Can cannabis oil cure serious diseases like cancer BBC finally reports

[lRhyss]

The medical value of cannabis has been hotly debated for years. Its use as a relaxant or a pain reliever is widely accepted now.
But can cannabis do more than just treat symptoms of disease. Can it actually help cure serious illnesses, such as cancer?- http://www.bbc.com/news/world-32020114

Too bad it's ******* illegal then...

Why are they only just reporting this? lmfao

[MKR&*42]

The day I see the war on drugs (or just cannabis) end is the day I will appreciate the government in power [at the time].

[-:Undertaker:-]

The day I see the war on drugs (or just cannabis) end is the day I will appreciate the government in power [at the time].

There is no war on drugs.

And I am someone who is for eventual legalisation provided my requirements are met beforehand. But the war is a myth.

[The Don]

There is no war on drugs.

And I am someone who is for eventual legalisation provided my requirements are met beforehand. But the war is a myth.

Well there is... The term war on drugs refers to its prohibition, not a literal war.

[MKR&*42]

There is no war on drugs.

And I am someone who is for eventual legalisation provided my requirements are met beforehand. But the war is a myth.

What Akeam said^ :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well there is... The term war on drugs refers to its prohibition, not a literal war.

The government makes no real effort to enforce the laws against cannabis in this country.

[lRhyss]

The government makes no real effort to enforce the laws against cannabis in this country.
Hey my names Rhyss

It you look at my criminal record I think you'll find that's not true :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hey my names Rhyss

It you look at my criminal record I think you'll find that's not true :P

A cannabis warning?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1331568/PETER-HITCHENS-Professor-Nutt-cannabis-propagandist-scientists-white-coat.html


The authorities in this country have given up trying to enforce the law against possession of cannabis.

I know this because I have spent the week researching a statement recently made by the famed Professor David Nutt, hero of the cannabis lobby. And it is deeply misleading, which is especially shocking in one who holds the title ‘Professor’.

Professor Nutt said on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that last year ‘160,000 people were given criminal sanctions for possessing cannabis’.
Well, it is true that the Home Office recorded 162,610 cases of cannabis possession in England and Wales in 2009. But what happened next?

Savage punishment? Not exactly.

The majority of these cases – 86,953 – were dealt with by a feeble procedure known as a ‘Cannabis Warning’.

This has no legal status, does not lead to a criminal record and is not even recorded nationally. Yet it is recommended by the Association of Chief Police Officers as the first option, unless ‘aggravating factors’ are present.

Another 19,137 cannabis cases were dealt with through Cautions, which expire after a maximum of three months and normally needn’t be declared to employers.

Slightly tougher, but not exactly life-changing, were the 11,492 Penalty Notices for Disorder, which are recorded indefinitely but do not involve a court appearance, a fine or imprisonment. Only 22,748 cannabis cases, slightly more than one in eight, actually ended in court.


Nobody in Whitehall is able to tell me what sort of penalties were imposed or what distinguishes these cases from the others. I suspect that most of these involved persistent offenders, or possession with intent to supply, or were charged in conjunction with other crimes.

There is no record of what happened to the remaining several thousand cases. I imagine they slipped through the many cracks in our crumbling, decrepit criminal justice system.

But the message of these figures is perfectly clear. For good or ill (and I believe it is for ill, since several such people will end up spending their lives in locked mental wards), a young person who smokes cannabisvin private is most unlikely to attract the attention of the law. And if he does, he will not be seriously punished. Is a Cannabis Warning a ‘criminal sanction’ in any true sense? Or even a Caution?

Yet because David Nutt is a professor, he can say this sort of thing unchallenged on the BBC, and can also assert that ‘criminalising young people for smoking cannabis is actually more dangerous to them and their life than decriminalising it’.

This is language abuse. A person who knowingly breaks the law of the land is not ‘criminalised’. He criminalises himself. It is also propaganda masquerading as science, and it stinks.


I recall a few years myself at a music festival in the city centre, the strong smell of cannabis being smoked literally yards from myself and my friends and Police officers simply walked backwards and forwards past not even blinking an eye.

[lRhyss]

A cannabis warning?

Nope. Originally possession with intent to supply, but then for some reason they dropped the intent to supply part...

Although it's now Class B (For some ******* ******ed reason), so I assume they're cracking down on the possession and use of a plant.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Nope. Originally possession with intent to supply, but then for some reason they dropped the intent to supply part...

Although it's now Class B (For some ******* ******ed reason), so I assume they're cracking down on the possession and use of a plant.

Ah see, well they are harder on that... although the reasonable argument people like Peter Hitchens make is that it is pointless trying to control or stem supply when you are not enforcing laws against those using the drug which fuel the supply. Which makes sense even if you don't agree with the position itself.

My position is that I am happy with the moral argument for legalising drugs in that what you wish to consume into your body is your own choice and you pay the consequences yourself but my problem is that in this country it doesn't work like that (sadly) and the huge numbers of people who will steal to fund their habits as well as those who will lose their mental capacities and become literal useless vegtables will become a burden on the rest of us forever.

[FlyingJesus]

Not so much effort put on cracking down on cannabis perhaps (largely because the authorities are well aware that it's not that damaging, and it's better for them to keep an eye on its trafficking than to shut down every dealer they know about so that they have no future leads) but drugs in general are definitely targeted by law. MXE and 4MMC went from totally legal to class B with no real research going into them, and aMT went from the same completely legal state to a class A in one move with NBOMes and benzos going into the "temporary control" category which enforces the same legal penalties as a class B with no real intention to ever be a temporary measure. All it's done is make sure that new compounds are being manufactured with provably worse health risks

[The Don]

The government makes no real effort to enforce the laws against cannabis in this country.

Well the war on drugs is an american phrase so naturally I assumed you were talking about it in an american context. Although one could argue US drug laws have ultimately made the war on drugs a global campaign I do agree that there isn't that big of a campaign against drugs in the UK in comparison to the US.

[GommeInc]

The government makes no real effort to enforce the laws against cannabis in this country.
Depends on the local authorities really, not the Government at large. Essex takes a strong stance against cannabis users particularly growers. I think Kent is the same. It seems to be a south eastern thing, but we do share a few of the services. That said, it is clear these days that it seems relaxed as you can usually smell the stuff - but that might be down to fewer police officers wandering around.