Lords told to listen to science on cannabis

  • Thread starter FastForward
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
F

FastForward

1,989
48
A group of scientists has urged the House of Lords to listen to scientific advice rather than the ranting of Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and reject her proposal to change the classification of cannabis from C to B.

In a letter to the Guardian, eight leading scientists call on the Lords to back an amendment tabled by Baroness Meacher which would delay any reclassification until the issue is re-examined.

The letter said: "Cannabis use has fallen in recent years, especially following its downgrading to class C in 2004, and it is obviously unwise to risk reversing that trend. The classification system must be credible - reclassification would send out an ambiguous message about the dangers of current class B drugs.

"Even more importantly, the move would be a sad departure from the welcome trend - established after the Phillips report into the BSE disaster - of public policy following expert scientific advice unless there is new evidence."

The letter was signed by an ex-government chief scientific adviser David King, Professor Michael Rawlins, ACMD chair from 1998 to 2008, Robert May, another ex-government chief scientific advister, Professor Gabriel Horne, chair of the Academy of Medical Science working group on addiction and Professor Colin Blakemore, a member of the UK Drug Policy Commission.

Smith's scientific advisers - the ACMD - investigated alleged links between cannabis and mental illness and found there weren't any. Despite this and evidence that cannabis use has fallen since it was downgraded by David Blunkett in 2004, Smith said she wanted to upgrade the drug and ban the sale of paraphernalia like pipes and bongs.

Even the Home Office press release at the time said: "Cannabis use has fallen significantly across all age ranges and this is a testament to the success of the previous ten year Drug Strategy. However, the reduction in cannabis use must not be allowed to reverse."

The Association of Chief Police Officers also asked for flexibility in how it deals with people caught in possession of the drug.

Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/25/cannabis_lords_debate/
 
Houseoflords
T

theherbalizor

Premium Member
Supporter
1,412
48
The lords are conviening on this today I do believe.
 
7

7rayos

280
0
I guess you mean the outcome of the actual talk and the B or C silly shake, because, lighter or harder, the "general" outcome we all know it: carry on repression.
They should start on January the first, as a lot of people still have some forgotten remains in the pocket from the night before and will be easy prey, it's always good to start with a big number of offenders.
I think they just don't care what scientist think and it'd be a surprise Mrs Smith pulling back. It'll bring some more confrontation between everyone involved, as obviously at best it will only bring political advantage to a politician stance and no proven gain whatsoever for society.
I'm a med user who spends half the time in UK, why am i risking to be prosecuted? Because a crazy woman with not a clue and not wanting to hear even reliable scientific advice says so? What are her basis for doing something like that? Who does she work for that she is compelled to go all the way as to criminalize one of the few gov policies that actually worked? Or is it because it worked?
Let's say to her: Shuddafuckup, Jacqueline, go and beg you buck in another corner, which is how us hardened up war criminals address each other :nerd.
 
C

captain beefheart

2
0
The govt. will pick and choose as they see fit. The advisors' findings were counter-productive, and thus ignored. We all know had they advised an upgrade, their views would be peddled as the ultimate authority, the final word.
They have lost the war on drugs, and won the war on personal freedom.
 
Top Bottom