ChatterBank1 min ago
Should Cannabis Be Legalized And Taxed?
It has been recently stated in the I paper that legalizing cannabis and also taxing it could cut deficit by 1.2 billion. Do you think cannabis should be legalized and taxed? I am studying politics a level and this is one of the issues i will be conducting my debate on, so I was wondering if you could perhaps post your opinions on this issue here? Thankyou!
Answers
'Cannabis' nature's way of telling you you have too much money!
16:12 Thu 26th Sep 2013
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
as long as it's not the super skunk and it's organic, it would stop them spraying it with liquid glass to make it sticky, and rocky is the melted down mush they add petrol, co codamol or paracetamol in to thicken it, not safe, skunk or green is home grown, so organic, grown in a warm window, but hydroponic seeds have to be grown under light and even though you can buy the grass spray legally it's the big businesses and where the real crime is
Yes, but sold only through properly licensed premises. I'd suggest chemists' shops, but, once the necessary training has been give, maybe even publicans could do it.
Another advantage might be that the strength of product sold could be held within rigid parameters. I certainly wouldn't be alone in saying that I've encountered stuff over the years that was much, much stronger than anything I'd used before. Now that's a bit scary.
So it would be manufactured by licensed factories, sold by licensed retailers and taxed. Packets would have to carry health warnings, just like cigarettes and there would be much more control over the age of people who get to buy it. Your average street dealer wouldn't give a monkey's over who he sells to, any licensed retailer would have to keep a rigid check on ages.
Another benefit is that it will go at least some way towards putting the illegal traders out of the way. Not guaranteed, of course, but many of them would just pack up.
I can't see that there is any problem with it.
Perhaps I should point out that it's about thirty years since I used any, so the Statute of Limitations must apply, surely?
Another advantage might be that the strength of product sold could be held within rigid parameters. I certainly wouldn't be alone in saying that I've encountered stuff over the years that was much, much stronger than anything I'd used before. Now that's a bit scary.
So it would be manufactured by licensed factories, sold by licensed retailers and taxed. Packets would have to carry health warnings, just like cigarettes and there would be much more control over the age of people who get to buy it. Your average street dealer wouldn't give a monkey's over who he sells to, any licensed retailer would have to keep a rigid check on ages.
Another benefit is that it will go at least some way towards putting the illegal traders out of the way. Not guaranteed, of course, but many of them would just pack up.
I can't see that there is any problem with it.
Perhaps I should point out that it's about thirty years since I used any, so the Statute of Limitations must apply, surely?
-- answer removed --
Possibly not, Lynnmarie. If the dealers have lost the biggest part of their business to legal suppliers, why would they continue, just to supply kids? I hear what you say about under age drinking and smoking, that's always been the case (at least, it certainly was when I was 14), but there's nothing at all to stop youngsters acquiring it now, so legalisation would at least go some way to stopping that.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.