Just testing the discuss this thread on this excellent article

sorry it's a massive read, took me a while to plough through that one.

a friend sent me a copy of the original reefer madness film, that was hilarious. it was hard to take it seriously and believe that people actually felt it was an accurate account of cannabis and it's use and the effect it causes.

just like the stuff coming out today, it is so far removed from reality you have to wonder who plotted the scare tactics up to make it even sound plausible enough to the ignorant person who readily absorbs what the media spews at them.

i remember that article by the independent (i think i actually kept it somewhere), and it's retraction. the same rubbish other pressure groups have been touting for years -- oh it's so much stronger than what we had in the 60's, etc rah rah rah.. and yes, although there's a possibility of it being up to 20x's stronger, you're right, the crims aren't going to wait around for the perfect crop, they want their money. so the majority of what is going around isn't this big scary "skunk" that the media keeps chundering on about.

and yes, i also don't think they should punish everyone for abusing drugs when it's only a certain percentage of people who do. that happens with everything, except alcohol, it seems. it's too much of a cash crop for the UK govt, and they're busy pickling themselves as well while they're at it, so they're unlikely to budge even though there are more accidents and deaths out there related to alcohol than cannabis.

also a good point made on the methods NL has for dealing with sale of cannabis vs. the amount of under 18 smokers in comparison to the UK.

signed the petition as well, nice one DH.

kind of on topic, an article about our canadian cousins -- apparently british columbia has more middle-class growers than "the baddies" and they're having to be more lenient on the law with cannabis. see, if everyone just started growing their own, they couldn't arrest us all, eh?
http://news.bbc.c...ricas/7519178.stm

There are an estimated 2million cannabis users (probably more) in Britain if we all start openly growing cannabis, openly selling it in premises they will have no choice.
Yes some will be arrested but if ever single one of the two million of us play there part we could easily change the law. You think the prisons and courts could handle that load.

They would arrest some but it will come to the point where it's just too much to cope. I think all of us stoners have been too lazy to bother with so many we could so easily make a huge difference.

We could open a coffee shop in every town, throw seeds into every field.


And another thing has it become a law now that every news paper article has to talk about "deadly skunk" or "1billion times stronger mega skunk" or whatever crap they think up next.



Even that one on this page which was a fairly good still said :

"The noxious strands of skunk that are around today didn't exist, so I doubt that any of my contemporaries became psychotic as a result of smoking a joint".

So if you smoke hash a purified form(which was cheaper and more available then) that will always be stronger than sensi will not give you psychotic illness that's logical. It is also refereed to as "noxious" which makes it sound poisonous and deadly when it really isn't


"Smoking the odd ( nonskunk ) joint isn't automatically going to turn a teenager into a raving, scabby crackhead".
which implies that smoking hashish or seeded grass is fine but smoke a bit of sensi and you'll end up a crackhead.


http://www.badsci...3/reefer-badness/ which still mentions skunk but at least is scientifically accurate, probably one of the best articles the media has given us on cannabis.

And look at this utter shite.
news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2368994.ece


I refuse to call sensimilla skunk anymore because it is a term that is used to slate a natural god-given non toxic medicinal plant.

Also soapbar and gritweed are far more dangerous than seedless grass but the media hardly give those two deadly things a second yet sensi get's weekly shit.

FREE MEDIA MY FUCKING ARSE IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is a very long post so I think I will leave it at that as no one will be assed to read it otherwise.

i read this and was poised to reply when someone else used my pc and closed the window : P

after watching that documentary you posted ILB, i can see how it only takes a few media hyped scandals to steer the gov't back into criminalising cannabis. the US in the 70's were so primed to finally change the verdict, if that doesn't show who's in control of our law-making i don't know what will.

science is always manipulated, you have to ask yourself "who's paying for the research to be conducted and what are they likely to want the research to portray?". graphs and charts have their x & y axis altered to make data look more dramatic.

Whats the more intrested headline

"cannabis users twice as likely to become phsychotic"

or

"cannabis is relatavely harmless and most users just eat alot then fall asleep"#

Also scientists aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.

http://uk.youtube...tch?v=WqM9U_gslXM

Now this couldn't have anything to do with either men's heavy drug use one used cocaine and one has been experimenting with drugs for 12 years yet where does the finger get pointed, cannabis.

Also these people blatantly have underlying mental health issues and should not be using drugs anyway.

ilovebud wrote:
Whats the more intrested headline

"cannabis users twice as likely to become phsychotic"

or

"cannabis is relatavely harmless and most users just eat alot then fall asleep"#

Also scientists aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.

indeed, there's that or people who are mislead to believe the work they are doing is unbiased, i think that might be the case with university research where researchers may not be particularly bothered or aware of who or what organisation is funding their work.

one of my friends doing her PhD at exeter uni said she had a lecture by a researcher with purpose to inform them of how their work will be manipulated for other purposes.

The Government are also making it harder for people to grow at home, which is why they talk of banning seeds, etc., this is because they want people to consume the more dangerous forms of cannabis, and also to buy from the black market, which the military and security services are involved with, and use to fund black-ops.

frustrating : S
if people who grow keep networking between other growers though, they'll always be able to exchange cuttings?

and/ or buy seeds from overseas; Im sure we'll have a _link_ if they stop the sale in the UK