UK election 2010, Green party will legalise!!!!
- Thread starter Mr.Bigbud
- Start date
El Toker
Member
I understand the point you are making and to a certain extent agree. I've only been in a prison once, as a visitor to Strangeways. From what I saw it looks like a vile place to be forced to live.
As it is none of the main parties plans to do very much to change prison life.
I don't think the government should have right to limit the number of children that people have, even if they are on benefits. What is the maximum number of children that you think a family on benefits should be allowed? Would you let people have more kids if they were working? Even if there was a risk that they might end up on benefits in the future?
The police aren't asking for more power. As for PCSOs, they're a lot cheaper than police and they are able to attend to the minor stuff freeing up police officers for the more important stuff like kicking our doors in for cultivation.
The police spend a lot of time training, including two years of probation when they first start the job. I'm not aware of any issues with the police that have come about from a lack of training. If they have much more training they'll never get onto the streets. I think that the introduction of helmet cams will probably have a much more positive effect on policing, as it would make them accountable for everything that they do.
We are much safer in the UK than the people are in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
The reality is that if the tories get in there probably won't be much difference. Real labour hasn't existed for a long time, they adopted the look and policies of the conservative party a long time ago and called it "New Labour" which is really just old tory.
Again, there's nothing to indicate that the tories are any closer to your views than labour. Have you actually looked at the policies the tories are putting forward? The current manifesto fails to address any of your concerns.
Leo's do not need any more powers in this country as i think they have far too much power already. Do you hear of them complaining....too much?
The use of section 44 on the "entertaining" cop shows to detain and arrest drunk people on a Friday night is a BLATANT abuse of the system. Give them more power and they will find a way to abuse it.
House of Lords needs reform and i mean from top to bottom. Get rid of these lifers. Elect them and impose term limits to stop these lifers.
The use of section 44 on the "entertaining" cop shows to detain and arrest drunk people on a Friday night is a BLATANT abuse of the system. Give them more power and they will find a way to abuse it.
House of Lords needs reform and i mean from top to bottom. Get rid of these lifers. Elect them and impose term limits to stop these lifers.
daddy fingaz
Active member
Personally i vote for a complete political overhaul !!
...But as thats not Likely i think i will most probably vote lib dem, my only concern is that they have sold themselves out to Labour in the event of a hung parliament!
But then i also think it doesnt matter who gets in cos they're all puppets anyway!!
...But as thats not Likely i think i will most probably vote lib dem, my only concern is that they have sold themselves out to Labour in the event of a hung parliament!
But then i also think it doesnt matter who gets in cos they're all puppets anyway!!
Remember that if there's a hung parliament, all normal political systems will stop. Depending on the balances of seats, many different outcomes are possible, but if the LibDems are in a stronger position, that will put a stranglehold on the other two parties, and make them remove some of their more objectionable policies. Drugs classification, the use of the ACMD, and other controversial issues could be included in that group.
The latest polls show not only an undecided public, but a deeply suspicious and disinterested one too - at least in the political parties themselves. There's clearly an interest in politics though, but it will mean people getting involved more on a non-party level, and effectively beginning to wrestle control from parliament, and setting up other organisations that are more democratic, and not controlled by a central body. If we want that, of course.
BTW, I'm baffled by Cameron's version of that idea touted yesterday, as he seems to be advocating his own future redundancy...
The latest polls show not only an undecided public, but a deeply suspicious and disinterested one too - at least in the political parties themselves. There's clearly an interest in politics though, but it will mean people getting involved more on a non-party level, and effectively beginning to wrestle control from parliament, and setting up other organisations that are more democratic, and not controlled by a central body. If we want that, of course.
BTW, I'm baffled by Cameron's version of that idea touted yesterday, as he seems to be advocating his own future redundancy...
B
Blue
Correct me if I'm wrong but the Lib Dems were in the news last year I think as they were trying to make owning seeds illegal in the UK this is not a party I would vote for, As for the Greens they have the right idea on Mj but the rest of thier ideas are flawed.
I think someone needs to email them and to ask them what is the situation concerning this now?
This looks very much like a local campaign with no legs nationally - this is the last update from October 2008, so it sounds very much like it died:
http://www.tombrake.co.uk/news/000594/brake_takes_your_high_to_westminster.html
The shop in question clearly raised hackles, and I can see why, but it doesn't suggest for one minute there's a national clamour for seeds to be made illegal. The Tories could have picked it up, but they didn't seem to care. Most old-school Tories couldn't give a shit about drugs, and it's rarely an issue. Also Paul Flynn's response to the proposal (quoted on the Facebook page) was pretty devastating, and the government are sensible enough to know that this is one loophole probably best left open:
http://www.tombrake.co.uk/news/000594/brake_takes_your_high_to_westminster.html
The shop in question clearly raised hackles, and I can see why, but it doesn't suggest for one minute there's a national clamour for seeds to be made illegal. The Tories could have picked it up, but they didn't seem to care. Most old-school Tories couldn't give a shit about drugs, and it's rarely an issue. Also Paul Flynn's response to the proposal (quoted on the Facebook page) was pretty devastating, and the government are sensible enough to know that this is one loophole probably best left open:
daddy fingaz
Active member
grimweeder
Member
lib dems policy on cannabis is to decriminalise it and keep it at grade C they will also allow social supply(small time) and in the future seek full legalization from the UN to employ a tax based system of controlled supply etc.
the whole banning seeds bussiness are the personal endeavours of one Tom brake and are not the actual parties views, tom has since been pretty much cast out of the lib dems as they dont really agree with wot hes doing, it was just some head shop in his town selling shit near a school so he wanted to get it closed down etc. nothing wot so ever to do with the lib dems policies.
the canna policy is on their website somewhere and used to be easy to find but since then theyve made it a bit harder probably cos the canna/drugs issue is a bit of a taboo so it wont exactly win them votes in the long run.
if you really want change then you need to vote lib dems they are the only party with any chance(however small)of winning that have a fair policy for us growers/tokers. and med users especially.
dont let one man an his big ego trip make u think lib dems are against canna cos they arnt but they are entitled to their own views and opinions within the part they support and dont always agree with every policy they have.
if i was going to vote it would be lib dems, its a simple choice really jus from their canna policy. if i can find a link i will put it up as im sure il get a load of people asking for a source of my claims. it is true though.
the whole banning seeds bussiness are the personal endeavours of one Tom brake and are not the actual parties views, tom has since been pretty much cast out of the lib dems as they dont really agree with wot hes doing, it was just some head shop in his town selling shit near a school so he wanted to get it closed down etc. nothing wot so ever to do with the lib dems policies.
the canna policy is on their website somewhere and used to be easy to find but since then theyve made it a bit harder probably cos the canna/drugs issue is a bit of a taboo so it wont exactly win them votes in the long run.
if you really want change then you need to vote lib dems they are the only party with any chance(however small)of winning that have a fair policy for us growers/tokers. and med users especially.
dont let one man an his big ego trip make u think lib dems are against canna cos they arnt but they are entitled to their own views and opinions within the part they support and dont always agree with every policy they have.
if i was going to vote it would be lib dems, its a simple choice really jus from their canna policy. if i can find a link i will put it up as im sure il get a load of people asking for a source of my claims. it is true though.
grimweeder
Member
here you go heres full report from the lib dems network site of their views on drugs policies, you see half weay down the talk clearly about canna and not prosecuting us and breaking the link between organised crime and cannabis etc.
heres the full article copied and pasted and the link at the bottom.
There has been some confusion among some people as to where the Liberal Democrats currently stand on drugs. The below is a reply that a user received to an email querying this very topic. I have highlighted what I feel are some of the most important parts, although everything is important to a certain degree.
There is definite room for improvement in many of these policies, as several things have changed since this was written and several important documents have been published from various organisations (eg. Transform - Blueprint for Reform) that have the potential to inform this policy.
"Drugs
The Policy in Brief
The punitive approach to drug users that we have followed for decades has not been
successful. Drug use is higher than ever and our prisons are full to bursting with drug
addicts. It is time to stop criminalising drug users and start focusing on ending their
addiction through medical treatment. The Liberal Democrats will place policy making in
the drugs field on a much firmer evidence-based footing. This will involve the reform of
excessive and counterproductive criminal penalties and the promotion of a more
effective policy to reduce drug dependency and its adverse consequences. We will also
break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police resources
for higher priority tasks.
Why is it Necessary
The current law is not working. It neither effectively deters people from drug use nor
ensures effective education and treatment. The UK has one of the most punitive
approaches in Europe, yet according to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and
Drug Abuse the UK has one of the highest levels of drug use in Europe.
1 In 2006/07, 10% of adults (age 16-59) in England and Wales had used one or more
illegal drug in the past year, and 5.9% in the last month.
2 In 2006/07, 24.1% of 16-24 year olds said they had used an illegal drug in the last
year. 8.3 % reported ‘frequent use’.
3 In 2007, 17% of 11-15 year olds in England say they have used illegal drugs in the
last year, 10% in the last month.
4 We need to view drug misuse more as a public health issue and focus overstretched
criminal justice resources on the dealers and organised criminals. The law has to be
credible. The current classification system needs to be changed to ensure it is more
credible.
We believe treatment and prevention should be the priority for individuals who use
drugs. But the full force of the criminal law should be directed at the thugs and pushers
who run the illegal drugs trade. Our overstretched police, courts and prisons should be
focusing their efforts on these organised criminals. That is why we are proposing tough
new measures to combat them, including a new offence of ‘dealing’ to target those
supplying illegal drugs over long periods of time, making it easier to confiscate their
assets, and allowing the selling of drugs near children to be an aggravating factor in
sentencing.
Policy Detail
Place policy making in the drugs field on a much firmer evidence-based footing by:
Re-establishing the existing Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs as a standing
Drugs Commission with a wider range of expertise, greater independence from the
Government, and a remit to look at social effects and abuse of legal drugs
including alcohol, tobacco and solvents as well as currently illegal drugs.
Giving the Drugs Commission the task of advising the Government on appropriate
scheduling of drugs and policy responses on a continuous basis.
Requiring the Drugs Commission to conduct a major audit of the extent and social
and economic costs of the drugs problem in the UK and the effectiveness of
policies to tackle it.
Seeking to initiate a European level review of the drugs problem and the range of
policy responses with a view to securing renegotiation of UN Conventions on Drug
Trafficking. (this is very important)
Break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police
resources for higher priority tasks by:
Retaining the classification of cannabis as a Class C drug, in line with the
recommendations of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which
the Government ignored.
Adopting a policy of not prosecuting possession for own use, social supply to
adults or cultivation of cannabis plants for own use.
Repealing Sections 8 (c) and (d) of the Misuse of Drugs Act so that it is no longer a
crime for the occupier or manager of premises to permit someone to use cannabis
on those premises.
Permitting medical use of cannabis derivatives, subject to appropriate
pharmaceutical controls and the successful conclusion of current clinical trials.
In the longer term, seeking to put the supply of cannabis on a legal, regulated
basis, subject to securing necessary renegotiation of the UN Conventions. The
Global Cannabis Commission report of September 2008, published as part of the
2009 UN drug policy review supports a policy of regulated availability to minimise
the harms associated with cannabis abuse, adding that much of this harm is a
result of prohibition itself.
Reform excessive and counterproductive criminal penalties by:
Ending the use of imprisonment for possession for own use of illegal drugs of any
class.
Re-classifying ecstasy from Class A to Class B, but not re-classifying it further unless
recommended by the Drugs Commission subject to evidence on long-term health
effects. The ACMD is currently undertaking a review of ecstasy’s Class A status.
Amending sections 8 (a) and (b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act as recommended by
Runciman so that occupiers or managers of premises only commit a crime if they
knowingly and wilfully permit the supply or production of illegal drugs on those
premises.
Promote a more effective policy to reduce drug dependency and its adverse
consequences by:
Developing specialist heroin treatment clinics where heroin or heroin substitutes
can be administered under controlled conditions, with other medical treatment
and testing, and counselling and withdrawal programmes available, with the longterm
aim of making such services widely available.
Allowing GPs to prescribe short term or emergency maintenance doses of
addictive drugs, particularly diamorphine hydrochloride (heroin), to remove the
dependence of any new or existing addicts on criminal suppliers.
Repealing section 9A of the Misuse of Drugs Act to allow harm minimisation
programmes to distribute drug paraphernalia such as safe tourniquets, as
recommended by Runciman.
Assessing other alternatives to criminal sanctions such as Drug Treatment and
Testing Orders (DTTOs) and Drug Abstinence Orders (DAOs) and if suitable,
extending their use. DTTOs are used for offenders who have drug misuse issues
that require treatment. It requires compliance by the offender, who receives
supervised treatment and regular testing. DAOs are aimed at low level offenders,
with low level drug use, who are not assessed as being suitable for treatment.
Re-allocating resources towards making treatment and rehabilitation facilities and
programmes more generally available.
Crack down on illegal drug trafficking and drug affected driving by:
Introducing a new offence of ‘dealing’ as recommended by Runciman to allow
more effective action against those proved to be supplying illegal drugs over long
periods of time.
Allowing the selling of drugs near schools, psychiatric facilities and other sensitive
locations to be an aggravating factor in sentencing, as recommended by
Runciman.
Launching a public information campaign on the dangers of drug-affected driving,
and encouraging the police to carry out roadside sobriety testing of suspected
unfit drivers when appropriate.
Costs/Savings:
Sending just 1 in 10 drug users to residential rehab instead of prison
would save £40m a year.
source:
http://act.libdems.org.uk/group/lib...rent-liberal-democrat-drug?xg_source=activity
if you still insist on voting tory or labour them you need to consider if you really wanna grow an toke weed cos your only supporting a party thats wants YOU incriminated for your hobby/passion/medical need, which is just plain stupid imo.
their policy on heroin is also the only way we will improve addicts lives an stop the crime and stigma associated with being an heroin addict because heroin is actually medically benign if you take away addiction an risk of od the problems it creates are caused mainly by prohibition an the ongoing cost of supporting ones ever increasing habit to just to keep the addict from being physically sick etc. give it them on script an they no longer need to support their habit an can get on with their lives an may even become a functioning member of society, working etc.
heres the full article copied and pasted and the link at the bottom.
There has been some confusion among some people as to where the Liberal Democrats currently stand on drugs. The below is a reply that a user received to an email querying this very topic. I have highlighted what I feel are some of the most important parts, although everything is important to a certain degree.
There is definite room for improvement in many of these policies, as several things have changed since this was written and several important documents have been published from various organisations (eg. Transform - Blueprint for Reform) that have the potential to inform this policy.
"Drugs
The Policy in Brief
The punitive approach to drug users that we have followed for decades has not been
successful. Drug use is higher than ever and our prisons are full to bursting with drug
addicts. It is time to stop criminalising drug users and start focusing on ending their
addiction through medical treatment. The Liberal Democrats will place policy making in
the drugs field on a much firmer evidence-based footing. This will involve the reform of
excessive and counterproductive criminal penalties and the promotion of a more
effective policy to reduce drug dependency and its adverse consequences. We will also
break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police resources
for higher priority tasks.
Why is it Necessary
The current law is not working. It neither effectively deters people from drug use nor
ensures effective education and treatment. The UK has one of the most punitive
approaches in Europe, yet according to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and
Drug Abuse the UK has one of the highest levels of drug use in Europe.
1 In 2006/07, 10% of adults (age 16-59) in England and Wales had used one or more
illegal drug in the past year, and 5.9% in the last month.
2 In 2006/07, 24.1% of 16-24 year olds said they had used an illegal drug in the last
year. 8.3 % reported ‘frequent use’.
3 In 2007, 17% of 11-15 year olds in England say they have used illegal drugs in the
last year, 10% in the last month.
4 We need to view drug misuse more as a public health issue and focus overstretched
criminal justice resources on the dealers and organised criminals. The law has to be
credible. The current classification system needs to be changed to ensure it is more
credible.
We believe treatment and prevention should be the priority for individuals who use
drugs. But the full force of the criminal law should be directed at the thugs and pushers
who run the illegal drugs trade. Our overstretched police, courts and prisons should be
focusing their efforts on these organised criminals. That is why we are proposing tough
new measures to combat them, including a new offence of ‘dealing’ to target those
supplying illegal drugs over long periods of time, making it easier to confiscate their
assets, and allowing the selling of drugs near children to be an aggravating factor in
sentencing.
Policy Detail
Place policy making in the drugs field on a much firmer evidence-based footing by:
Re-establishing the existing Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs as a standing
Drugs Commission with a wider range of expertise, greater independence from the
Government, and a remit to look at social effects and abuse of legal drugs
including alcohol, tobacco and solvents as well as currently illegal drugs.
Giving the Drugs Commission the task of advising the Government on appropriate
scheduling of drugs and policy responses on a continuous basis.
Requiring the Drugs Commission to conduct a major audit of the extent and social
and economic costs of the drugs problem in the UK and the effectiveness of
policies to tackle it.
Seeking to initiate a European level review of the drugs problem and the range of
policy responses with a view to securing renegotiation of UN Conventions on Drug
Trafficking. (this is very important)
Break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police
resources for higher priority tasks by:
Retaining the classification of cannabis as a Class C drug, in line with the
recommendations of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which
the Government ignored.
Adopting a policy of not prosecuting possession for own use, social supply to
adults or cultivation of cannabis plants for own use.
Repealing Sections 8 (c) and (d) of the Misuse of Drugs Act so that it is no longer a
crime for the occupier or manager of premises to permit someone to use cannabis
on those premises.
Permitting medical use of cannabis derivatives, subject to appropriate
pharmaceutical controls and the successful conclusion of current clinical trials.
In the longer term, seeking to put the supply of cannabis on a legal, regulated
basis, subject to securing necessary renegotiation of the UN Conventions. The
Global Cannabis Commission report of September 2008, published as part of the
2009 UN drug policy review supports a policy of regulated availability to minimise
the harms associated with cannabis abuse, adding that much of this harm is a
result of prohibition itself.
Reform excessive and counterproductive criminal penalties by:
Ending the use of imprisonment for possession for own use of illegal drugs of any
class.
Re-classifying ecstasy from Class A to Class B, but not re-classifying it further unless
recommended by the Drugs Commission subject to evidence on long-term health
effects. The ACMD is currently undertaking a review of ecstasy’s Class A status.
Amending sections 8 (a) and (b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act as recommended by
Runciman so that occupiers or managers of premises only commit a crime if they
knowingly and wilfully permit the supply or production of illegal drugs on those
premises.
Promote a more effective policy to reduce drug dependency and its adverse
consequences by:
Developing specialist heroin treatment clinics where heroin or heroin substitutes
can be administered under controlled conditions, with other medical treatment
and testing, and counselling and withdrawal programmes available, with the longterm
aim of making such services widely available.
Allowing GPs to prescribe short term or emergency maintenance doses of
addictive drugs, particularly diamorphine hydrochloride (heroin), to remove the
dependence of any new or existing addicts on criminal suppliers.
Repealing section 9A of the Misuse of Drugs Act to allow harm minimisation
programmes to distribute drug paraphernalia such as safe tourniquets, as
recommended by Runciman.
Assessing other alternatives to criminal sanctions such as Drug Treatment and
Testing Orders (DTTOs) and Drug Abstinence Orders (DAOs) and if suitable,
extending their use. DTTOs are used for offenders who have drug misuse issues
that require treatment. It requires compliance by the offender, who receives
supervised treatment and regular testing. DAOs are aimed at low level offenders,
with low level drug use, who are not assessed as being suitable for treatment.
Re-allocating resources towards making treatment and rehabilitation facilities and
programmes more generally available.
Crack down on illegal drug trafficking and drug affected driving by:
Introducing a new offence of ‘dealing’ as recommended by Runciman to allow
more effective action against those proved to be supplying illegal drugs over long
periods of time.
Allowing the selling of drugs near schools, psychiatric facilities and other sensitive
locations to be an aggravating factor in sentencing, as recommended by
Runciman.
Launching a public information campaign on the dangers of drug-affected driving,
and encouraging the police to carry out roadside sobriety testing of suspected
unfit drivers when appropriate.
Costs/Savings:
Sending just 1 in 10 drug users to residential rehab instead of prison
would save £40m a year.
source:
http://act.libdems.org.uk/group/lib...rent-liberal-democrat-drug?xg_source=activity
if you still insist on voting tory or labour them you need to consider if you really wanna grow an toke weed cos your only supporting a party thats wants YOU incriminated for your hobby/passion/medical need, which is just plain stupid imo.
their policy on heroin is also the only way we will improve addicts lives an stop the crime and stigma associated with being an heroin addict because heroin is actually medically benign if you take away addiction an risk of od the problems it creates are caused mainly by prohibition an the ongoing cost of supporting ones ever increasing habit to just to keep the addict from being physically sick etc. give it them on script an they no longer need to support their habit an can get on with their lives an may even become a functioning member of society, working etc.
daddy fingaz
Active member
Nice one grim!
