“The Pyramid which is the Place of Sunrise and Sunset”
Fourth dynasty; approx. 2575 BC ?
As
the reader will know the pyramids at Giza are amongst the greatest and
most mysterious structures ever built. I hesitate before saying “ever
built by man”. We do not know who really built them, when or why!
Although
it is generally believed that these massive structures were built over
about 70 years, anyone with any knowledge of even the most up-to-date
engineering technology available today will know that this would be an
impossible task now, let alone thousands of years ago before they had
even invented the wheel or the pulley. Classic Egyptologists tend to
rely on their readers ignorance or lack of imagination when they state
figures like 100,000 men taking 20 years to build the Great Pyramid.
A
quick calculation reveals the impossibility of such a feat, using ropes
and rollers and dragging stones up to 70 tons up ramps, placing them in
incredibly accurate positions which aligned perfectly with the stars.
They seldom consider how these ancient workers could have dragged and
lifted the stones weighing 200 tons used to build the temples and
causeways around the pyramids and Sphinx.
Although it
is often stated that the Pharaohs Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure ordered
the building of these wonders in the fourth dynasty, there is no actual
evidence of this. Quarry marks inside the Great Pyramid may be
forgeries; the tiny statue of Khufu found, upside down as if dropped, in
a crack in the ground outside the pyramid no more suggests that he was
the builder than would the finding of Nelson’s Column in Trafalgar
Square suggest that Nelson engineered the Square.
Not
only are these impressive structures surrounded by mystery, but it
appears that even the Egyptian authorities are keen to suppress any new
discoveries and many explorers have in recent days been stopped from
continuing their work on the point of possibly momentous discoveries.
This is precisely what happened to the work of scientist Rudolf
Gantenbrink who, using a robot, examined the so-called ventilation
shafts leading from the so-called Queen’s Chamber in 1993. Having found
evidence of a small door at the end of one shaft and seen (through the
robot eye) a piece of wood which could be dated to reveal the true age
of the pyramid, his work was halted and he has not been allowed to
continue since. Others, like John West and the geologist Robert Schoch
of Boston University, have been ignored, because the results of their
work would seriously effect the classic Egyptologists view of the past;
their work on the weathering of the Sphinx would suggest it is much
older than Egyptologists want it to be. It certainly appears that
either there is some hidden knowledge which us common folk are not
privilege to, or else there is some sort of anti-intelligence
conspiracy.
There are hundreds of books written on
the Great Pyramid. Authors approach the monuments from a variety of
angles. For some it is evidence of extra-terrestrial life or of an
advanced civilisation from the past. Others see the Pyramid as a cosmic
message, either warning us of some great disaster or promising us the
coming of a Messiah. Measurements, undeniably precise, can be
interpreted as magical, astronomical or numerological. Some claim the
Pyramid was a tomb, others an observatory of the stars and yet others
believe it was a centre for mysterious initiation ceremonies. Whatever
its true purpose, it is now certain that a great number of
inscriptions, paintings and papyri refer to Giza in terms we are only
just beginning to understand.
As the author of this
presentation, I would have thought the whole thing was no more than
science fantasy, if I had not myself been able to walk around, enter and
climb upon the Great Pyramid.
Items found within the Great Pyramid of Giza
Iron
Plate 2.6 cms x 8.6 cms, discovered by J.R.Hill (1837) stuck inside
joint inside southern shaft from King’s Chamber. Purpose and origin
unknown. Now in British Museum.
Three items found in northern ‘ventilation’ shaft from Queen’s Chamber: *
1.Piece of cedar wood: may have been a measure
2.Bronze forked hook-like item, believed to have been used for Opening of the Mouth ceremony, with part of wooden handle.
3.Green granite ball, 0.850 kg (1 lb 3 oz)
All discovered by Wayman Dixon and Grant in 1872.
*NB
: These so-called ‘ventilation’ shafts where these objects were found
do not appear to have run as far as the outside of the pyramid.
Size and comparison of size
Height 418.9 feet (146.0 m)
North side755 feet 4.9818 inches
West side755 feet 9.1551 inches
East side755 feet 10.4937 inches
South side756 feet 0.09739 inches
Corner Angles : SE 89o 56’27”; NE 90o 3’ 2”; SW 90o 0’ 33”; NW 89o 59’ 58”
Area 53,000 square metres
Estimated number of rocks = 2,500,000; average weight 2.6 tons
91,000,000 cubic feet
Estimate of tonnage of rock = 6,300,000 tons
The following size comparisons have been made:
The pyramid contains more solid masonry than all the cathedrals, churches and chapels built in Britain since the time of Christ.
The Great Pyramid could contain the cathedrals of Florence, Milan, St. Peter’s, Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s.
The base of the pyramid occupies 13 acres, equivalent to 7 New York city blocks!
The
casing blocks were removed by Arabs to build the mosques of Cairo; the
mosques contain less material than than the outer casing of the
pyramids..
Early entries:
It seems likely
that the Great Pyramid was open through most of the New Kingdom and then
sealed up, maybe due to local superstitions that it housed powerful
magic or a powerful and frightening magician.
Within the period of
fairly ‘modern’ history there was a report by the historian Strabo in
24 BC, that the entrance to the Great Pyramid was through a hinged stone
door, which, once replaced, was indistinguishable from the rest of the
outside of the pyramid. There is no evidence of this, although one of
the pyramids at Dahshur does have such a doorway. At this time it must
have been an even more magnificent building since the outer layer of
polished limestone was still intact. Remember that the pyramid was, to
Strabo, as ancient as Strabo is to us today.
The
first major attempt to re-find or create an entrance after the original
entrance was lost, was in 820 AD by the young caliph Abdullah Al Mamun.
Convinced that the pyramid contained much treasure the caliph used the
services of many men to try to burrow in through the side. Hammers and
chisels failing they then tried cracking the stones by throwing cold
vinegar onto the stones heated by red hot fires, knocking out the
pieces. This process enabled them to tunnel in one hundred feet. They
met up with a passageway 3_ feet wide by nearly 4 feet high, sloping
at an angle of 26o. They discovered a large stone on the floor, which
seemed to have been dislodged from the roof. They then discovered the
original secret entrance ninety feet to the North and some forty-nine
feet above the base of the pyramid. Following this tunnel, the
‘Descending Passage’ as it became known later, they came upon the empty
‘pit’. Returning to the fallen stone they attempted to dislodge further
stones from the ceiling but were unable to do so.
They
decided to dig in along side this huge ‘plug’. After six feet they
found another plug, then a third. Eventually they came to limestone so
hard that they could go no further so they forced there way into the
‘Ascending Passage’, again 4 feet high, at a slope of 26o again. They
crawled 150 feet along this slippery passageway, reaching a horizontal
passage which itself led to a rectangular limestone chamber with a
gabled limestone ceiling, which later became known as the ‘Queen’s
Chamber’, although there was no evidence that it related to any ancient
queen; in fact it was the Arabs who buried their women in tombs with
gabled ceilings. There was an empty niche in one of the walls, which
attracted Mamun’s attention further, which could have once housed a
statue or hidden another passage or chamber. Mamun decided to get his
men to burrow into this niche, but they gave up after 3 feet.
Returning
to the Ascending Passage they discovered they were in a narrow gallery,
some 28 feet high, stretching up at a slope of 28o. This became known
as the ‘Grand Gallery’. With great difficulty they climbed 150 feet to
find a huge stone which they had to climb over. Beyond this stone the
passage levelled out, the ceiling now only 41 inches high. The
explorers found another chamber (the ‘Antechamber’) and a larger chamber
made from massive polished granite blocks, 34 feet long, 17 feet wide
and 19 feet high. Notice the ratio of the length to breadth of this
chamber is 2 : 1. The roof here was level and the chamber became
known as the ‘King’s Chamber’ because that was the type of ceiling used
in Arab tombs for the men. Unfortunately this chamber was empty except
for a sarcophagus without a lid, although this in itself became
fascinating to later explorers because it is slightly too big to pass
through the chamber door. There were reports that a stone statue had
been found in the sarcophagus although there is no other evidence of
this. Mamun and his men had become so frustrated with the lack of
treasure that they attacked the floor!
Years later,
after an earthquake had destroyed much of the Arab city El Kaherah, the
Arabs removed 22 acres of outside covering from the pyramid, to rebuild
the city, as well as two bridges! In 1356 AD Sultan Hassan removed
stone to build his mosque which still stands in modern Cairo. There was
much rubble left piled up and this eventually covered Al Mamun’s
entrance Although the removal of the outer layer had uncovered another
two possible entrances, there were now rumours of black magic and nobody
wanted to enter the pyramid.
The next entry of
interest was made by John Greaves, a mathematician and astronomer. He
climbed the rubble and followed Mamun’s route to the Queen’s Chamber
which now stank so bad he had to abandon it. He visited the King’s
Chamber and collected much data and measurements. Greaves also
discovered the ‘Well’ in the Grand Gallery. He descended 60 feet into
this well (there was no water in it) finding that it widened into a
rough chamber later called the ‘Grotto’. Unfortunately the stench and
the large volume of bat dung forced his retreat. He then climbed the
outside of the pyramid counting the courses and estimating the height to
be 481 feet without the missing top layers.
The Well
was entered again in 1765 by Nathaniel Davison, an explorer, only to
find the bottom blocked in. Davison also made another remarkable
discovery, the area above the roof of the King’s Chamber, by climbing
the Grand Gallery and crawling down a hole only 2 foot wide. The
chamber he found had been made from rough granite slabs, weighing each
some 70 tons. How these slabs could ever have been lifted and placed so
perfectly is yet another mystery. The chamber is now known as
‘Davison’s Chamber’. The ceiling of this low crawl space is also made
from 70 ton slabs.
In 1798 Napoleon arrived in Egypt
and visited the Pyramid with a unique group of scientists and soldiers,
to search for knowledge of the ancient past. Napoleon was a man
convinced of supernatural powers and fascinated by magic, but they found
nothing more except even more bat dung. On August 12 1799 Napoleon
himself entered the King’s Chamber and asked to be left alone. Upon
exiting he was asked what he had found as he looked shocked and pale.
He answered nothing and never spoke about his experience, until his
dying day when he started to speak but then said “What’s the use, you’d
never believe me” (in French, of course).
The next
discovery was made by an Italian, Caviglia, who cleared the bat dung
from Davison’s Chamber and dug a tunnel off it, finding nothing. Then
Caviglia descended the Well and tried to clear the rubble that had
collected since Mamun’s men had burrowed up into the ceiling. He
struggled 150 feet down a stifling passage, the Ascending Passage and,
despite sickness from heat and smell, he pressed on another 50 feet,
finding a low doorway leading into a hole. Digging into this they
emerged into the bottom of the Well.
About this time
an Englishman, Colonel Howard-Hyse, arrived on the scene at Giza. His
team dug up the floor of the Queen’s Chamber but found nothing there, so
thoughtfully refilled the holes! Discovering a crack in the roof of
Davison’s Chamber they tried to dig into the roof, but were unable to do
and so blasted their way up. Here Hyse discovered another chamber, the
floor of which was the roof of Davison’s Chamber. The ceiling was made
of 50 ton blocks. Continuing upwards they found another similar
chamber made of 8 granite blocks. Over the next four moths they found
three more chambers, all empty, except for a fine black dust originating
from decayed insects. Howard-Hyse named these chambers after Nelson,
Lady Ann Arbuthnot and Colonel Campbell. They are now seen to be a
means of relieving the immense pressure that would otherwise be directly
on the roof of the King’s Chamber; the topmost chamber also had a
gabled roof. Red painted cartouches (upside down so probably quarry
marks rather that decoration), were found on some of the stones up here
and proved to be of a fourth dynasty Pharaoh called Khufu. Khufu was
believed to be the Cheops whom the historian Herodotus had heard of and
reported. It was therefore concluded that Khufu built the Great
Pyramid, although there is very little direct evidence to support this
conclusion. Howard- Hyse also found two shafts running from the King’s
Chamber through 200 feet of solid masonry to the outside of the pyramid;
there is no knowing whether they ever went through the original outer
layer, although it is now widely accepted that these were ventilation
shafts - air poured through when they were unblocked. Incidentally
Howard-Hyse also took the sarcophagus from the third pyramid at Giza,
that of Menkaure, but this was lost off the coast of Spain in a
shipwreck and now lies deep in Davy Jones’ Locker.
The Subterranean Chamber
A
passage only 3 feet 6 inches (1.1 m) wide and 3 feet 11 inches (1.2 m)
high, at an angle of 26o, descends 345 feet (105 m) from the true
entrance, into the bedrock. It ends in a roughly hewn pit measuring
46’ x 27’1” x 11’ 6” (14 m x 8.3 m x 3.5 m), 600 feet (183 m) below the
apex of the pyramid. There is a hole sunk into the floor, leading
nowhere. In the western side there is a squared, polished, passage, cut
horizontally, 100 feet (30 m) long, leading nowhere. In 1992 Professor
Jean Kerisel used radar to examine the walls and floor of the
subterranean chamber and reported that he found evidence of an
undiscovered system of corridors within the Great Pyramid.
Unfortunately the Egyptian Government has not allowed this to be
further investigated. Strangely Herodotus had reported being told of an
underground chamber at Giza.
The Ascending Passage
This
passage leads up into the pyramid, at an angle of 26o, matching the
Descending Passage. It is 129 feet (39 m) long, but too low to stand up
in. Where the passage levels out, it forks, one way to the Queen’s
Chamber, the other down steps to the Grand Gallery.
The Grand Gallery
Height 28 feet (8.52 metres)
Length 157 feet (48 m)
Angle of ascent 26o
Seven
courses of limestone, each course corbelled in 3 inches over the lower
course.. The gallery is 62” wide (1.6 m) at the bottom but only 41” (1
m) at the top. In present times the gallery is fitted with a wooden
ramp.
The King’s Chamber
Size : 34’4” (10.45 m) E-W; 17’2” (5.23 m) N-S; height 19’1” (5.81 m)
= 20 x 10 Egyptian Cubits
Reached
by a passageway from the top of the Grand Gallery, it is empty, apart
from a broken sarcophagus which is too wide to have been carried through
the passageway. The passage leads to an antechamber with three deeply
cut grooves, which may have been to house a portcullis. A pair of
granite leaves are set above the portcullis entrance, with a small
protuberance or seal on the granite face, on the lower leaf. The
meaning of this is unknown, it is not hieroglyphic. The antechamber
becomes a restricted passage for a few feet, then opens up to the King’s
Chamber.
The floor is made from 15 massive granite paving stones.
The floor plan of the chamber is the ratio 2:1; the height is in the
ratio of the diagonal of the floor, representing the Golden Section, or
Phi, the formula _(1+˚5) .
The walls are formed from 5
courses of stone containing exactly 100 blocks, each about 70 tons. The
ceiling is formed from nine immense red granite stones, some of which
weigh over 50 tons.
The sarcophagus is still inside the King’s
Chamber. As mentioned already it is bigger than the doorway so it could
not be moved out. The sarcophagus has inside measurements of 6 foot
6.6 inches long, 2 foot 2.81 inches wide and 2 foot 10.42 inches deep,
whilst its outside measurements are 7 foot 5.63 inches long, 3 foot 2.5
inches wide and 3 foot 5.31 inches deep. This makes it about an inch
wider than the doorway, so it could not have been carried through the
lower entrance (now plugged). The sarcophagus is made of chocolate
coloured granite with hard granules of feldspar, quartz and mica. It is
wondrous how such a piece could ever have been cut in the Stone Age.
It would require saws 8 feet long, made of some material such as bronze
and jewels - diamond was extremely rare in those days. How on earth
such a block could be hollowed out remains a mystery, as no saws or
drills have ever been found.
There are small ‘ventilation holes’ on the North and South walls, although these may have been wrongly named.
The Queen’s Chamber
A
horizontal passage, 127 feet (39 m) long, from the Grand gallery leads
to the Queen’s Chamber; the floor of this passage drops two feet
towards its end. There is a stepped niche cut into the chamber’s
southern wall. The floor of the chamber has been left rough. Two
‘ventilation shafts’, left sealed at the outer extremity, run from the
walls.
Davison’s Chamber
Above the roofing
slabs of the King’s Chamber, closed to the public, a series of rough
hewn blocks set in 4 layers, rise to a roofed compartment. This causes
an echo in the King’s Chamber. It was discovered by Davison in the
eighteenth century and it is believed to be a device for relieving the
pressure on the roof of the King’s Chamber. On one of the upper levels
were found quarry marks containing the cartouche of Cheops - Khufu.
The Well or Grotto
At
the junction of the Ascending Passage and the passage to the Queen’s
Chamber is a sealed entrance to a narrow, roughly hewn, shaft, running
partly perpendicular, partly obliquely, to the Descending Passage, near
its lowest point in the bedrock.
How Did They Build It?
Bearing
in mind the huge size of the pyramids, classical Egyptologists have
kindly calculated that it must have taken something like twenty years
and 100, 000 men to build the Great Pyramid of Giza. I think this
statement must require some quantitative analysis.
Firstly
we must not, of course, forget that this building was achieved (we
think) in the Stone Age, before (we think) the invention of the pulley
or the wheel. However the work was done it would involve (as far as we
know) only the power of human and animal muscles, along with basic
rollers, ramps and levers. We do not know whether such human muscle
would have been provided by reluctant slaves or devoted servants, but
one thing is sure, it would take several highly experienced generals of
the calibre of Napoleon or Caesar to organise such a work-force in one
place. Then there is the question of the number of highly trained
engineers needed constantly on site, supervisors for lifting and
dragging the stones weighing from 1 to 25 tons each. We must not, of
course, forget the huge task force required to feed the workers.
Next
consider how the stones were actually lifted and moved. “Dragged up
ramps”, the Egyptologists explain. But here we are considering dragging
huge stones along rollers, probably wooden and constantly in need of
replacement, up a ramp from river level to an eventual height of
hundreds of feet, to be then placed perfectly. Such a ramp would in
fact involve something like three times the material involved in the
pyramid itself - some 8 million cubic metres - and would need to be
something like 4800 feet long. This material would need to be very
strong and hard and would itself require a huge task force to transport
it ( and, presumably move it away afterwards, since it doesn’t seem to
be around any more). Now for a little mathematics. It is estimated
that the Great Pyramid contains some 2,5000,000 stones, a total weight
of about 6,300,000 tons ( an average of about 2.6 tons each). The 23rd
course alone consists of several hundred 5 ton limestone blocks. Now we
are told that the workers built only during the time of the annual
inundation, when they were not required on the land. But let’s be
generous and assume that the work force worked 365 days a year for the
twenty years and each day they worked 16 hours. This gives us a total
of about 116,800 hours. So they had to cut, transport, drag, lift and
place some two and a half million 2.6 ton (average - a lot weighed over
20 tons) stones in 116,800 hours. That is one stone every 3 minutes!
Quite a feat trying to imagine the large numbers of men crowded into the
available places, pulling and pushing to the shouts of their
supervisors “Left a bit, up a bit, back a bit, down - no, up and
forward a bit - now down again - oh sand, we’ll have to move that one
again!”. I very much doubt that any construction company in the world
today, with all the technology and power available, would take on the
task. 54 tons of solid stones moved each hour, 16 hours a day, 365 days
a year, for 20 years. Obviously, we cannot sensibly accept these
figures based on what we know today, let alone in Stone Age times.
Now
here we have a problem. How can we cook the books? How can we adjust
the figures to make this construction more feasible. To increase the
work force would be difficult, since only so many men can occupy the
space. We do not know any way of making the stones smaller or lighter.
We cannot increase the hours worked per day, or the number of days in a
year, so the number of years must be changed. So far we calculated the
time taken to lift and place a stone to be 3 minutes. This in itself
cannot be possible given our technological knowledge. Safely lifting
huge stones takes a lot longer. But if we estimate 30 minutes the
overall time factor is increased tenfold, that is it will take 200
years. This is all being on the generous side; it would, of course,
have taken longer still. This means workers and bosses alike dying off,
as well as the Pharaoh himself. Then there would be the Second Pyramid
of Giza, as huge as Cheop’s, to build - another few hundred years. We
are now faced with the prospect of a huge organisation spanning over
several hundreds or a thousand years and many successive Pharaohs (many
of whose names we seem to have lost). Do you believe it?
Personally
I can only conclude that such as feat as the building of three pyramids
at Giza is physically impossible given our technological knowledge (
hardly considering the other 70 odd pyramids in Egypt). The problem is
that the pyramids are not science fiction, but real, I have been inside
them, like millions of tourists over the last few hundred years. Sure,
there must be some explanation, it was done. But how? Alien
technology, lost magic, the will of the gods? I’ll leave you to think
about that one!
The Valley Temple
Almost
as fascinating as the pyramid is the nearby so-called Valley Temple,
composed of hundreds of limestone blocks as large as 30 feet by 12 feet
by 10 feet and weighing up to 200 tons each (yes 200!). How could
these blocks be lifted 40 feet into the air and placed so precisely. In
1997 AD there are only two cranes in the world capable of lifting such a
massive stone and these require 6 weeks preparation by a team of 20
specialised men, as well as a huge counter-weight. Egyptologists seem
to ignore these questions.
The Ground Plan of Giza
There
are a remarkable number of coincidences in the way in which the three
main pyramids at Giza are laid out. As well as the representation of
mathematical concepts such as PI (22/7) and the alignment of the
pyramids with the poles, it has now been suggested that the ground plan
may be a representation of part of the sky at night. Certainly an
aerial photograph of the pyramid plateau reveals a great similarity with
the shape of the stars in the belt of the constellation of Orion, with
the third pyramid slightly out of line with the other two. Recently,
with the aid of computer generated images of the sky thousand of years
ago, it seems that at least one of the so-called ventilation shafts
pointed directly at Orion. What is even more incredible is that if you
look at the situation of the other pyramids in that part of Egypt, they
represent even more stars of Orion, with the Nile representing the Milky
Way. Maybe there is some significance in this, because we know the
Ancient Egyptians were fascinated by the night sky. Why Orion? Could it have been the home of Osiris?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/From-Dot-Cleopatra-Alun-Buffry-ebook/dp/B007I5N0I4
Tuesday, 4 February 2014
Cannabis Social Clubs - A Healthy and Safe Alternative to Unjust Prohibition
Cannabis Social Clubs
introduced and functioning in Spain, Belgium, Italy and France.
How much better is that than in the UK where so many millions are resorting to illegally growing their own or running the risk of buying from dealers that cannot always assure (or do not care) about quality or contamination and often offer hard drugs - as well as making untaxable profits.
We - adults - are capable of making our own choices on what we do with our lives including what we put into our own bodies - even though many may make wrong choices.
Guidance, advice, safety are essential - but none of that is offered by criminalised cannabis suppliers.
It ought to have nothing to do with Government what a citizen does in private - unless the person poses a risk to public health or order, national security or the Rights of others as demanded by Human Rights legislation.
A person should be free to grow and use (possess) cannabis for their own use and Government ought to be looking at how best to protect them, just as those that choose to consume alcohol and tobacco are protected (and the rest of us protected from them).
The same logic and care ought to be applied to victimless cannabis users.The Cannabis Social Clubs model as promoted by ENCOD is a good way to go.
CSC's are non-profit groups of individuals collectively growing good quality cannabis for their own personal and beneficial use.
Cannabis Social Clubs Proposal https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099
Cannabis clubs blossoming in the UK
The Guardian, Nov 17 2013There are 49 of them around the UK now, with members meeting to discuss the drug's production, its medicinal use and legalisation – and to get high
"I
guess it's like wine-tasting – but with cannabis," says Orson Boon (not
his real name), head of the London Cannabis Club. "People come to
exchange samples, try new strains and have a chat."
Sitting around a table in north-east London are several members of the LCC. One member is examining a sample of cannabis under the blue light of a small microscope to check for mite faeces. Another is comparing the smell of a lemon equinox strain and a Jack Herer, a medicinal sativa strain named after a famous cannabis decriminalisation activist. Different-sized lenses, vaporisers and an assortment of labelled pots containing buds and cuttings from cannabis plants cover the table. It's like a science laboratory crossed with the Chelsea flower show."This is the strain that won the Underground London Cannabis Cup," says Boon, holding a small tube labelled K3M under the nose of a recent recruit, who works in an investment company in the City. The newcomer takes a sniff: "I'm seriously considering growing one or two plants with friends. Homegrown stuff like this is so much smoother than the weed I buy off the streets and you know exactly what you're getting." The others begin speculating as to where would be the best place in their homes to set up a hydroponics tent.
Over the past few years, local cannabis clubs have blossomed over Britain. There are now 49 around the UK, which are united by the UK Cannabis Social Club, an organisation founded in 2011 to represent cannabis users. Operating primarily through Facebook, (the LCC's page has had 39,301 likes the clubs bring cannabis users together from all over Britain to discuss topics ranging from fertiliser to self-medication and campaigning for the decriminalisation of the drug. They also organise meetings, from a recent 10,000 person smoke-out in Hyde Park to more intimate evenings such as tonight's soiree, allowing pensioners, students, bricklayers and bankers to talk about one of their favourite hobbies.
Boon's day job – he holds a senior position in the medical field – compelled him to start the cannabis club in the first place. "A lot of my work has been out of the UK where I have seen how effective cannabis has been on patients suffering all kinds of illnesses. I understand cannabis can have bad effects and can be abused – like anything. But when used correctly it is a very different story. When I came to London I met so many people who were secretly medicating with cannabis, which just didn't seem right. So I set up a Facebook page with the intention to normalise cannabis use and bring users together"One of the mantras of the cannabis clubs is to encourage a more healthy use of cannabis. "I only ever vaporise now, it's so much better for you and the taste is much purer," says Orson, placing a tiny piece of cannabis inside the vaporiser and inhaling deeply. It's also more discreet: only weeks before, several members of the LCC had gathered in the Shard, London. While the surrounding guests tucked into their steak tartare, the unlikely club members proceeded to get high with cannabis vaporisers 31 floors up. "It just looks like you're sucking on the end of a posh pen," says Orson.
The fact that growing and possessing cannabis is illegal in Britain does not deter many cannabis clubs across the UK from using social media to publicise meetings – "It's not illegal to talk about cannabis," says Boon – and the openness is part of the campaign for normalisation. Members themselves usually keep their involvement private: "Many of the people I've met have families, high-profile jobs, mortgages and all sorts, and are terrified of losing everything," he adds.
Millie, 59, is a member of a club in Wales. "As an MS sufferer, I found cannabis to be the only thing that really works. Years ago I had been buying it from a lad down the road, but then I thought, screw it, I'm going to grow my own. I go to little meetings a few times a month and they give me tips on how to grow the best weed for my condition, which helps a lot. It also gets me out of the house."
"At present, our main priority is following America's footsteps and legalising cannabis for medical use," says Boon. "If at the very least that happens I will be a happy man."
How much better is that than in the UK where so many millions are resorting to illegally growing their own or running the risk of buying from dealers that cannot always assure (or do not care) about quality or contamination and often offer hard drugs - as well as making untaxable profits.
We - adults - are capable of making our own choices on what we do with our lives including what we put into our own bodies - even though many may make wrong choices.
Guidance, advice, safety are essential - but none of that is offered by criminalised cannabis suppliers.
It ought to have nothing to do with Government what a citizen does in private - unless the person poses a risk to public health or order, national security or the Rights of others as demanded by Human Rights legislation.
A person should be free to grow and use (possess) cannabis for their own use and Government ought to be looking at how best to protect them, just as those that choose to consume alcohol and tobacco are protected (and the rest of us protected from them).
The same logic and care ought to be applied to victimless cannabis users.The Cannabis Social Clubs model as promoted by ENCOD is a good way to go.
CSC's are non-profit groups of individuals collectively growing good quality cannabis for their own personal and beneficial use.
Cannabis Social Clubs Proposal https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099
Cannabis clubs blossoming in the UK
The Guardian, Nov 17 2013There are 49 of them around the UK now, with members meeting to discuss the drug's production, its medicinal use and legalisation – and to get high
"I
guess it's like wine-tasting – but with cannabis," says Orson Boon (not
his real name), head of the London Cannabis Club. "People come to
exchange samples, try new strains and have a chat."Sitting around a table in north-east London are several members of the LCC. One member is examining a sample of cannabis under the blue light of a small microscope to check for mite faeces. Another is comparing the smell of a lemon equinox strain and a Jack Herer, a medicinal sativa strain named after a famous cannabis decriminalisation activist. Different-sized lenses, vaporisers and an assortment of labelled pots containing buds and cuttings from cannabis plants cover the table. It's like a science laboratory crossed with the Chelsea flower show."This is the strain that won the Underground London Cannabis Cup," says Boon, holding a small tube labelled K3M under the nose of a recent recruit, who works in an investment company in the City. The newcomer takes a sniff: "I'm seriously considering growing one or two plants with friends. Homegrown stuff like this is so much smoother than the weed I buy off the streets and you know exactly what you're getting." The others begin speculating as to where would be the best place in their homes to set up a hydroponics tent.
Over the past few years, local cannabis clubs have blossomed over Britain. There are now 49 around the UK, which are united by the UK Cannabis Social Club, an organisation founded in 2011 to represent cannabis users. Operating primarily through Facebook, (the LCC's page has had 39,301 likes the clubs bring cannabis users together from all over Britain to discuss topics ranging from fertiliser to self-medication and campaigning for the decriminalisation of the drug. They also organise meetings, from a recent 10,000 person smoke-out in Hyde Park to more intimate evenings such as tonight's soiree, allowing pensioners, students, bricklayers and bankers to talk about one of their favourite hobbies.
Boon's day job – he holds a senior position in the medical field – compelled him to start the cannabis club in the first place. "A lot of my work has been out of the UK where I have seen how effective cannabis has been on patients suffering all kinds of illnesses. I understand cannabis can have bad effects and can be abused – like anything. But when used correctly it is a very different story. When I came to London I met so many people who were secretly medicating with cannabis, which just didn't seem right. So I set up a Facebook page with the intention to normalise cannabis use and bring users together"One of the mantras of the cannabis clubs is to encourage a more healthy use of cannabis. "I only ever vaporise now, it's so much better for you and the taste is much purer," says Orson, placing a tiny piece of cannabis inside the vaporiser and inhaling deeply. It's also more discreet: only weeks before, several members of the LCC had gathered in the Shard, London. While the surrounding guests tucked into their steak tartare, the unlikely club members proceeded to get high with cannabis vaporisers 31 floors up. "It just looks like you're sucking on the end of a posh pen," says Orson.
The fact that growing and possessing cannabis is illegal in Britain does not deter many cannabis clubs across the UK from using social media to publicise meetings – "It's not illegal to talk about cannabis," says Boon – and the openness is part of the campaign for normalisation. Members themselves usually keep their involvement private: "Many of the people I've met have families, high-profile jobs, mortgages and all sorts, and are terrified of losing everything," he adds.
Millie, 59, is a member of a club in Wales. "As an MS sufferer, I found cannabis to be the only thing that really works. Years ago I had been buying it from a lad down the road, but then I thought, screw it, I'm going to grow my own. I go to little meetings a few times a month and they give me tips on how to grow the best weed for my condition, which helps a lot. It also gets me out of the house."
"At present, our main priority is following America's footsteps and legalising cannabis for medical use," says Boon. "If at the very least that happens I will be a happy man."
The law is not about risks from cannabis use
Mr Rolles of Transform says "Cannabis needs to be legalised because of its risks, not because it is safe, the charity says."
The "risks" are mainly from cannabis of unknown strength, additives, lack of hygiene and selling to underaged people - those risks are caused by the prohibition and associated greed, not the plant itself - there are numerous reports from around the world that show that cannabis is not only safer than most pills and drugs, but also, according to the DEA's Judge Francis Young, safer than potatoes.
Maybe Mr Rolles could tell us what risks he is talking about and what percentage of users are supposed to be at risk.
Of course it is not about risks - or safety - because bearing in mind the risk: benefit ratio, it is not and never has been banned because of risks!
Any risk is determined by the individual - and how much sense does it make to punish people that not only do no harm to others but benefit from their use of cannabis - and for that matter how much sense to punish the small minority of users that have suffered?
TRANSFORM and others need to realise that prohibition of drugs causes more damage than the drugs, look at it from the Human Rights angle.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/13/legalise-cannabis-in-britain-would-save-money_n_4438609.html
Huffington Post:: 13 Dec 2013
The "risks" are mainly from cannabis of unknown strength, additives, lack of hygiene and selling to underaged people - those risks are caused by the prohibition and associated greed, not the plant itself - there are numerous reports from around the world that show that cannabis is not only safer than most pills and drugs, but also, according to the DEA's Judge Francis Young, safer than potatoes.
Maybe Mr Rolles could tell us what risks he is talking about and what percentage of users are supposed to be at risk.
Of course it is not about risks - or safety - because bearing in mind the risk: benefit ratio, it is not and never has been banned because of risks!
Any risk is determined by the individual - and how much sense does it make to punish people that not only do no harm to others but benefit from their use of cannabis - and for that matter how much sense to punish the small minority of users that have suffered?
TRANSFORM and others need to realise that prohibition of drugs causes more damage than the drugs, look at it from the Human Rights angle.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/13/legalise-cannabis-in-britain-would-save-money_n_4438609.html
Huffington Post:: 13 Dec 2013
Legalising Cannabis In Britain, Like Uruguay, 'Would Save Millions'
Recent reform victories are reshaping the landscape of the oldest debate in drug policy.
As Uruguay passed historic legislation this week – becoming the first country in the world to make the production, sale and possession of cannabis legal – the debate around the regulation of the drug in the UK has been thrown back into the spotlight.
The debate over the legalisation of cannabis has been moving increasingly from the margins into the political mainstream, with multiple cities, states and countries considering, developing or implementing a range of regulated market models.
Many public figures, including some politicians, are in agreement that fifty years later, the war on drugs has failed – so has the time come for Britain to take the step from prohibition to legalised regulation?
At a time when Britain is facing brutal austerity measure, The Institute For Social And Economic Research recently estimated that a regulated market could reduce the government deficit by up to £1.25bn, whilst producing roughly £400m in "net benefit" for the country.
The Huffington Post UK spoke to one of the experts who advised the Uruguayan government on its landmark decision on whether Britain could benefit from a similar move.
Steve Rolles, the Senior Policy Analyst for the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, has argued for a regulated cannabis market under a strict and sensible framework, like the one implemented in Uruguay.
He acknowledged that, for the UK, "it's a long way away," but now that a country has successfully pursued government-led legalisation "it is going to be hard for other places to ignore it."
"It's one of those things where someone had to go first," he said.
Mr Rolles said the battle in the UK was now to try and change the more "old school" political attitude towards cannabis and the steadfast idea that "drugs are bad."
Nearly a century ago cannabis, along with other drugs, was identified as "evil, a threat to be fought in a winnable war that would completely eradicate the non-medical use of these substances," Transform said in their Practical Guide on how to regulate cannabis, which was released this week. "The experience of the past 50 years demonstrates that prohibitionist policies have not, and cannot, achieve their stated aims."
Transform is not primarily interested in the discussion of the specific harms that cannabis causes – arguing instead that the negative outcomes of drug use are effectively reduced, whatever they are, by regulating the drug.
Cannabis needs to be legalised because of its risks, not because it is safe, the charity says.
As Diego Canepa, the president of the Uruguay's National Drug Board, said: “A regulated market that is visible has greater oversight than prohibition.”
Uruguayans who register on a national database can now buy up to 40g of cannabis from a pharmacy, and adults are allowed to grow up to eight marijuana plants each.
Everything is monitored by a government database and all forms of advertising, promotion and sponsorship are banned – effectively killing the black market.
Additionally, around 20 US states have now decriminalised cannabis possession for personal use, while Washington and Colorado, have passed ballot legislation to legalise and regulate non-medical cannabis production and supply – ̨the first jurisdictions ever to doso.
Mr Rolles said the point of legalising cannabis is to gain control of the substance and protect public health.
“Prohibition doesn’t improve public health, it actually endangers public health. It doesn’t protect children, it imperils children. It doesn’t reduce crime, it fuels crime. It’s very expensive and is delivering terrible outcomes," he said.
Legalisation, he said, would also effectively eradicate an underclass of people burdened with crippling criminal records and give police more time to "pursue real crime."
But whether legalisation will ever happen here is hard to say.
David Cameron, who once called for "alternative ways" to tackle drugs, has been accused of "chickening out" of reforming Britain's drug laws.
A former government adviser previously told the Huffington Post UK the Prime Minister is "posturing with tough policies" and that his stance has hardened since he became Tory leader.
Professor David Nutt, who used to chair the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, said this was down to "pressure from the old men in the party who told him he could not get elected if he was not hard on drugs."
As a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Mr Cameron voted in favour of the United Nations looking at whether the drugs trade could be legalised and regulated.
But last year he rejected calls for a royal commission to look at whether drugs could be legalised.
"It's a huge disappointment. Now he's just a traditional Tory," Prof Nutt said.
Wednesday, 22 January 2014
NO JUSTICATION FOR CANNABIS PROHIBITION - Reiterating "The Challenge"
Reiterating "The Challenge"
The main reason that the UK Government has given as a basis for its refusal to consider repeal of the cannabis law is that it would pose an extra risk to public health, with particular reference to the possible detrimental effects of cannabis smoking on the mental health and future mental health of young teenagers - the words psychosis and schizophrenia are bandied around as if it were a common place occurance.
So adults cannabis users that have and pose to problems to others are punished as some sort of deterrent meant to discourage teenagers from smoing cannabis.
EVEN IF cannabis did cause schizophrenia it is obviously in such a tiny minority of users that is is still in dispute, and things are not banned which means people are not generally punished for things that detrimentally effect others.
Alcohol, tobacco, aspirin, pills, sugar, peanuts and even rock climbing and sunbathing can effect a minority is bad ways, sometimes even fatal - marriage can and does have bad consequences on the many - let alone guns and knives - but the law does not threaten to punish all those that participate in the activity or possess or consume the substance or item EVEN then.
No Victim No Crime.
To punish a cannabis user - especially one that benefits from their use - as a deterent to try to stop and unknown and tiny minority of users that may or may not have suffered ille effects is simply nonsensicalThe argument that it leads to hard drugs, again for a minority of users that later tried hard drugs - is no reason even so to punish those that did or those that did not take hard drugs - makes as much sense as punishing kids with toy guns or water pistols because most offences involving real guns are committee by peopele that started off with toy guns.In fact there is no reason not to end prohibtion and the Government refuses to budge because they "fear" the consequences, losing votes, and loss of revenue from the massive profiteering that prohibition enables for pharmaceutical and petrochemicals etc.
http://www.ccguide.org/lca/challengeintro.php
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Challenging-the-Criminal-Justice-System/687982441233428
CHALLENGE
We believe that the prohibition of cannabis, presently embodied in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and associated legislation has:
A legal regulated control of cannabis, would:
We are concerned by the failure of our current democratic institutions and public authorities (as defined by the Human Rights Act) to address these issues.
To date, in a debate that asks whether cannabis use ought to be decriminalised or legalised, those who support current policies need not utter a single word in its defence. They can simply sit back and wait for their opponents to make predictions, and then challenge the accuracy of those predictions.
WHY IS THIS?
We believe this debate cannot proceed sensibly unless it begins with reasons in favour of punishing people who use cannabis.
GOVERNMENT MUST JUSTIFY THE LAW!
This document is designed to assist you in you deliberations.
To ensure constructive consultation we invite you to reproduce this document [unedited] and/or forward the URL http://www.ccguide.org/lca/challenge.php to anyone who you think needs to know the truth.
WARNING
Know What You're Getting Into Before Speaking Against Legal Regulated Control http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/dea/pubs/legaliz/aware.htm
INTRODUCTION
Agree? Disagree?
If we were to ask: "What is the Government's 10-year Drugs Strategy on cannabis controls?" we doubt that 1 in 10,000 of the general public would have the foggiest notion what we were on about!
To increase the public understanding of the cannabis and the controversy surrounding it,we invite you to participate in a open and honest dialogue regarding the future of UK cannabis control policies in which fear, prejudice and punitive prohibition yield to common sense, science, public health, human rights and practicality.
In the past decade there appears to have been a change in opinion about the harmfulness of cannabis.
There has also been a limited debate on allowing personal use of cannabis such as under 'reclassification', 'decriminalisation" and a legal regulated supply. However, it has not been as clear as what would be desirable or what the Government's intentions are.
Laws to combat drugs are like a jigsaw puzzle with the linking pieces missing, being regularly added by the Home Office with little or no parliamentary debate, let alone public discussion.
The public are forced to guess or rely on chat show hosts and media hype to form opinions as to what the legislator has in mind when they resort to punishment for cannabis offences. This has resulted in the general public becoming confused and insufficiently informed.
This is not surprising. Consecutive governments' "War on Drugs" has evolved into a complex and complicated system, misunderstood by most people, including many of those responsible for implementing Government Anti-Drugs policy!
Since the mid 1980s, consecutive UK governments have increased funding and actions to tackle illegal substances on five main fronts: international co-operation, enforcement, deterrence, prevention and treatment.
Estimated UK government funding in these areas for 1993-94 was 526 million. Today this figure is allegedly billions annually but there are no comprehensive figures available! [Tackling Drugs Together October 1994 ISBN O-10-126782-7]
Despite these increasing efforts, there can be little doubt that cannabis suppliers have succeeded in maintaining the supply to satisfy the ever-increasing demand. In fact, it is hard to see how they could have been more successful had cannabis not been banned!
It therefore makes sense to examine the successes and failures of past and present systems of control, to set out the available choices, to examine how they would work if applied in the UK and try to predict their likely consequences!
Is it worth doing? We think it is!
This consultation is for everyone with an interest in our drug policy, [including those who favour retaining criminal sanctions punishments]. We are confident it will:
Why is it our legislators have absolutely nothing to say on behalf of the position they endorse? Instead, the public are forced to guess or rely on chat show hosts and media hype to form their opinions as to what the legislator has in mind when they resort to punishment for cannabis offences.
This is not good enough: The burden to produce justification must be placed on government!
However. Despite David Blunkett's request for a rational debate on allowing personal use of cannabis including proposals for reclassification, decriminalisation and a legal regulated supply it has not been as clear what the Government's or the Opposition party?s policies are on cannabis.
The Conservative Party has branded the Home Affairs Select Committee's recommendation to reclassify cannabis and governments proposed liberalisation of disposal of cannabis possession offences to finance the war on addictive substances as "muddled and dangerous policy".
Instead, they back Sweden?s strategy where the public report suspected drug users and a huge expansion of drug rehabilitation facilities and prisons to lock the non-conformist up - an approach described recently by David Blunkett as "unworkable".
George Orwell said: "Political language is designed to make a lie appear the truth and give solidity to wind"!
Today it would appear government is embarked on the dangerous USA coercive abstinence strategy, based on the belief that we can put enough people in prison to effectively control the drug problem. In other words, we will make the drug users get treatment or go to jail and put all the drug dealers or cannabis cultivators in jail.
Let's suppose we agree with this. Now, exactly how many prison cells will we need to build to carry out this plan? How many prisoners is the current plan going to take?
What is the total cost to date for drug testing alone? Is government minded to introduce universal drug testing?
What about human rights? How many people will lose a job or not get one, or have driving licences pulled because they use cannabis? How many children will be expelled from schools for testing positive for cannabis? In short, are we talking ourselves into a 'controlled' society?
If society is to achieve any success in its drug control and awareness programmes, we need to be truthful, use correct terminology and study the evidence and research already available.
We must examine: the failures and successes of present and past control regimes, how the implementation of law conflict with Human Rights, harm reduction, good practice, the need to create a just and workable legislation that reduces harm from cannabis without infringing upon personal privacy and the rights to choose one's own lifestyle or belief, legislation aimed at protection not punishment, our own understanding and attitudes towards drugs use, misuse and abuse.
Note: The overwhelming majority of those who use cannabis are not 'problem users' and normal use ought not be labelled as misuse.
We must ask: would it be preferable to have a legal system of cannabis retail outlets incorporating all necessary quality control and harm reduction provisions, rather than a criminal justice issue? What is the value, reliability, cost and the need for universal testing? Whether we have good reasons to continue to punish people who use cannabis or grow a few plants for their own use or share with friends at home (non-commercial)?
The point is: Punishment is the most powerful weapon in the CJS arsenal. It is the most terrible thing that any state can do to its citizens. These sanctions should not be invoked casually; they always require a compelling defence.
Any sort to punishment requires a justification. We must always be prepared to show why what we are doing is right. For no individual should be deprived of their liberty unless there are excellent reasons for doing so!
The basic question we ask is not whether we have good reasons not to punish cannabis users but whether we have good reasons to continue to punish people who use cannabis or grow a few plants for their own use or share with friends at home.
Are the laws just? Are they fair?
NOTE: "The Challenge": "Cannabis, Challeging the Criminal Justice System" was authored by Don Barnard and Alun Buffry
The main reason that the UK Government has given as a basis for its refusal to consider repeal of the cannabis law is that it would pose an extra risk to public health, with particular reference to the possible detrimental effects of cannabis smoking on the mental health and future mental health of young teenagers - the words psychosis and schizophrenia are bandied around as if it were a common place occurance.
So adults cannabis users that have and pose to problems to others are punished as some sort of deterrent meant to discourage teenagers from smoing cannabis.
EVEN IF cannabis did cause schizophrenia it is obviously in such a tiny minority of users that is is still in dispute, and things are not banned which means people are not generally punished for things that detrimentally effect others.
Alcohol, tobacco, aspirin, pills, sugar, peanuts and even rock climbing and sunbathing can effect a minority is bad ways, sometimes even fatal - marriage can and does have bad consequences on the many - let alone guns and knives - but the law does not threaten to punish all those that participate in the activity or possess or consume the substance or item EVEN then.
No Victim No Crime.
To punish a cannabis user - especially one that benefits from their use - as a deterent to try to stop and unknown and tiny minority of users that may or may not have suffered ille effects is simply nonsensicalThe argument that it leads to hard drugs, again for a minority of users that later tried hard drugs - is no reason even so to punish those that did or those that did not take hard drugs - makes as much sense as punishing kids with toy guns or water pistols because most offences involving real guns are committee by peopele that started off with toy guns.In fact there is no reason not to end prohibtion and the Government refuses to budge because they "fear" the consequences, losing votes, and loss of revenue from the massive profiteering that prohibition enables for pharmaceutical and petrochemicals etc.
http://www.ccguide.org/lca/challengeintro.php
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Challenging-the-Criminal-Justice-System/687982441233428
CHALLENGE
We believe that the prohibition of cannabis, presently embodied in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and associated legislation has:
- proved ineffective in the achievement of its objects,
- been counter productive in its side-effects,
- wasted public resources,
- been destructive in its cultivation of criminality and been inhumane in its operation.
A legal regulated control of cannabis, would:
- reduce drug-acquisition crime,
- facilitate the education both of the young and of adult users,
- reduce the incidence of problematic drug use,
- facilitate the deployment of therapeutic support,
- release public and Police Service resources for other deployment,
- constitute a system compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
- and generate a new and acceptable source of public income.
We are concerned by the failure of our current democratic institutions and public authorities (as defined by the Human Rights Act) to address these issues.
To date, in a debate that asks whether cannabis use ought to be decriminalised or legalised, those who support current policies need not utter a single word in its defence. They can simply sit back and wait for their opponents to make predictions, and then challenge the accuracy of those predictions.
WHY IS THIS?
We believe this debate cannot proceed sensibly unless it begins with reasons in favour of punishing people who use cannabis.
GOVERNMENT MUST JUSTIFY THE LAW!
This document is designed to assist you in you deliberations.
To ensure constructive consultation we invite you to reproduce this document [unedited] and/or forward the URL http://www.ccguide.org/lca/challenge.php to anyone who you think needs to know the truth.
WARNING
Know What You're Getting Into Before Speaking Against Legal Regulated Control http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/dea/pubs/legaliz/aware.htm
INTRODUCTION
Agree? Disagree?
If we were to ask: "What is the Government's 10-year Drugs Strategy on cannabis controls?" we doubt that 1 in 10,000 of the general public would have the foggiest notion what we were on about!
To increase the public understanding of the cannabis and the controversy surrounding it,we invite you to participate in a open and honest dialogue regarding the future of UK cannabis control policies in which fear, prejudice and punitive prohibition yield to common sense, science, public health, human rights and practicality.
In the past decade there appears to have been a change in opinion about the harmfulness of cannabis.
There has also been a limited debate on allowing personal use of cannabis such as under 'reclassification', 'decriminalisation" and a legal regulated supply. However, it has not been as clear as what would be desirable or what the Government's intentions are.
Laws to combat drugs are like a jigsaw puzzle with the linking pieces missing, being regularly added by the Home Office with little or no parliamentary debate, let alone public discussion.
The public are forced to guess or rely on chat show hosts and media hype to form opinions as to what the legislator has in mind when they resort to punishment for cannabis offences. This has resulted in the general public becoming confused and insufficiently informed.
This is not surprising. Consecutive governments' "War on Drugs" has evolved into a complex and complicated system, misunderstood by most people, including many of those responsible for implementing Government Anti-Drugs policy!
Since the mid 1980s, consecutive UK governments have increased funding and actions to tackle illegal substances on five main fronts: international co-operation, enforcement, deterrence, prevention and treatment.
Estimated UK government funding in these areas for 1993-94 was 526 million. Today this figure is allegedly billions annually but there are no comprehensive figures available! [Tackling Drugs Together October 1994 ISBN O-10-126782-7]
Despite these increasing efforts, there can be little doubt that cannabis suppliers have succeeded in maintaining the supply to satisfy the ever-increasing demand. In fact, it is hard to see how they could have been more successful had cannabis not been banned!
It therefore makes sense to examine the successes and failures of past and present systems of control, to set out the available choices, to examine how they would work if applied in the UK and try to predict their likely consequences!
Is it worth doing? We think it is!
This consultation is for everyone with an interest in our drug policy, [including those who favour retaining criminal sanctions punishments]. We are confident it will:
- help remove many of the misconceptions about cannabis and the law,
- demonstrate that cannabis is so much more than a recreational substance,
- show that many long-term social, ecological and economical benefits can be gained by rescheduling cannabis.
Why is it our legislators have absolutely nothing to say on behalf of the position they endorse? Instead, the public are forced to guess or rely on chat show hosts and media hype to form their opinions as to what the legislator has in mind when they resort to punishment for cannabis offences.
This is not good enough: The burden to produce justification must be placed on government!
However. Despite David Blunkett's request for a rational debate on allowing personal use of cannabis including proposals for reclassification, decriminalisation and a legal regulated supply it has not been as clear what the Government's or the Opposition party?s policies are on cannabis.
The Conservative Party has branded the Home Affairs Select Committee's recommendation to reclassify cannabis and governments proposed liberalisation of disposal of cannabis possession offences to finance the war on addictive substances as "muddled and dangerous policy".
Instead, they back Sweden?s strategy where the public report suspected drug users and a huge expansion of drug rehabilitation facilities and prisons to lock the non-conformist up - an approach described recently by David Blunkett as "unworkable".
George Orwell said: "Political language is designed to make a lie appear the truth and give solidity to wind"!
Today it would appear government is embarked on the dangerous USA coercive abstinence strategy, based on the belief that we can put enough people in prison to effectively control the drug problem. In other words, we will make the drug users get treatment or go to jail and put all the drug dealers or cannabis cultivators in jail.
Let's suppose we agree with this. Now, exactly how many prison cells will we need to build to carry out this plan? How many prisoners is the current plan going to take?
What is the total cost to date for drug testing alone? Is government minded to introduce universal drug testing?
What about human rights? How many people will lose a job or not get one, or have driving licences pulled because they use cannabis? How many children will be expelled from schools for testing positive for cannabis? In short, are we talking ourselves into a 'controlled' society?
If society is to achieve any success in its drug control and awareness programmes, we need to be truthful, use correct terminology and study the evidence and research already available.
We must examine: the failures and successes of present and past control regimes, how the implementation of law conflict with Human Rights, harm reduction, good practice, the need to create a just and workable legislation that reduces harm from cannabis without infringing upon personal privacy and the rights to choose one's own lifestyle or belief, legislation aimed at protection not punishment, our own understanding and attitudes towards drugs use, misuse and abuse.
Note: The overwhelming majority of those who use cannabis are not 'problem users' and normal use ought not be labelled as misuse.
We must ask: would it be preferable to have a legal system of cannabis retail outlets incorporating all necessary quality control and harm reduction provisions, rather than a criminal justice issue? What is the value, reliability, cost and the need for universal testing? Whether we have good reasons to continue to punish people who use cannabis or grow a few plants for their own use or share with friends at home (non-commercial)?
The point is: Punishment is the most powerful weapon in the CJS arsenal. It is the most terrible thing that any state can do to its citizens. These sanctions should not be invoked casually; they always require a compelling defence.
Any sort to punishment requires a justification. We must always be prepared to show why what we are doing is right. For no individual should be deprived of their liberty unless there are excellent reasons for doing so!
The basic question we ask is not whether we have good reasons not to punish cannabis users but whether we have good reasons to continue to punish people who use cannabis or grow a few plants for their own use or share with friends at home.
Are the laws just? Are they fair?
NOTE: "The Challenge": "Cannabis, Challeging the Criminal Justice System" was authored by Don Barnard and Alun Buffry
CANNABIS: POSSIBLE LEGAL SUPPLY ROUTES
In discussing and advocating the repeal of cannabis laws we must go
beyond the issues of possession or cultivation for own use: there is
clearly no justification for any authority to interfere with Private
Life activities that pose no threat to public order, health or the
Rights of others.However, when it comes to supply, I think it essential
that any future control of cannabis should be based upon consumer
protection and taxation (only on profits, to my mind).
Whether the cannabis is gifted or sold, the receiver deserves the protection of law just as everybody does with other goods.So what are the alternative systems of supply that would best suit the customers without putting unnecessary burdens on commercial cultivation or supply.
Presumably there would be a system of license or registrations allowing conditions to be put on businesses to ensure hygiene, freedom from, accuracy of weights, maybe even labelling requirements. There would need to be avenues of recompense for breaches.
“Grow-your-own!” has become a mantra for many within the cannabis law repeal fraternity and “Cannabis Social Clubs” (CSC's)
(https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099) have been proposed as an extension of that.
A CSC is a non-profit making collective of people that grow communally for their own needs; they are transparent to authority with accounts and details of membership and production and distribution.
Many CSC's now operate in Spain and more are starting up in Belgium, France and Italy. Many are already growing cannabis and distributing to members.
In the UK, many CSC's are newly formed groups of users and campaigners in various counties, cities or towns across the country and it is possible that eventually they may lead to organised growing similar to the Spanish model. Of course that would be no problem after legalisation.
Previous to prohibition though, there were no CSC's. People either grew there own or picked it wild.
Countries such as India had Government shops that sold hashish, and New York once had hashish bars.
Since prohibition and until recently, there has been no country in the world that allows the legal sale of cannabis – even in the Netherlands with all their policy of tolerance for “Coffeeshops”, they have no legal supply routes into the premises. It's a sort of half-way-house (grey area) where adults can go to buy and sometimes smoke small amounts of cannabis but the only control on quality is through reputation. Most are great places to visit and I would love to see them in every city, enabling people to buy and smoke cannabis when away from home, or even in their own towns. It is estimated that 30 to 40% of Dutch smokers buy from Coffeeshops, the rest grow their own or buy from house dealers – there is also some punting of cannabis to tourists on the streets – something likely to increases if the Dutch Government implement their backward-planning for restrictions against tourists and the citing of venues.
Cannabis, grown and irradiated by the Dutch pharmaceutical company under the name Bedrocan, has been available on prescription in The Netherlands and Italy and sold through pharmacies. It is granulated bud. Unfortunately, it is more expensive than the Coffeeshops, and although residents of countries that prescribe Bedrocan can travel freely with it throughout the UK, it remains an offence for residents of the UK to go and buy it and bring it back – the UK Government are still in the stone age when it comes to recognising the true medicinal values of cannabis.
So in the UK the supply of all natural cannabis remains in the hands of “criminals”, whether simply profiteers or people trying to help the sick and injured.
Now, in 2014, changes are afoot in some countries.
In Uruguay the Government has attempted to take control of cannabis and stop the illegal dealing by allowing people to grow a few plants of their own, and otherwise the Government will grow and supply the plant themselves. That said, they still have to work out which strains to grow, packaging and pricing, and how to stop resale.In California and other States in the US, cannabis has been supplied through “clinics” requiring a doctor's prescription for a number of years: unlike
The Netherlands however, prescriptions are much easier to get and the cannabis is not radiated – hash, cookies, foodstuffs and other cannabis products are often sold through the same clinics.. Under federal law, however, it all remains illegal and it remains to be seen what Obama will ultimately do about it – get heavy-handed or turn a blind eye?
After a powerful vote last year, Colorado and has gone one step further in defiance of federal law has allowed cannabis shops to open up and sell the plant in its many forms without the Californian pretence of medicinal prescription for almost anyone – the supply is legal, consumers are protected as are all consumers, profits taxed. Adults over 21 can buy for “recreational use” and thousands of people in medical need are also heading that way – the revenue raised is already impressive, within days.
Cannabis is subject to the same regulations as all products to which the public is exposed. http://youtu.be/lS-ijtvVaCAI guess the Colorado legalisation could be called a free-for-all within the law, without the criteria of non-profit making of the Spanish CFC model, beyond the policy of the front room tolerance but back door crime of the Dutch Coffeeshops, side-stepping the question of purpose of use, protecting the consumer, taxing the profits --- it seems just the sort of system many campaigners said we could never have.
We may have to wait a while now to see how it develops in California, Colorado, Uruguay and the Netherlands, and then we need to convince our own Government that such systems are better for everyone except the criminals – just wait and see how they react when we learn just how much revenue is raise through tax on profits and how much is saved on policing! Many people think that in these times of supposed fiscal crisis, money will be the key to change, rather than Rights or health issues – after all, Government raises huge sums from selling cigarettes and alcoholic drinks, why not weed?
Ask which system of distribution I prefer from the above: simple: any and all of them.I would like to see private cultivation, group cultivation,medicinal supply, Coffeeshops for supply and toking and clinics or shops for supply = such systems are not mutually exclusive.
LINKS
http://www.encod.org/info/-English-en-.html
http://ukcsc.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099
http://www.ccguide.org/index.phphttps://www.facebook.com/CCGUIDE
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alliance-of-Cannabis-Hemp-Activists-ACHA/119868538117932
http://www.coffeeshop.freeuk.com/
http://norml-uk.org/
Whether the cannabis is gifted or sold, the receiver deserves the protection of law just as everybody does with other goods.So what are the alternative systems of supply that would best suit the customers without putting unnecessary burdens on commercial cultivation or supply.
Presumably there would be a system of license or registrations allowing conditions to be put on businesses to ensure hygiene, freedom from, accuracy of weights, maybe even labelling requirements. There would need to be avenues of recompense for breaches.
“Grow-your-own!” has become a mantra for many within the cannabis law repeal fraternity and “Cannabis Social Clubs” (CSC's)
(https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099) have been proposed as an extension of that.
A CSC is a non-profit making collective of people that grow communally for their own needs; they are transparent to authority with accounts and details of membership and production and distribution.
Many CSC's now operate in Spain and more are starting up in Belgium, France and Italy. Many are already growing cannabis and distributing to members.
In the UK, many CSC's are newly formed groups of users and campaigners in various counties, cities or towns across the country and it is possible that eventually they may lead to organised growing similar to the Spanish model. Of course that would be no problem after legalisation.
Previous to prohibition though, there were no CSC's. People either grew there own or picked it wild.
Countries such as India had Government shops that sold hashish, and New York once had hashish bars.
Since prohibition and until recently, there has been no country in the world that allows the legal sale of cannabis – even in the Netherlands with all their policy of tolerance for “Coffeeshops”, they have no legal supply routes into the premises. It's a sort of half-way-house (grey area) where adults can go to buy and sometimes smoke small amounts of cannabis but the only control on quality is through reputation. Most are great places to visit and I would love to see them in every city, enabling people to buy and smoke cannabis when away from home, or even in their own towns. It is estimated that 30 to 40% of Dutch smokers buy from Coffeeshops, the rest grow their own or buy from house dealers – there is also some punting of cannabis to tourists on the streets – something likely to increases if the Dutch Government implement their backward-planning for restrictions against tourists and the citing of venues.
Cannabis, grown and irradiated by the Dutch pharmaceutical company under the name Bedrocan, has been available on prescription in The Netherlands and Italy and sold through pharmacies. It is granulated bud. Unfortunately, it is more expensive than the Coffeeshops, and although residents of countries that prescribe Bedrocan can travel freely with it throughout the UK, it remains an offence for residents of the UK to go and buy it and bring it back – the UK Government are still in the stone age when it comes to recognising the true medicinal values of cannabis.
So in the UK the supply of all natural cannabis remains in the hands of “criminals”, whether simply profiteers or people trying to help the sick and injured.
Now, in 2014, changes are afoot in some countries.
In Uruguay the Government has attempted to take control of cannabis and stop the illegal dealing by allowing people to grow a few plants of their own, and otherwise the Government will grow and supply the plant themselves. That said, they still have to work out which strains to grow, packaging and pricing, and how to stop resale.In California and other States in the US, cannabis has been supplied through “clinics” requiring a doctor's prescription for a number of years: unlike
The Netherlands however, prescriptions are much easier to get and the cannabis is not radiated – hash, cookies, foodstuffs and other cannabis products are often sold through the same clinics.. Under federal law, however, it all remains illegal and it remains to be seen what Obama will ultimately do about it – get heavy-handed or turn a blind eye?
After a powerful vote last year, Colorado and has gone one step further in defiance of federal law has allowed cannabis shops to open up and sell the plant in its many forms without the Californian pretence of medicinal prescription for almost anyone – the supply is legal, consumers are protected as are all consumers, profits taxed. Adults over 21 can buy for “recreational use” and thousands of people in medical need are also heading that way – the revenue raised is already impressive, within days.
Cannabis is subject to the same regulations as all products to which the public is exposed. http://youtu.be/lS-ijtvVaCAI guess the Colorado legalisation could be called a free-for-all within the law, without the criteria of non-profit making of the Spanish CFC model, beyond the policy of the front room tolerance but back door crime of the Dutch Coffeeshops, side-stepping the question of purpose of use, protecting the consumer, taxing the profits --- it seems just the sort of system many campaigners said we could never have.
We may have to wait a while now to see how it develops in California, Colorado, Uruguay and the Netherlands, and then we need to convince our own Government that such systems are better for everyone except the criminals – just wait and see how they react when we learn just how much revenue is raise through tax on profits and how much is saved on policing! Many people think that in these times of supposed fiscal crisis, money will be the key to change, rather than Rights or health issues – after all, Government raises huge sums from selling cigarettes and alcoholic drinks, why not weed?
Ask which system of distribution I prefer from the above: simple: any and all of them.I would like to see private cultivation, group cultivation,medicinal supply, Coffeeshops for supply and toking and clinics or shops for supply = such systems are not mutually exclusive.
LINKS
http://www.encod.org/info/-English-en-.html
http://ukcsc.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099
http://www.ccguide.org/index.phphttps://www.facebook.com/CCGUIDE
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alliance-of-Cannabis-Hemp-Activists-ACHA/119868538117932
http://www.coffeeshop.freeuk.com/
http://norml-uk.org/
Monday, 30 December 2013
CANNABIS CHANGING WORLD: JUNE 2012 to DECEMBER 2013: NEWS REPORTS
US: THE YEAR IN WEED, 25 DEC 2013
URUGUAY LEGALISES THE PRODUCTION AND SALE OF MARIJUANA, 11 DEC 2013
MOROCOO IS GOING TO POT! RABAT EYES GIVING HASHISH LEGALIZATION LAW THE "GREEN" LIGHT, 5 DEC 2013
GERMANY: BERLIN COUNCIL AUTHORIZES FIRST CANNABIS CAFE, 30 NOV 2013
ST VINCENT & GRENADINES TO LEGALISE MARIJUANA?
CZECH REPUBLIC: POLICE RAID GROW SHOPS, 6 NOV 2013
MEXICO CITY MAY BE NEXT TO BEAT CALIFORNIA TO MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION, 14 OCT 2013
MARIJUANA FINALLY DECRIMINALIZED IN JAMAICA, 13 OCT 2013
ROMANIA BECOMES 10TH COUNTRY IN THE EU TO ALLOW MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA, 5 OCT 2013
SWITZERLAND: MIXED FEELINGS OVER NEW SWISS CANNABIS LAW, 30 SEPT 2013
NETHERLANDS: UTRECHT PRESSES AHEAD WITH 'LEGAL' CANNABIS EXPERIMENTS, 11 SEPT 2013
CANNABIS CAFES COULD SET UP SHOP IN BERLIN, 16 SEPT 2013
MALTA: NO POSSESSION OF DRUGS REQUIRED FOR DRUG POSSESSION CHARGES, 6 SEPT 2013
MEXICO CITY MULLS LEGAL MARIJUANA 'CLUBS', 4 SEPT 2013
SOUTH AFRICA TO CONSIDER LEGALIZING MARIJUANA, 8 AUGUST 2013
URUGUAY VOTES TO CREATE WORLD'S FIRST NATIONAL LEGAL MARIJUANA MARKET, 1 AUGUST 2013
FRENCH LAW ON POT-BASED MEDICINE TAKES EFFECT, 10 JUNE 2013
CANADA'S NEW MEDICAL MARIJUANA RULES CUT HOMEGROWERS, PHARMACISTS OUT, 10 JUNE 2013
DENMARK: COPENHAGENERS CAUTIOUSLY SUPPORT LEGAL CANNABIS, BUT PROVINCES UNCONVINCED, 6 MAY 2013
ITALY LEGALISES MEDICINAL CANNABIS, 12 MARCH 2013
HAWAII: SENATE VOTES UNANIMOUSLY TO DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA, 6 MARCH 2013
CANADA: POT STAYS ILLEGAL IN CANADA AFTER APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS RULING, 2 FEB 2013
COSTA RICA, MEXICO, AND COLOMBIA PREPARING FOR U.S. POT LEGALIZATION
US: AMERICAS FIRST LEGAL RECREATIONAL CANNABIS CLUB OPENING TODAY 31 DECEMBER 2012
US: THE NEXT SEVEN STATES TO LEGALIZE POT, 18 DEC 2012
CROATIA DECRIMINALIZES DRUG USE, 14 DEC 2012
NEW ZEALAND: NZ CALLING FOR A NATIONAL CONVERSATION ABOUT CANNABIS, 14 NOV 2012
LATIN AMERICAN LEADERS CALL FOR DRUG POLICY REVIEW AFTER 2 US STATES VOTE TO LEGALISE CANNABIS, 12 NOV 2012
US: LEGALIZE IT! HISTORIC NIGHT FOR MARIJUANA REFORM AS COLORADO AND WASHINGTON TAKE THE BIG STEP, 6 NOV 2012
FRANCE’S MINISTER OF EDUCATION FAVOURS CANNABIS DECRIMINALISATION, 15 OCT 2012
CHILEAN SENATORS PROPOSE DECRIMINALISATION OF CANNABIS CULTIVATION, 8 AUG 2012
SWISS EXPERTS DEBATE WHAT TO DO ABOUT CANNABIS, 22 Jul 2012
BELIZE CONSIDERING DECRIMINALISATION OF MARIJUANA POSSESSION, 20 JUL 2012
PORTUGUESE POLITICIANS PROPOSE BILL TO LEGALISE AND REGULATE CANNABIS, 16 JUL 2012
IRELAND: OUR POLITICIANS NEED TO FRAME A DRUGS POLICY THAT ACTUALLY WORKS, 4 JUL 2012
FRENCH CANNABIS SOCIAL CLUBS START GROWING IN DEFIANCE OF POT LAWS, 28 JUN 2012
BASQUE GOVERNMENT REGULATES CANNABIS SALE AND USE, 30 DEC 2011
Thursday, 5 December 2013
We need to debate use of cannabis - Bristol Post - Comment
It's been debated long enough and it's the politicians that refuse
to seriously consider changing the law.
The law MUST be changed in the interests of public health, Justice, Human Rights and the environment.
The present law that punishes people that have done no harm and posed no threat, for the possession or cultivation of plants in their own homes for their own use - it is expensive, an utter failure at protecting people, and completely unworkable in a society where over 10% have admitted using cannabis.
These times of prohibition will be looked at in the future i the same way we now look a alcohol prohibition in the US.
In short, evil.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/need-debate-use-cannabis/story-20256098-detail/story.html
Bristol Post: Dec 4 2013:
Editor's comment: We need to debate use of cannabis
IT is no accident that the number of cannabis factories is on the increase. Whilst they may be illegal they are certainly lucrative. And without question they are meeting a demand.
It could be argued that the proliferation of these factories is evidence for saying the law needs to change to make the use of cannabis acceptable.
Then there is the use of cannabis to treat medical conditions.
Should we follow the United States where it is regularly prescribed?
And should we deny people with arthritis and other painful conditions the relief cannabis can deliver?
But equally we should not forget that these factories are part of a much bigger picture involving drug dealing and violent crime. It is surely no coincidence that knives were found at one of these farms.
And there is a further issue here. That is if we accept the common use of cannabis then we run the risk of more people moving on to harder drugs and everything that implies.
It is time again to have a serious debate about all these issues.
Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/need-debate-use-cannabis/story-20256098-detail/story.html#ixzz2mah556R3
The law MUST be changed in the interests of public health, Justice, Human Rights and the environment.
The present law that punishes people that have done no harm and posed no threat, for the possession or cultivation of plants in their own homes for their own use - it is expensive, an utter failure at protecting people, and completely unworkable in a society where over 10% have admitted using cannabis.
These times of prohibition will be looked at in the future i the same way we now look a alcohol prohibition in the US.
In short, evil.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/need-debate-use-cannabis/story-20256098-detail/story.html
Bristol Post: Dec 4 2013:
Editor's comment: We need to debate use of cannabis
IT is no accident that the number of cannabis factories is on the increase. Whilst they may be illegal they are certainly lucrative. And without question they are meeting a demand.
It could be argued that the proliferation of these factories is evidence for saying the law needs to change to make the use of cannabis acceptable.
Then there is the use of cannabis to treat medical conditions.
Should we follow the United States where it is regularly prescribed?
And should we deny people with arthritis and other painful conditions the relief cannabis can deliver?
But equally we should not forget that these factories are part of a much bigger picture involving drug dealing and violent crime. It is surely no coincidence that knives were found at one of these farms.
And there is a further issue here. That is if we accept the common use of cannabis then we run the risk of more people moving on to harder drugs and everything that implies.
It is time again to have a serious debate about all these issues.
Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/need-debate-use-cannabis/story-20256098-detail/story.html#ixzz2mah556R3
Monday, 18 November 2013
Cannabis Social Clubs - Healthy and Safe Alternative to Unjustifed Prohibition
Cannabis Social Clubs introduced and functioning in Spain, Belgium, Italy and France.How much better is that than in the UK where so many millions are resorting to illegally growing their own or running the risk of buying from dealers that cannot always assure (or do not care) about quality or contamination and often offer hard drugs - as well as making untaxable profits.
We - adults - are capable of making our own choices on what we do with our lives including what we put into our own bodies - even though many may make wrong choices. Guidance, advice, safety are essential - but none of that is offered by criminalised cannabis suppliers.
It ought to have nothing to do with Government what a citizen does in private - unless the person poses a risk to public health or order, national security or the Rights of others as demanded by Human Rights legislation.
A person should be free to grow and use (possess) cannabis for their own use and Government ought to be looking at how best to protect them, just as those that choose to consume alcohol and tobacco are protected (and the rest of us protected from them).
The same logic and care ought to be applied to victimless cannabis users.
The Cannabis Social Clubs model as promoted by ENCOD is a good way to go.
are non-profit groups of individuals collectively growing good quality cannabis for their own personal and beneficial use.
Cannabis clubs blossoming in the UK
The Guardian, Nov 17 2013
There
are 49 of them around the UK now, with members meeting to discuss the
drug's production, its medicinal use and legalisation – and to get high
"I guess it's like wine-tasting – but with cannabis," says Orson Boon (not his real name), head of the London Cannabis Club. "People come to exchange samples, try new strains and have a chat."
Sitting around a table in north-east London are several members of the LCC. One member is examining a sample of cannabis under the blue light of a small microscope to check for mite faeces. Another is comparing the smell of a lemon equinox strain and a Jack Herer, a medicinal sativa strain named after a famous cannabis decriminalisation activist. Different-sized lenses, vaporisers and an assortment of labelled pots containing buds and cuttings from cannabis plants cover the table. It's like a science laboratory crossed with the Chelsea flower show."This is the strain that won the Underground London Cannabis Cup," says Boon, holding a small tube labelled K3M under the nose of a recent recruit, who works in an investment company in the City. The newcomer takes a sniff: "I'm seriously considering growing one or two plants with friends. Homegrown stuff like this is so much smoother than the weed I buy off the streets and you know exactly what you're getting." The others begin speculating as to where would be the best place in their homes to set up a hydroponics tent.
Over the past few years, local cannabis clubs have blossomed over Britain. There are now 49 around the UK, which are united by the UK Cannabis Social Club, an organisation founded in 2011 to represent cannabis users. Operating primarily through Facebook, (the LCC's page has had 39,301 likes the clubs bring cannabis users together from all over Britain to discuss topics ranging from fertiliser to self-medication and campaigning for the decriminalisation of the drug. They also organise meetings, from a recent 10,000 person smoke-out in Hyde Park to more intimate evenings such as tonight's soiree, allowing pensioners, students, bricklayers and bankers to talk about one of their favourite hobbies.
Boon's day job – he holds a senior position in the medical field – compelled him to start the cannabis club in the first place. "A lot of my work has been out of the UK where I have seen how effective cannabis has been on patients suffering all kinds of illnesses. I understand cannabis can have bad effects and can be abused – like anything. But when used correctly it is a very different story. When I came to London I met so many people who were secretly medicating with cannabis, which just didn't seem right. So I set up a Facebook page with the intention to normalise cannabis use and bring users together"One of the mantras of the cannabis clubs is to encourage a more healthy use of cannabis. "I only ever vaporise now, it's so much better for you and the taste is much purer," says Orson, placing a tiny piece of cannabis inside the vaporiser and inhaling deeply. It's also more discreet: only weeks before, several members of the LCC had gathered in the Shard, London. While the surrounding guests tucked into their steak tartare, the unlikely club members proceeded to get high with cannabis vaporisers 31 floors up. "It just looks like you're sucking on the end of a posh pen," says Orson.
The fact that growing and possessing cannabis is illegal in Britain does not deter many cannabis clubs across the UK from using social media to publicise meetings – "It's not illegal to talk about cannabis," says Boon – and the openness is part of the campaign for normalisation. Members themselves usually keep their involvement private: "Many of the people I've met have families, high-profile jobs, mortgages and all sorts, and are terrified of losing everything," he adds.
Millie, 59, is a member of a club in Wales. "As an MS sufferer, I found cannabis to be the only thing that really works. Years ago I had been buying it from a lad down the road, but then I thought, screw it, I'm going to grow my own. I go to little meetings a few times a month and they give me tips on how to grow the best weed for my condition, which helps a lot. It also gets me out of the house."
"At present, our main priority is following America's footsteps and legalising cannabis for medical use," says Boon. "If at the very least that happens I will be a happy man."
Sitting around a table in north-east London are several members of the LCC. One member is examining a sample of cannabis under the blue light of a small microscope to check for mite faeces. Another is comparing the smell of a lemon equinox strain and a Jack Herer, a medicinal sativa strain named after a famous cannabis decriminalisation activist. Different-sized lenses, vaporisers and an assortment of labelled pots containing buds and cuttings from cannabis plants cover the table. It's like a science laboratory crossed with the Chelsea flower show."This is the strain that won the Underground London Cannabis Cup," says Boon, holding a small tube labelled K3M under the nose of a recent recruit, who works in an investment company in the City. The newcomer takes a sniff: "I'm seriously considering growing one or two plants with friends. Homegrown stuff like this is so much smoother than the weed I buy off the streets and you know exactly what you're getting." The others begin speculating as to where would be the best place in their homes to set up a hydroponics tent.
Over the past few years, local cannabis clubs have blossomed over Britain. There are now 49 around the UK, which are united by the UK Cannabis Social Club, an organisation founded in 2011 to represent cannabis users. Operating primarily through Facebook, (the LCC's page has had 39,301 likes the clubs bring cannabis users together from all over Britain to discuss topics ranging from fertiliser to self-medication and campaigning for the decriminalisation of the drug. They also organise meetings, from a recent 10,000 person smoke-out in Hyde Park to more intimate evenings such as tonight's soiree, allowing pensioners, students, bricklayers and bankers to talk about one of their favourite hobbies.
Boon's day job – he holds a senior position in the medical field – compelled him to start the cannabis club in the first place. "A lot of my work has been out of the UK where I have seen how effective cannabis has been on patients suffering all kinds of illnesses. I understand cannabis can have bad effects and can be abused – like anything. But when used correctly it is a very different story. When I came to London I met so many people who were secretly medicating with cannabis, which just didn't seem right. So I set up a Facebook page with the intention to normalise cannabis use and bring users together"One of the mantras of the cannabis clubs is to encourage a more healthy use of cannabis. "I only ever vaporise now, it's so much better for you and the taste is much purer," says Orson, placing a tiny piece of cannabis inside the vaporiser and inhaling deeply. It's also more discreet: only weeks before, several members of the LCC had gathered in the Shard, London. While the surrounding guests tucked into their steak tartare, the unlikely club members proceeded to get high with cannabis vaporisers 31 floors up. "It just looks like you're sucking on the end of a posh pen," says Orson.
The fact that growing and possessing cannabis is illegal in Britain does not deter many cannabis clubs across the UK from using social media to publicise meetings – "It's not illegal to talk about cannabis," says Boon – and the openness is part of the campaign for normalisation. Members themselves usually keep their involvement private: "Many of the people I've met have families, high-profile jobs, mortgages and all sorts, and are terrified of losing everything," he adds.
Millie, 59, is a member of a club in Wales. "As an MS sufferer, I found cannabis to be the only thing that really works. Years ago I had been buying it from a lad down the road, but then I thought, screw it, I'm going to grow my own. I go to little meetings a few times a month and they give me tips on how to grow the best weed for my condition, which helps a lot. It also gets me out of the house."
"At present, our main priority is following America's footsteps and legalising cannabis for medical use," says Boon. "If at the very least that happens I will be a happy man."
Friday, 1 November 2013
Groundless Fears over Cannabis meeting in Dorchester tomorrow
regarding the claim about the number of chemicals in
cannabis - all plants contain a large number of "chemicals" but that
does not make them bad or dangerous - and tap water contains many more
which have been added.
regarding the cannabis meet -p protest picnic - well of course many people don't want to be around cannabis smoke, so why not give users a place to go in safety, away from the public, free of fear of arrest, where they can socialise?
those that choose to drink alcohol have pubs, clubs and restaurants - and we all know just how dangerous that drug can be - fortunately people are not allowed to drink on the streets or in our parks.
and of course any crime committed against people or property should be prosecuted whether the person is sober, drunk or high
COMMUNITY leaders in Dorchester have expressed fears over a controversial ‘Cannabis Awareness Day’ that will take place in Maumbury Rings tomorrow.
This is to be the first ever event organised by the Dorset Cannabis Community - which is a branch of the UK Cannabis Social Clubs and campaign to de-stigmatise, decriminalise and regulate cannabis consumption.
Event organiser Dave Smith states the event is planned to 'educate the general public on the many positive uses of cannabis such as medicinal, spiritual and industrial use.'
It was originally called a 'smokeup' but Mr Smith changed it to reflect the meeting's intentions.
The event comes after months of work by Dorset Police in Dorchester to curb the spread of class B drug cannabis use among teenagers in the county town.
The fact that the event is near the skate park, used by local teenagers, has councillors and police worried that the over 18's only event may draw attention from a younger crowd.
Inspector Steve Marsh said that people need to keep in mind that cannabis is still a Class B drug and is illegal to possess.
He said: "I respect the right for anyone to discuss the current law and peacefully explain an opposing point of view.
"That is a fundamental right in this country.
"However organisers of the event in question should understand that if any offences are suspected under the misuse of drugs act, my officers will take positive action. "
He added: "I am concerned that the area chosen is used regularly by young people and families and ask that any meeting takes this into account and thinks very carefully about the messages they communicate to those that attend."
Organiser Dave Smith, of Gillingham said: “We chose Dorchester because it was central in the county for our first ever awareness day.
“We have a few members in Dorset now so we wanted to organise this regional meet up to spread the message and therefore we will have several key speakers.
"The Dorset Cannabis Community is working to raise awareness of the many uses of cannabis and the dangers of prohibiting this plant.
“We want to remove the black market trade of cannabis in the UK that is currently controlled by organised criminals who are making huge amounts of money from producing and selling cannabis.
“Organised criminals don't pay tax, they use money raised from cannabis sales to fund other forms of crime such as human trafficking, they are happy to sell to young people in the name of profit and they are not put off by the legality, in fact many are aware that if cannabis was legalised and regulated they would be out of a job.
He added: “You do not have to be a cannabis consumer to get involved and we welcome all peaceful members of society to come and check out what we are doing.
“People can come and smoke at their own risk but anyone aged under the age of 18 will be asked to leave.”
Around the country cannabis social clubs are holding their inaugural public protests or awareness days.
Four weeks ago a similar 'smokeup' event was organised called the Berkshire Cannabis Protest Picnic and police officers from Thames Valley Police turned up to confiscate cannabis from those attending the protest.
Dorchester councillor David Taylor, who sits on the Dorchester Crime Prevention Panel, said he has concerns about the event.
He said: “In Dorchester the police and council have worked very hard to stop the encouragement of using drugs such as cannabis and my concern is that this event will make it look 'cool' to the young people and that it is okay to be part of this set.”
The meeting starts at 2pm but talks will take place from 3pm onwards.
Cannabis and the law
Many influential politicians and celebrities have called for the legalisation of cannabis.
Last month Durham Chief Constable Mike Barton claimed the war on drugs had failed and said decriminalisation was the best way to wrestle power away from criminal gangs.
The UK Cannabis Social Club believe that consumers should not be criminalised or treated differently than any other member of society or culture or those that use another social or medical drug. The group aims to remove the criminal black market and divert funds away from organized crime by replacing it with a community based and or regulated outlets.
UKCSC support the right to domestic cultivation for personal and medicinal use without fear or having their peace breached by the force of the law.
The group say that users should not be forced to buy their cannabis from sources where proceeds go towards real crime or funding gangs that create real victims. This is a completely artificial chain that has been created entirely by the continued enforcement of prohibition.
The United Kingdom Cannabis Social Clubs say they are here to help bring an end to this by replacing the criminal supply chain with a community based system similar to that which is working in other parts of Europe.
AGAINST
The NHS has issued several warnings about health risks linked to cannabis use.
These include dependency problems, mental health problems and lung damage, further cautions are.
* Even hardcore smokers can become anxious, panicky, suspicious or paranoid.
* It affects co-ordination. Drug-driving is illegal.
* The drug has lots of chemicals, which can cause lung disease and possibly cancer with long term or heavy use.
* Cannabis increases the heart rate and can affect blood pressure.
* It can cause paranoia in the short term, and in those with a pre-existing psychotic illness, such as schizophrenia, it can contribute to relapse.
* Strong herbal cannabis (also known as skunk) can cause more powerful dangerous affects.
Panel Cannabis and the law • Cannabis is a Class B drug - it's illegal to have for yourself, give away or sell.
• Possession is illegal whatever you're using it for, including pain relief. The penalty is up to five years in jail.
• Supplying someone else can get you fourteen years and an unlimited fine.
• Supplying friends, even if you give it away, is also considered 'supplying' under the law.
Opinion by Inspector Steve Marsh
I am aware that some members of the community want to see certain drugs decriminalised, in particular Cannabis.
One of the arguments used is the medical benefit cannabis can give to those suffering from certain illnesses.
I see this as being an entirely separate argument from the general legalisation of what is currently a Class B drug.
This means it is illegal to possess and supply etc.
My teams have recently carried out several drugs warrants at premises within the town as a result of increased community concern, in particular in connection to the supply of Cannabis to young people.
We continue to work closely with local schools to ensure that all parents and pupils are well informed regarding the risks associated with cannabis.
I am keen to ensure that those most vulnerable are fully aware of the potential risks associated with smoking cannabis not only from a criminal justice point of view but as importantly their own personal health and well being.
I respect the right for anyone to discuss the current law and peacefully explain an opposing point of view.
That is a fundamental right in this country. However organisers of the event in question should understand that if any offences are suspected under the misuse of drugs act, my officers will take positive action.
I am concerned that the area chosen is used regularly by young people and families and ask that any meeting takes this into account and thinks very carefully about the messages they communicate to those that attend.
regarding the cannabis meet -p protest picnic - well of course many people don't want to be around cannabis smoke, so why not give users a place to go in safety, away from the public, free of fear of arrest, where they can socialise?
those that choose to drink alcohol have pubs, clubs and restaurants - and we all know just how dangerous that drug can be - fortunately people are not allowed to drink on the streets or in our parks.
and of course any crime committed against people or property should be prosecuted whether the person is sober, drunk or high
Fears over Cannabis meeting in Dorchester tomorrow
http://www.dorsetecho.co.uk/news/10777796.Fears_over_Cannabis_Awareness_meeting_in_Dorchester_tomorrow/?ref=ntCOMMUNITY leaders in Dorchester have expressed fears over a controversial ‘Cannabis Awareness Day’ that will take place in Maumbury Rings tomorrow.
This is to be the first ever event organised by the Dorset Cannabis Community - which is a branch of the UK Cannabis Social Clubs and campaign to de-stigmatise, decriminalise and regulate cannabis consumption.
Event organiser Dave Smith states the event is planned to 'educate the general public on the many positive uses of cannabis such as medicinal, spiritual and industrial use.'
It was originally called a 'smokeup' but Mr Smith changed it to reflect the meeting's intentions.
The event comes after months of work by Dorset Police in Dorchester to curb the spread of class B drug cannabis use among teenagers in the county town.
The fact that the event is near the skate park, used by local teenagers, has councillors and police worried that the over 18's only event may draw attention from a younger crowd.
Inspector Steve Marsh said that people need to keep in mind that cannabis is still a Class B drug and is illegal to possess.
He said: "I respect the right for anyone to discuss the current law and peacefully explain an opposing point of view.
"However organisers of the event in question should understand that if any offences are suspected under the misuse of drugs act, my officers will take positive action. "
He added: "I am concerned that the area chosen is used regularly by young people and families and ask that any meeting takes this into account and thinks very carefully about the messages they communicate to those that attend."
Organiser Dave Smith, of Gillingham said: “We chose Dorchester because it was central in the county for our first ever awareness day.
“We have a few members in Dorset now so we wanted to organise this regional meet up to spread the message and therefore we will have several key speakers.
"The Dorset Cannabis Community is working to raise awareness of the many uses of cannabis and the dangers of prohibiting this plant.
“We want to remove the black market trade of cannabis in the UK that is currently controlled by organised criminals who are making huge amounts of money from producing and selling cannabis.
“Organised criminals don't pay tax, they use money raised from cannabis sales to fund other forms of crime such as human trafficking, they are happy to sell to young people in the name of profit and they are not put off by the legality, in fact many are aware that if cannabis was legalised and regulated they would be out of a job.
He added: “You do not have to be a cannabis consumer to get involved and we welcome all peaceful members of society to come and check out what we are doing.
“People can come and smoke at their own risk but anyone aged under the age of 18 will be asked to leave.”
Around the country cannabis social clubs are holding their inaugural public protests or awareness days.
Four weeks ago a similar 'smokeup' event was organised called the Berkshire Cannabis Protest Picnic and police officers from Thames Valley Police turned up to confiscate cannabis from those attending the protest.
Dorchester councillor David Taylor, who sits on the Dorchester Crime Prevention Panel, said he has concerns about the event.
He said: “In Dorchester the police and council have worked very hard to stop the encouragement of using drugs such as cannabis and my concern is that this event will make it look 'cool' to the young people and that it is okay to be part of this set.”
The meeting starts at 2pm but talks will take place from 3pm onwards.
Cannabis and the law
- · Cannabis is a Class B drug - it's illegal to have for yourself, give away or sell.
- · Possession is illegal whatever you're using it for, including pain relief. The penalty is up to five years in jail.
- · Supplying someone else can get you fourteen years and an unlimited fine.
- · Supplying friends, even if you give it away, is also considered 'supplying' under the law.
Many influential politicians and celebrities have called for the legalisation of cannabis.
Last month Durham Chief Constable Mike Barton claimed the war on drugs had failed and said decriminalisation was the best way to wrestle power away from criminal gangs.
The UK Cannabis Social Club believe that consumers should not be criminalised or treated differently than any other member of society or culture or those that use another social or medical drug. The group aims to remove the criminal black market and divert funds away from organized crime by replacing it with a community based and or regulated outlets.
UKCSC support the right to domestic cultivation for personal and medicinal use without fear or having their peace breached by the force of the law.
The group say that users should not be forced to buy their cannabis from sources where proceeds go towards real crime or funding gangs that create real victims. This is a completely artificial chain that has been created entirely by the continued enforcement of prohibition.
The United Kingdom Cannabis Social Clubs say they are here to help bring an end to this by replacing the criminal supply chain with a community based system similar to that which is working in other parts of Europe.
AGAINST
The NHS has issued several warnings about health risks linked to cannabis use.
These include dependency problems, mental health problems and lung damage, further cautions are.
* Even hardcore smokers can become anxious, panicky, suspicious or paranoid.
* It affects co-ordination. Drug-driving is illegal.
* The drug has lots of chemicals, which can cause lung disease and possibly cancer with long term or heavy use.
* Cannabis increases the heart rate and can affect blood pressure.
* It can cause paranoia in the short term, and in those with a pre-existing psychotic illness, such as schizophrenia, it can contribute to relapse.
* Strong herbal cannabis (also known as skunk) can cause more powerful dangerous affects.
Panel Cannabis and the law • Cannabis is a Class B drug - it's illegal to have for yourself, give away or sell.
• Possession is illegal whatever you're using it for, including pain relief. The penalty is up to five years in jail.
• Supplying someone else can get you fourteen years and an unlimited fine.
• Supplying friends, even if you give it away, is also considered 'supplying' under the law.
Opinion by Inspector Steve Marsh
I am aware that some members of the community want to see certain drugs decriminalised, in particular Cannabis.
One of the arguments used is the medical benefit cannabis can give to those suffering from certain illnesses.
I see this as being an entirely separate argument from the general legalisation of what is currently a Class B drug.
This means it is illegal to possess and supply etc.
My teams have recently carried out several drugs warrants at premises within the town as a result of increased community concern, in particular in connection to the supply of Cannabis to young people.
We continue to work closely with local schools to ensure that all parents and pupils are well informed regarding the risks associated with cannabis.
I am keen to ensure that those most vulnerable are fully aware of the potential risks associated with smoking cannabis not only from a criminal justice point of view but as importantly their own personal health and well being.
I respect the right for anyone to discuss the current law and peacefully explain an opposing point of view.
That is a fundamental right in this country. However organisers of the event in question should understand that if any offences are suspected under the misuse of drugs act, my officers will take positive action.
I am concerned that the area chosen is used regularly by young people and families and ask that any meeting takes this into account and thinks very carefully about the messages they communicate to those that attend.
Wednesday, 30 October 2013
Peter Reynolds v Alun Buffry Court Case Settled
Peter
Reynolds v Alun Buffry Court Case Settled
SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT
Between
Peter
John Reynolds of
...................................................................
and
Alun
Buffry of
…..............................................................................
1.
Peter Reynolds is pursuing a claim for defamation against Alun Buffry
in the High Court, claim no. HQ13D01104 against which Alun Buffry has
submitted a Defence.
2.
The parties agree jointly to discontinue this action and to bear
their own costs subject to the terms set out below.
3.
Each party agrees that they shall not by themselves, their servants,
agents or otherwise, abuse, harass, criticise or otherwise comment on
the other with regard to their respective private lives. Neither
party shall be restricted in any way from commenting on the political
and campaigning activities of the other.
4.
Each party agrees that they will not instigate fresh legal
proceedings against the other over any words published prior to this
Agreement
5.
The parties agree that this settlement agreement may be published
within seven days of its completion and publication shall consist
only of the words of the agreement with private addresses excluded
under the heading “Peter Reynolds v Alun Buffry Court Case Settled”
. Thereafter the matter is at an end and each party agrees neither by
themselves, their servants, agents or otherwise to make any public
statement about this agreement or the proceedings to which it
relates.
Agreed
and signed by the parties:
Peter
John Reynolds Date:
25th October 2013
Alun Buffry Date: 26th October 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)