Harm from Cannabis v Harm from Bad Laws

For every person that even claims to have been harmed by cannabis substances, there are thousands that have been harmed by a bad law that punishes people for possession or cultivation of a plant without license despite them having done no harm to others - they have been given criminal records and limits on employment, travel and even insurance.

Furthermore, the law has not prevented that harm that people say cannabis caused them through their own choice to use it; the law did not prevent access; rather it opens the door to illegal profiteers who often care little about anything but profit often selling contaminated products or offering to sell other illegal substances. The law exposes people that have chosen cannabis to the world of crime where profits are not taxed, devoid of consumer protection.

The fear of repercussions may well delay people from seeking medical help when they need it.

What sense is there in punishing those that claim to have suffered through their use of cannabis and what sense in punishing those that testify that cannabis has benefited their health?

Blood on the Streets, blood on her hands

I was thinking of getting some red paint and just throw it all over the streets to remind people of the blood that our government is spilling in Syria

The Need for a Cannabis-Focussed Political Party

The need for a cannabis-focussed political party.

I sincerely believe in our need for a political party that puts cannabis policy at its forefront to enable cannabis activists to enter the political arena.

I say this in the knowledge of opposition within the cannabis campaigning communities! I know full well that people will say that we should instead support the Green Party, the Liberal Democrats or other political parties that have a positive policy on cannabis. They have been saying that for decades but although those parties do create waves, they do not exactly represent the freedom and recognition of Rights that we want. They do not give us a chance to represent ourselves at election times. Instead they seldom mention and do not prioritise their cannabis policies enough: they do not recognise the any benefits of the plant and potential benefits to individuals, the Nation and the world.

I know that people will also say that a single-issue party will fail to gather man votes or that those votes will make no difference. Yet the type of party that I propose, although prioritising cannabis issues and uniting people under a single banner (legalisation of possession, cultivation and supply), allows candidates to hold and express their own opinions and policies on other issues: a single-issue party with multi-issue candidates. Their policies on other those other issues will attract or lose votes too. The chances to be heard will certainly make a difference.

Cannabis has an extremely wide range of associated issues: the utilisation of the plant has direct relevance to Human Rights, health and medicine, pollution and the environmental, farming, industry and employment, taxation and revenue, culture and religion.

Such a party did exist in the not-so-distant past: that was the Legalise Cannabis Alliance Party (LCA), 1999 to 2006. During that time, candidates fought in over 80 elections and although seldom gaining more than 3% of the vote in Parliamentary elections, doing better in local elections, in an all-up council election in Great Yarmouth in 2004 Michael Skipper received a vote from over 16% of the voters. http://www.ccguide.org/lca/lca.php

As well as enabling all those candidates to have their say, the LCA also distributed about one million fliers and had a presence on many news and other programs on radio and TV (including the Fastest Political Party race on Top Gear in which Mark Gibson for the LCA came second), spoke at universities and schools attended rallies and protests, produced a series of informational pamphlets and publications including “Cannabis: Challenging the Criminal Justice System) that gained thousands of signatures in support and a copy was sent to every MP including a copy in Braille to then Home Secretary David Blunkett. LCA also spoke at the Oxford Union and testified before a government panel set up to look at drugs law.

The aim of the LCA was primarily to give people a platform in the political arena and the support of a party focussed on cannabis.

Also its aims were to stimulate debate and to remove cannabis from the Misuse of Drugs Act.

LCA certainly provided the platform and certainly stimulated debate, yet of course the law on cannabis has not changed. Yet I consider it relevant that under David Blunkett cannabis was downgraded to class C and after LCA deregistered as apolitical party in 2006, cannabis was soon upgraded again: both changes were under a Labour Government.

Why did LCA deregister? Mainly because, after the invasion of Iraq and bombing of Afghanistan, with debates on such as ID issues, many members felt that other issues were immediately of greater importance. With de-registration though, came a loss of direction and unity and although LCA continued to exist as a campaigning group it became less active.

In 2011 Peter Reynolds was voted as leader (previously their was no single leader and candidates became leaders in their own community). Reynolds changes the name and policy, got rid or alienated many of the previous members, and formed his own party, the Cannabis Law Reform Party, badly-led dismal failure.

Then came CISTA: Cannabis is Safer Than Alcohol party, founded by Paul Birch who funded just over 30 candidates. CISTA and Birch found a great deal of opposition and not everyone agreed with their main policy of calling for a Royal Commission. As I have said, I believe in the need for a political platform.

I also acknowledge that when it comes to voting, many people may decide that by voting for one prohibitionist party, Labour, they may help oust a worse prohibitionist part, the Conservatives. BUT forming and running a party focussed on cannabis, which none of the others do, is not about getting elected or winning votes, it’s about raising the issues at election times, being heard, representing ourselves. I was one of the two founders of the LCA, Jack Girling being the other, in 1999, and active in both its administration and campaigning. 

Now at over 68 years-of-age, I am not enthusiastic on doing it again. All it takes though, is a team of half a dozen people, including one to name as leader and one as treasurer, a short constitution and all else will follow.

YOUR Right to choose and practice your religion or beliefs. Your Right to a Private Life.

UK law and International Treaty protect the Right of every person to choose and to practice his own belief. There is no stipulation on what that belief should be; there is no list of acceptable religions. Each to his or her own. The practice of that belief, alone or with others, is also part of that Right. In addition, we have the Right to a Private Life.  

 

These Rights are being abused by the way in which The Misuse of Drugs Act is applied, by invading the Private Lives of people who pose no risk or do no harm due to their possession or cultivation or non-commercial sharing of cannabis alone or with consenting adults in their private, in belief that such activites improve the quality of their lives.

 

The Law and the Articles in the Treaties quite specifically limit and set criteria for when authorties are allowed to interfere with those Rights. Unless they can show that the criteria demanded is satisfied, then those authorities are themselves accussed of breaking the law.

 

There is no evidence to suggest that the possession or cultivation of cannabis for own use or sharing in private poses a risk to public health or the Rights as others. 

 

The UK Human Rights Act 1998 states: 

 

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. 

 

Right to respect for private and family life

 

1 Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2 There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. 

 

Prohibition of abuse of rights

Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention. 

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1

 

https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf  

 

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

 

image thanks to Karl Turner

 

SHAME on MP's that voted against free school meals for the poorest families in the UK

SENT to my MP Chloe Smith, Norwich North

School meals

According to the press, you voted out free school meals for even the poorest of children.  Blindly following party whips and instructions AGAIN! 

YOU do not represent me or anyone else I know.

You ought to be full of shame.

You need to be ousted and rest assured, many people are working on that - the next election is not far away now, that is if the tyranats allow it.

SHAME ON YOU ALL

These are all the MP's who voted for a cruel cap on free school meals for low income families

Phone call: I want to help you with your computer"

J: "Good morning, my name is Jack and I want to speak to the owner of your computer."

Me: "I am the owner of my computer"

J: "Can I speak to you?"

Me: "You already are"

J: : "Yes but I want to speak about your computer."

Me: "Which computer?"

J: "Your main one."

Me: "Who did you say you are?"

J: "Jack"

Me "Jack?"

J: "Yes Jack"

Me: "And what do you want?"

J: "I want to help you with your computer."

Me: "Which computer?"

J: "The one you are using at the moment."

Me: "I'm not using a computer, I am on the phone with you."

J: "Yes but there is a problem and I want to help."

Me: "What sort of problem, I feel fine."

J: "The problem is with your computer."

Me: "Who did you say you are?"

J: "Jack"

Me: "Jack who?"

J: "Jack Williams"

Me: "Jack Williams?"

J: "Yes"

Me: "I don't know you"

J: "Yes but I am trying to help you"

Me: "What with?"

J: "With your computer"

Me: "I don't have a computer"

J: Hangs up.

BEWARE OF THESE SCAMMERS, THEY WILL ASK YOU TO GIVE THEM ACCESS TO YOUR COMPUTER AND THEN RIP YOU OFF."

One way or the other, the UK Government is teling lies about cannabis

IF the UK Gov are to be believed when they say cannabis is a plant with no meedicinal value, and yet grow and produce and export so much "medcine" from it, one way or the other it must go down on one of the biggest cons in history

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-is-worlds-largest-producer-of-legal-cannabis-11278131

UK is world's largest producer of legal cannabis

A drug reform group slams the Government for "maintaining cannabis has no medical uses" while allowing its export abroad.

The UK is the world's largest producer and exporter of legal cannabis for medical and scientific use, according to a new report from a UN body.

The UK produced 95 tonnes of legal cannabis in 2016, more than double the total of the previous year, reveals the UN's International Narcotics Control Board. This accounted for 44.9% of the world total.
The nearest competitor is Canada, with 80.7 tonnes.
Some 2.1 tonnes was exported from the UK, making it responsible for 67.7% of the world total, followed by the Netherlands (16.4%).
A drug policy reform lobby group has criticised the UK government, saying they have "consistently refused to allow medical cannabis in the UK on the basis that it has 'no therapeutic value'".

Steve Rolles, Transform's senior policy analyst said: "It is scandalous and untenable for the UK government to maintain that cannabis has no medical uses, at the same time as licensing the world's biggest government-approved medical cannabis production and export market.
"UK patients are either denied access and suffering unnecessarily, or are forced to buy cannabis from the criminal market.
"Countries with proper access to medical cannabis do not have this problem, as standardised cannabis products are in the hands of doctors and pharmacists."
A significant part of the UK's legal cannabis production goes towards a cannabis-based medicine called Sativex, produced by GW Pharmaceuticals.
It is available on prescription for patients such as those suffering the effects of multiple sclerosis, but it is only on the NHS in Wales.
 Alfie Dingley, aged six, is a British boy who suffers from a rare form of epilepsy, something his parents say can be treated with cannabis oil.
Alfie, from Kenilworth, returned from the Netherlands last month, where he had been receiving this treatment.
His parents want the Government to let him use the medication in the UK but it is banned.

My books

 ABEFREE Publishing site

The Government has responded to the petition – “Legalise cannabis for medical and recreational use.”

So the government still stubbornly insists that the cannabis plant itself has no medicinal value, hence classifying those kind souls and profiteers alike that manage to extract edicinal compounds from a plant with no mdeicinal value as MIRACLE WORKERS. 

The only way to get a government to legalise is to persuade Labour to adopt the policy NOW so that when elected, they may make a move - and THAT IS UP TO YOU - write now to Jeremy Corbyn 

Dear alun buffry, The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Legalise cannabis for medical and recreational use.”.

Government responded:
This Government has no plans to legalise cannabis. Raw cannabis is not recognised in the UK as having any medicinal benefit.
There is clear scientific and medical evidence that cannabis is a harmful drug which can damage people’s mental and physical health, and harms individuals and communities. The evidence from the Government’s independent experts, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), is that the use of cannabis is a ‘significant public health issue and can unquestionably cause harm to individuals and society’.
The decriminalisation of drugs in the UK would not eliminate the crime committed by the illicit trade nor would it address the harms associated with drug dependence and the misery this can cause to families and society. Decriminalisation or legalisation of cannabis would send the wrong message to the vast majority of people who do not take drugs, especially young and vulnerable people, with the potential grave risk of increased misuse of drugs.
When a police officer finds someone in possession of drugs, it is an operational matter as to the appropriate response. We have confidence in our police officers to assess as appropriate any enforcement action, where there is a public order or protection or local drug issue that needs addressing, rather than seek them out for drug possession offences. It is not always appropriate or conducive to the public good to arrest every person they find with a small amount of cannabis and although the police can charge individuals with a criminal offence, they can also issue a warning or an on-the-spot fine of £90 if an individual is found with cannabis.
It is important that medicines are thoroughly tested to ensure they meet rigorous standards before being placed on the market, so that doctors and patients are sure of their efficacy, quality and safety. There is a clear regime in place administered by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (‘MHRA’) to enable medicines (including controlled drugs such as cannabis) to be developed, licensed and made available for medicinal use to patients in the UK. For example, the cannabis-based medicine ‘Sativex’ has been granted Marketing Authorisation in the UK by the MHRA for the treatment of spasticity due to multiple sclerosis. Sativex was tested for its safety, efficacy and quality before receiving Marketing Authorisation approval for this application.
The MHRA is open to considering marketing authorisation approval applications for other medicinal cannabis products should a product be developed by a manufacturer. As happened in the case of Sativex, the Home Office will consider issuing a licence to enable trials of any new medicine, providing it complies with the appropriate ethical approvals.
We continue to monitor international developments on the evidence base around cannabis. The World Health Organisation’s Expert Committee on Drug Dependence has committed to reviewing the scheduling of cannabis under the UN’s 1961 Convention. This is due to consider the therapeutic use as well as dependence and the potential to abuse constituent parts of cannabis.
Home Office
Click this link to view the response online:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/200021…
The Petitions Committee will take a look at this petition and its response. They can press the government for action and gather evidence. If this petition reaches 100,000 signatures, the Committee will consider it for a debate.
The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee
Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

Letter to Jeremy Corbyn and Labour: How to Win the next general election

Dear Mr Corbyn,

I would very much appreciate if you could read this brief document that was written over a decade ago but still applies today.  The response we received from Carolyne Flynn at the time acknowledged our arguments but said that Labour would not change the law on cannabis because they thought it would lead to increased use and harm, despite the evidence, even then, that it is only a small percentage and number of consumers that experience harm and the vast majority that experience benefits (thus concluding that the vast majority of users would also benefit).

In addition to the points made in "The Challenge", there would be a huge saving in policing costs, a  saving on NHS costs as so many people claim that cannabis enables them to stop using many expensive prescription medicines, an increase in general revenue through taxation on profits, consumer protection and removing control of supply away from criminal gangs and multi-drug dealers.

I sincerely believe that IF the Labour Party were to discuss the legalisation of cannabis at the next conference and include it in the next election manifesto, Labour would win that election - you would certainly gain my vote and those of many people that I know- we find it difficult or impossible tovote for Labour as a party that supports the prohibition of cannabis.

LINKED from this page is "The Challenge" document along with pages of letters to and from the Home Office.

I do hope that you can find the time to read it and reply.

http://www.ccguide.org/challenge/web/index.php?r=petition

Alun Buffry, Norwich North
======

Reply received - do you think they read beyond the first mention of cannabis?

Dear Alun,

Thank you for your email. I appreciate you took the time to get in touch with us regarding the medical use of marijuana.

Please be assured that your comments have been passed on.

The Labour Party will ensure that all NHS patients get fast access to the most effective new drugs and treatments.

We will also insist on value-for-money agreements with pharmaceutical companies.

Thank you for getting in touch

Best wishes,

Jake

Membership Services and Correspondence

The Labour Party