MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
First obstacle for Uruguay's marijuana bill: it violates international convention on drug control
Uruguay's decision to legalize marijuana is in violation of an international convention on drug control, the Vienna-based International Narcotics Control Board, INCB, which monitors government compliance with such treaties said on Wednesday. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesRaymond Yans said “due to its dependence-producing potential”,sounds just like one of those self-serving tobacco spokesmen that used to insist their product wasn't addictive, this is wonderful coming from some unelected bureaucrat. Of cause such a statement is an absolute lie.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 12:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whether or not Uruguay's enactment will be a positive contribution remains to be see. But, as sure as heck the present laws are utterly irrational and disproportional.
Anybody who has followed the irrational historical application of the many odious anti-canabis laws, is familiar with the original lobbying by the US lumber industry to eliminate the the competition to their market domination by this plant.
To put cannabis in that category and not tobacco and alcohol is hypocritical. It's the old red nosed alcoholics here whining and crying. How long has Denmark had legal pot bars? These fat old bastards need to sit back with a scotch and cigar and chill out.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 01:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0@1 & @2
Dec 12th, 2013 - 04:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Agreed.
lt should be up to the individual whether they smoke maryjane or not.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 09:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0Govts are no doubt, already working out how much tax they can levy on commercially packaged marijuana.
Hypocrites!
@ 4
Dec 12th, 2013 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, I thought that when Pepe Le Puke came up with it in the first place.
Of course all these registered places will need the “Licence” and “Inspection twice a year” just as any other “business” in the country. All good tax revenue.
@4 & @5
Dec 12th, 2013 - 11:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Washington State, which has aprox twice the population of Uruguay, and has made pot legal for both purchase and consumption, estimated that tax revenue will be $1.9 Billion over 5 years.
Skunk = clinical (and irreversible) paranoia.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, that will keep the shrinks happy in their Uruguayan mansions.
#6 Colorado is the latest to legalize it for recreational use.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 12:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The real point is that banning it hasn't ever really stopped anyone that wants to smoke it. All it's done is given criminal gangs a relatively risk free way of making vastly more money than by planning bank jobs.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 01:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@7 GeoffWard2
Dec 12th, 2013 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@8
And California to follow?
”Cannabis is controlled under the 1961 Convention, “which requires States Parties to limit its use to medical and scientific purposes”
Dec 12th, 2013 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, Pepe Le Puke has said it's an experiment, so that's OK then!
USA should respect Uruguayan legalization... or not.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 03:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It matters little.
Personally, I think #1 hit the nail on the head...
#10 Most likely. Most states have marginalized the penalty for it. Here in Massachusetts it's been the equivalent to a ticket. It will come down to a power struggle between sovereign states and the federal government. Most states will ultimately pass and legalize grass....just like most states are accepting same sex marriage. Their will be a few hard core, neo nazi extreme conservation, God fearing states that hold out as they do on everything.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@1-6 and 8-13. Druggies! Not that you'd notice. Recent research shows that cannabis impairs brain function. Psychological “disturbance”. Loss of “intelligence” and cognitive ability. So, go on, now that your mental deficiency has been identified, how would you know? The only reasonable test is a comparison against a lifelong non-user.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 06:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0By the way, Mujica is a senile tosser! And now, it seems, Uruguay is a law-breaking rogue state.
@ 14 Conq
Dec 12th, 2013 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Back to the old wide tar brush again?
I am not a druggie, I do not drink alcohol, nor do I smoke any substances.
If memory serves me correct and I can’t be arsed to check, but a “convention” is not a law, is it?
As much as I dislike Pepe Le Puke, the Uruguayan elected representatives in government voted it in. So we shall see what happens next.
Why don’t YOU come over to Uruguay and put us all straight? But your balls on the line for once, eh?
conq, your logic is flawed and a true paradox.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 07:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Can it really be true that you lit your first spliff inside the womb?
Not possible, hence the flaw.
Although you DO smoke in a garrafa... so who knows...
cong.......simmer down and toss back a pint of gin, it has no affect on the brain or liver.......trust me and the makers. It's not addictive either.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He shakes his balls.....never stirs them.
I agree with you all.
Dec 12th, 2013 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...
Has anyone else got the muchies?
Rrrrrrrrrr ...
Dec 12th, 2013 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@14 Conqueror
Dec 13th, 2013 - 02:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0'...cannabis impairs brain function”. So does reality T.V.
Why would I need to smoke dope when I have you to make me laugh? And you don't cost me a cent!
@18
MuNchies Armitage, munchies...
@20
Dec 13th, 2013 - 12:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks for the correction.
http://www.cannabis.net/articles/psychosis.html
Dec 13th, 2013 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I'd legalise normal dope, but turn skunk into class A, an almost impossible thing to do, I know, but it's the only way that makes sense unless you decriminalise the whole lot.”
“You couldn't put your hand on your heart and say this drug is safe.
It is astonishing to me that substances that cause extreme harm are in the control of criminals whose only interest is financial gain.”
@ 22 GeoffWard2
Dec 13th, 2013 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, and the criminals have shares in the scouring powder companies who own Vim, etc, the amount that is used to dilute the real drug.
I bet it “cleans” the arteries out though. :o)
@22 Geoff
Dec 13th, 2013 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The latter part of the article you provided confirms my anecdotal observations. I have never seen irreversible psychosis due exclusively to smoking cannabis. I HAVE observed apparently permanent psychosis in some who were diagnosed with a mental illness who also consumed cannabis. The most common drug-induced psychosis I have witnessed is from amphetamines.
The first paragraph you have quoted is interesting to me - in Adelaide, where I live, what the article calls skunk ( a term rarely used here ) is in fact 'normal dope'. It is what the vast majority of people who smoke dope here buy.
What defines 'safety' in drug use is of course relative. Protracted and heavy use of almost any drug will inevitably cause problems. People who aren't addicts will acknowledge this and take the appropriate steps to deal with it.
People who are addicts are those who want to stop and can't. This is why the first step in the Fellowship of Narcotics Anonymous is “We admitted we were powerless and our lives had become unmanageable”.
When the singer Andrew Wood, of the band Mother Love Bone - a precursor of Pearl Jam, died of a heroin overdose, his friends who were also heroin addicts, including Steve Earl, wanted to know where he got the gear from. If he OD'd from it must be good right? That's how addiction works - it is the only disease that will tell you that you don't have a disease.
People who like to use mind-altering drugs are attracted to risky behaviour, as are those who are uncaring of their welfare. People who become addicts were addicts long before they ever used drugs. The same is true for people who were always going to develop a mental illness.
Life in the late 20th century onwards has produced conditions particularly conducive to inspiring spiritual emptiness in humans and that is where addiction thrives. If we want to inhibit the damage that drugs can do to our youth that is where we need to start. In my humble opinion.
Conqueror is right.....out come all the pot heads...and why does it not surprise me that this forum is teeming with them....
Dec 13th, 2013 - 05:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you need drugs there is something lacking in your life...all those idiots sitting around shit faced spouting shite thinking they have deep and meaningful thoughts...
...all great achievers...not...get a life...
...I don't do drugs..I am drugs....
(22) GeoffWard2
Dec 13th, 2013 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say...:
“I'd legalise normal dope, but turn skunk into class A“
I say...:
Translating the above into ”Alcohol Terms“ what you are saying is...:
“I'd legalise 4% Lager, but turn Pilsner, Brown Ale, IPA, Stout, All Wines, Champagne, Sherry, Madeira, Port, All Light Liqueurs, Vodka, Whisky, Rum, Absinthe, Neutral Grain Spirits & Absolute Alcohol into class A”
Think,
Dec 14th, 2013 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0#22 Quote from interviewee in web article:
“I'd legalise normal dope, but turn skunk into class A,
* ... an almost impossible thing to do, I know, but it's the only way that makes sense - unless you decriminalise the whole lot!*.”
I'm pretty sure the expert actually realised the difficulties - the second part of her sentence expresses the dilemma.
This is the bag of illogicalities that Pepe is opening.
(27) GeoffWard2
Dec 14th, 2013 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!