The campaign for legal cannabis continues apace – and believe me when I say that it’s not the users who are pushing it
Published:
July 2, 2014 at 7:07pm
Equating cannabis use to eating a McDonald’s burger and chips? Making out that McDonald’s is a problem but cannabis is not? The propaganda continues.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
The only reason behind legalisation/ decriminalisation is making the drug acceptable and therefore increasing consumption. MLP’s pusher friends won’t have to worry about having to pay tax or competing against drug retail outlets because these are not on the cards.
Happy Meals are sold to children. The message of this online poster is that Happy Meals are dangerous for children, but cannabis is not.
Cannabis, like heroin, can and should be used for medicinal purposes if it is proved that those purposes actually exist.
Decriminalising cannabis is not a bad idea. Often people turn to drugs because of other social problems like poverty etc. therefore turning them into criminals does not serve much of a purpose. Once you ve got a criminal conviction your life is over. So they will just get trapped in the underground world of drugs and make nothing of their lives. This is not a desirable outcome.
However, those fighting for their right to smoke weed are only making fools of themselves. Why are you fighting for the right for something that is bad for you? I would never fight for my right to have a Big Mac. I hate mac Donald’s too. Sometimes I think that we should put a tax on fast food, but of course that is obviously not that practical.
Smoking weed ruins your brain, even if you only do it every now and then. That is a scientific fact.
Is it so hard to understand: we have morphine but not heroin. The same can be done for cannabis.
When cannabis is accepted as having medicinal properties by the competent authority – not by the drug lobby – it will be made available for treatment under the Dangerous Drugs Act and under the restrictions of the Medical & Kindred Professions Ordinance i.e. by legally qualified health personnel not as a D.I.Y. treatment in the hands of brain-rotted drug abusers for pleasure. Morphine, heroin, amphetamines etc are already available for genuine treatment by licensed doctors but that won’t satisfy hedonist drug abusers.
The point is that it’s not as bad for you as all the hype would have us believe. There’s too much propaganda and misinformation about the subject.
McDonalds may be unhealthy (I don’t eat it) but it’s still available. Comparing that food to cannabis is stupid, because alcohol would have been a better example.
Daphne is quite right in that there are ulterior motives behind the obvious sudden push for decriminalisation and yet to me it’s a step in the right direction. The right move would have been to legalise completely, educate, experiment, monitor and tax it.
The Internet is replete with misinformation and blatant lack of logic such as that picture.
Yes, it’s a redundant comparison, but more importantly, it commits a strange breed of logical fallacy; one that may be likened to a tu quoque argument in that it appeals to hypocrisy while offering little in the way of evidence in favour of your position. For all we know, both fast food and pot smoking could be dangerous – the latter certainly is, and so is the former but only when consumed on a regular basis.
How many people a year die of obesity-related causes in Malta? How many people a year die of cannabis-related causes in Malta?
[Daphne – A false comparison, Dave. The problems with routine cannabis use are not death.]
How many times one finds stupid illogical arguments like yours on the internet. It shows that you don’t need to smoke weed to say something idiotic. Or is it the other way round?
46 so far. Not in Malta but Afghanistan. I’m not about to legalise anything that gets my friends killed.
Decriminalisation increases demand without legal and safe supply.
This article in The Economist is very instructive:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21605908-decriminalising-drugs-leaves-crooks-cash-legalise-drugs-instead-half-smoked-joint
The Economist favours legalisation and not decriminalisation. Do you agree with this?
Legalisation has to be accompanied by legalisation of drug retailers who in return would be taxed and have their activity monitored.
It’s a ridiculous comparison, but she is an idiot.
Compare alcohol and cannabis and it becomes obvious which is safer.
I mean, we tolerate alcohol abuse in this country like it’s nothing. Teenagers openly drinking in public, girls as young as 13 getting blind drunk in dresses fit for prostitutes, dying in fights or falling off bastions on NYE or getting killed by a drunk drivers.
And that’s not including alcoholism and domestic violence. In Malta if you don’t drink alcohol at a party they ask you what’s wrong or people say ‘dak stramb’. Despite the known danger of alcohol abuse, it is ingrained within our culture and trust me a lot of alcoholics would prefer to be a demotivated and stupid person rather than shaking, vomiting, hallucinating and pissing himself, because he’s trying to quit.
https://ncadd.org/in-the-news/155-25-million-alcohol-related-deaths-worldwide-annually
It’s hypocrisy to tolerate alcohol use, but not cannabis use.
Yes, but the Reefer Madness faction wants everyone to believe that this old herb cannabis is the concoction of Satan himself and it will lead to your ruination and painful early death at the mere mention of the word “cannabis”.
The reality about cannabis is that it is not a panacea for the ills of mankind but neither is it heroin and LSD rolled into one that is at the ready to ruin the life of every teenager at every street corner on the way to school.
Drinks and cigarettes are harmful. Fact. What exactly is the benefit of adding a third harmful way?
Is Ms. Frendo aware that most cannabis is grown in Africa? But that’s OK I guess.
And in Malawi it provides an income to many families.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGZYpOchepA