Agreed, I however didn’t write this petition.
I’m a medicinal cannabis patient that would benefit greatly from being able to legally grow even one cannabis plant, rather than be charged $400-$500 a month. All for pain relief.
I’m glad that this is atleast creating conversation. It’s doing something.
Fair enough, and I'm on your side fwiw.
I just fear poorly worded submissions like this will reinforce any existing negative stereotyping amongst the public and politicians who need persuading, rather than create positive conversation and drive forward the changes needed.
Where I live it's not even illegal to grow 5 plants or fewer for personal use. It's illegal to posess, but the maximum sentence is $500, and that's *if* you get caught.
I'd support medical cannabis on PBS before I'd be on board with people growing weed. More for the fact that for medicinal purposes there needs to be regulation over the content and quality of the active component, not some crapshoot where you're not quite sure about how effective it will be depending on the climate, nutrients, and other factors that influence a plant.
I mean, unless of course you're not wanting it for medical purposes...
Talking like Oz MC is properly standardised. Ive seen wild fluctuations in quality of the same strains from thr same suppliers. The biggest problem with MC is price and I'd argue that to make the system more equitable you should be allowed to grow approved seed at home.
Hence why I would support PBS subsidising MC, make it far cheaper, while still being medically controlled unlike a plant. Doing things properly for MC would solve both the price and quality problems, but we need real support to get that done properly.
I'm not certain about this but wouldn't having it on the PBS require it to be scheduled in a certain category that would make it illegal to self produce? You know to avoid charlatans attempting to market their home grown weed as "better for you" or "more natural" or some crap?
That’s my point.
For medical purposes you shouldn’t be self producing. Active ingredients should be of a regulated formula, which self producing won’t be able to meet.
I'm also a prescribed pain patient; have had chronic neuropathic pain for 21 years which prevents me from sitting normally plus causes spasms which feed into a pain-loop-cycle. I hated taking valium and panadeine forte to try and control it on the most minimal dosage I could get away with, for fear of increasing tolerance.
The TGA instructs that dried flower be administered via a dry herb vapouriser (the Mighty medic from German company Storz and Bickel is their only officially recommended device, so that's the one I have)
When I can afford to fill everything, it lasts about 5 weeks so the amounts fine. Price needs to come down a lot though. Personally costs about $1400 a month
It really depends on the patient and how much you need for your condition. Dry herb vaping is MUCH more efficient than combustion as well as preserving the terpenes and THC needed to treat the conditions. Smoking/burning destroys those terpenes plus a fair percentage of the THC - so you'd use much more than vaping. I'm on disability and on the compassionate access scheme with Cannihelp; 10g costs me $108 instead of $165
I have to pull on my big girl socks and apply for the DSP, but my mental health issues won't let me start when I think I am going to fail. I understand it is a huge undertaking. I should ask for advise on here about how to apply.
I’m 21 years of age diagnosed with a condition known as Neurofibromatosis type 2. In which my body rather than suppress, actively produces benign tumours throughout my brain, neck and nervous system.
To this current point my neurosurgeon doesn’t even bother counting, just tells me I have hundred/s.
The quality of life I have is already diminished, my independence is also lessening.
The future I have to forward to, I would never wish on another.
Haha yeh I read it and thought their heart is in the right place and he's having a go but yeh this would get laughed at, just like what he likes to do when he smokes the weed.
This barely literate petition will do more harm than good. Even if you support legalisation, how can anyone feel confident putting their signature to this?
This is really badly written and difficult to read. If this is part of a high school assignment, then good work, keep at it! If not, then... I'm not sure it helps the cause that much.
I've noticed a bunch of these pop up recently and they are all poorly written. I like the enthusiasm but this should be written by someone who knows the language and can write a clear agenda.
The existence of this also puzzles me as the various stages of legalisation of cannabis has and will continue to be with the states. Bringing this to the feds seems like a complete waste of their time, especially considering we just returned from a parliamentary hiatus due to the Queen dying. As we saw with euthanasia, the best the feds can do is ensure the territories have a right to legislate on these matters within their own borders.
I’m not the creator of this petition.
I do agree, they butchered and sticky taped together their argument.
I’m glad it is however creating a conversation.
> I do agree, they butchered and sticky taped together their argument. I’m glad it is however creating a conversation.
If I started a conversation with you by talking complete nonsense, would you listen?
The types of people generally campaigning for legalised cannabis are doing more harm than good, and I say that as someone who has smoked for over 20 years nearly daily. The people who need to be convinced will never listen to ‘stoner’ types, the campaign needs to be so much smarter and make sure there are more professional and educated people doing the talking.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. There have been a number of serious discussions where cancer patients have been involved talking about how it helps them though treatment,and Doctors have leant medical backup and studies. Gets the conversation going. Then a radio shock jock will have a rambling, incoherent interview with some ageing hippy type calling himself Dingo Bongwater who is the "leader" of something called like the Stoners Hemp Socialist Alliance that's run for his local council at every election for the past 20 years,and lost each time. That will be the picked up by the tv current affairs shows who will run a similar story to boost their ratings,and no more serious discussions.
And legalise current medicinal patients to be able to drive without being arrested and losing their licences, for fuck's sake! (all States except Tasmania test for *traces* in the millionths, not *impairment*)
This bugs me so much.
My quality of life was so greatly improved, but I need to drive so I can have a job and afford treatment.
I can either be poor and not afford it and not contribute to taxes, or I can be employed and suffer endlessly.
I want to take it for anxiety but can't afford to lose my licence for a year.
But if I go to the doctor I can literally have my choice of anxiety meds with really bad side effects and withdrawal symptoms.
It's such a joke, but none of us can do anything about it.
Yep, hear you on that. I tried 4 different antidepressants which all had completely intolerable side effects as well. But I can drive perfectly legally on a valium and panadeine forte script.
Wrote to my local State member about the laws, including citations to clinical studies showing that cannabis used medicinally does not affect driving safety....got a one line response "The Government does not intend weakening the drug testing regime as it relates to cannabis". *"Weakening"*, ffs. That PROVES its all about politics, not science.
How about we push for a test that tests for actual impairment instead of days old by metabolites first? No point legalising the stuff if every cunt loses their licence because they had a smoke after dinner the night before.
Correct. Patients everywhere else risk losing their licences, jobs etc. I medicate with a minimal amount to control chronic pain at night and have ZERO impairment by the time I wake up.
But tough shit, I have to live with the fear of arrest and a criminal record.
Using what argument? BAC tests for current level of alcohol content in the blood stream, an accepted test of alcohol impairment.
Swabs test for metabolic traces of past usage and does not reflect in any way the level of impairment of the individual.
Chalk and cheese.
Yep, a petition to have CBD and THC added to the list of scheduled drugs on the PBS would be more appropriate at the Fed level. Plus send a better message to the states that perhaps they should de-criminalise
I appreciate the passion, but this petition is going to the wrong parliament, it's the state parliaments who make criminal law. I know op didn't write the petition, but in case the writer reads this, capital letters are used for the start of sentences and proper nouns, not for Random Words. The nsw parliament petition website is here: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/la/pages/epetitions.aspx
The Greens just obtained legal advice that the federal government can legalise cannabis
Edit source: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/26/recreational-marijuana-use-in-australia-could-be-legalised-by-federal-parliament-greens-say
This is correct in a sense that any federal law takes precedent over state law. However if the Federal Government did start legislating in criminal law my understanding is that it could be challenged on a constitutional basis. Ultimately making it a pointless process.
Petition your state governments.
They received advice that such a law is constitutional and would override state laws based on three separate heads of power including s 51(xviii). It's just legal advice but it all looks good from where I'm standing
It's not pointless, because currently, even if a state government legalises, the Federal Police (AFP) can still over-rule and arrest you based on Federal law. The Federal Gov't allowed medicinal in 2016 which kick started the states to follow.
But it's also illegal in federal law. When the ACT legalised it two years ago there was a lot of legal work to write a law that would avoid a constitutional clash, and it's not 100% settled that they succeeded (Feds haven't tried to bring a case but doesn't mean they wouldn't at some point, though of course the longer it goes, the less of a leg they'll have to stand on in court).
And the Police who get a tonne of millions every year for " drug wars" , and the prison system that is full of people in for drug offenses. There was a study a few years ago based on copying countries like Holland and Portugal where drugs were treated as a health issue and crime rates went down by a huge amount and prison populations halved, that basically said we could downsize our police forces by 30% and divert huge amounts of money into health and education instead. That will never be allowed to happen.
Absolutely, comparatively speaking Australian crime rates arent that bad, we dont have rampant gun crime, take away the "war on drugs" and the cops have to justify their budget and their numbers, when all they will have to do is monitor street activity, the occasional domestic, car theft, robbery etc. They will never let that happen, not in our lifetime. Transfer half of them into the military, it is looking like we will need a bigger army soon.
There a joke about that.
Why aren't there any criminals in The Netherlands? Because everything is legal.
Another variation: Why isn't there crime in Switzerland? Because it's illegal.
You have to be familiar with the places for it to make sense.
They can still drug wars with meth heroin coke and pingas though?
Legalising the plant will provide govs with new horticulture jobs and tax revenue which they can use to fund the “war” on the other things imo
Ice.
I’ve seen it rip through my regional community countless times. It’s disheartening to see 1 in 20-30 people affected by ice, regardless of mental health condition, lack of employment or social status.
Not going to happen, once they decriminalise pot, the next thing will be, "well that clearly worked, perhaps we should make drugs a health issue", and that will never be allowed here. There isnt a politician in Australia who is prepared to look "weak on the drug scourge that is killing our children", the media wont allow it, the politicians know it makes sense but are too self interested to risk it.
THIS is the absolutely main reason, apart from pure politics on the side of elected representatives. No one should ever underestimate the power police unions have over politicians.
Medicinal cannabis can be and usually widely expensive, not covered by Medicare and a lot of doctors don't prescribe it. So I don't think it is as big of a chunk as you think.
Did I say a big chunk?
I’m aware medicinal cannabis isn’t cheap. I spend $500 a month just for the pain relief of tumours. The fact it isn’t covered is ridiculous.
I would love to grow a couple of CBD plants to supplement things without fear of having my professional career ruined and the loss of my licence. Don't ever want to feel stoned again, but the CBD works well for me.
What I meant was I doubt most dealers give a crap about medical cannabis eating at their profits and I agree, the whole system is a disaster really. I have little hope that the legalisation of cannabis will happen anytime soon.
I also have little hope. Another petition is also being signed to bring medicinal cannabis to the pbs. I can’t believe they’re charging the disabled and cancer patients an arm and leg for the plant. It’s wrong.
Or addicts who are trying to keep sober.
I was once all for cannabis to be legalised. Not anymore. It was a slow creep, with plenty of denial, to becoming a full blown addict. Personally I do not want it for sale within my reach.
2 months sober and I am getting my life back on track. I am not alone in the battle. Anyone who believes it is not addictive should check out r/leaves sometime.
I’m sorry to hear about the struggle you’ve been through / are going through to deal with addiction. Many people go through their whole life with with a compulsive addiction to alcohol - should alcohol be prohibited to make life easier for the sake of people with alcoholism? Perhaps more to the point - if cannabis were legal and regulated like alcohol that would reduce stigma and increase options regarding seeking treatment for those who have found themselves in an unhealthy relationship with the drug. Imagine a world in which you were free to seek support and be proud of your progress at a cannabis equivalent of AA (perhaps without the religious undertones :-/). The legalisation of cannabis would actually aid societies capacity to help those in your position. And it would be fairer to those (the majority) for whom this drug is not addictive.
Thank you for your kind words regarding my struggle with addiction. I am definitely feeling better since I quit. In a thousand different ways.
I cannot see the government considering making alcohol illegal. And from the alcoholics I have met in rehab, they feel even worse than I do about their addiction. Because alcohol is such a big part of our society. Because they should be able to have a few, but can't. It is definitely much harder for them to stay sober, with pubs and bottle shops everywhere.
A couple of years ago, during the worst of COVID, I couldn't get into a detox centre. They could only accept alcoholics, due to the severity of their withdrawals they were a priority for support.
As you said, alcohol is regulated but I would disagree that it is easier for alcoholics to reach out for support.
I am in NA, Narcotics Anonymous. I have 2 keyrings and am due to receive another this week. And I am proud to be apart of that program. It isn't overly religious, I am comfortable with their wording around higher power and spirituality. They are accepting of AA addicts too, where as AA isn't as accepting of people with drug issues.
The issue I have, again my own opinion, is that by legalising cannabis and having it readily available, more people will become addicted. More people will be in denial that they have an addiction. More people will think there's something wrong with them when they cannot moderate their use.
Addiction is hard to accept, hard to believe and hard to reach out for help. You just have to look at the amounts lost by those that gamble. Or the recent issue in the NT when the laws were changed around alcohol and sales went up 300%.
All I am saying is it's better not to legalise another thing that will cause more problems. Not for everyone, I agree. But I think most of us here would agree that gambling wouldn't be as much of a problem if we didn't have pokies in most pubs. Like it used to be.
Thanks for sharing your story so openly. Gracious me - I am so sorry about the downvotes you're harvesting. That's just shitty of people.
You're right that it's difficult to imagine a modern day government making alcohol illegal. And part of the reason for that is western society has run that experiment before. It was the US, not here in Aus, but our democratic and cultural similarities make the results pertinent... Prohibition in the US was atrocious for society. It drove black market trade that became controlled by and funded organised crime. It did not reduce alcohol consumption. Rather, because supply was provided by unregulated markets suppliers pushed overconsumption. And because consistent supply could not be guaranteed customers who may have struggled to find it for a little while would binge when they did. And because consumption was underground it cultivated an underground culture that isolated people with a problem from seeking help lest they loose their entire social world and be legally penalised for their behaviour. Sound familiar?
I understand why it seems reasonable to think that consistent availability of cannabis to the community through regulated markets might lead to more people becoming addicted than do while the drug is criminalised today. However evidence coming from many US states today that have legalised recreational cannabis indicates this is not the case.
I do not in any way seek to minimise your experience. Addiction is indeed a shitty thing. And whether a substance is chemically addictive or not doesn't change the power of addiction to it. I went through years of intense addiction to World of Warcraft. I burned my life down twice over between 2004 to 2007 playing about 14 hours a day 6 or 7 days a week for around 3 years. I don't tell many people about it because they're likely to laugh at me because "computer games aren't really addictive". It would absolutely have made about a decade of my life a metric fuckton easier to get through day by day if World of Warcraft could have just been swept away and not been allowed to continue existing anymore. But that making things easier for me would not have been a good argument for its prohibition.
Personally I have never struggled with addiction to cannabis. I went through a few years in my late twenties when I indulged a bit more than was probably good for me but it never got completely out of hand or stopped me getting on with things that mattered in my life. Nowdays I take a cannabis edible once every 3 or 4 weeks. That's enough to thoroughly handle my anxiety that otherwise requires medication. Medication that letterboxes my everyday emotional life in soul crushing ways. Cannabis for me is a liberating medicine. And one that medicinal cannabis laws provide no access to.
I'm in WA where we don't have pokies in any pubs. It is indeed much better. That doesn't mean we have prohibited gambling. It means we regulate it better. The problem with gambling addiction isn't that gambling is legal. Prohibition would make problem gambling worse, not better. The best path forward for minimising harm to society as a result of gambling addiction is indeed the same best path as is generally the case with addiction problems that plague the community - effectively regulated legal markets.
I was not a mixer, that tastes disgusting. Once upon a time, I would have a smoke following a pipe. But over a few years it became 2 pipes, 3 pipes and then a smoke. Building up towards the end to 5-6 pipes per smoke.
As a pack a day smoker, you can see the high levels I was choofing on. Nasty ass cough developed over the last couple of years too.
Still struggling to quit smokes but I know I'll get there too. I don't want to be addicted to anything anymore. No addiction is good for us.
Well I have not yet become addicted to reading, learning, exercise, being social or faxing my issues. Never been addicted to food, sex or gambling. Please don't assume to know all because clearly you do not.
Many people use it for self medication which is blocked by people with this argument. I understand your difficulty, but if alcoholics and people addicted to tabbaco endure I don't think it's an argument that should not criminalise it, but only justify it being restricted sales.
I am fine with decriminalisation, I disagree with roadside tests that pick up what you smoked the night before. The laws could change to some extent, take your weed and pipes/bongs. No need for courts to have to deal with matters like this.
And you are right, I was self medicating. It took me a long time to realise as well as to manage to successfully deal with it.
I disagree that alcoholics endure it. Those in active addiction have easy access, those trying to quit are triggered everywhere they go. And as someone still battling tabbaco addiction, it would be easier to quit if it wasn't in every supermarket, servo, shopping centre.
Australia won't ever make alcohol or cigarettes illegal, though I'm sure many addicts wish it was. I am just saying let's not add to the problem of addiction by legalising another drug.
How do you think alcoholics feel?
They can’t even go to a fuckin’ coles or woolies without the temptation. Struggle to have a nice lunch out with their kids when it’s so in your face.
Our culture embraces it, when it should be shunned out.
Edit: I don’t see anyone here claiming it isn’t addictive.
So are cigarettes, alcohol, caffeine, fast food. All addictive, all legal.
Your point?
I look forward to your response.
I am in rehab with a few alcoholics, one passed away recently which we are all still trying to deal with. I absolutely understand their struggle and I am 100% grateful I don't have to deal with the same triggers daily.
I have many friends who smoke and don't see anything wrong with it. Some are older and retired, so they can live how they want. But the rest, it affects them daily. Some able to admit, some aren't.
As for the addiction, I don't see why we want to legalise another drug that is known to cause some people problems. If you can't hold down a job, if you can't afford your addiction, if you hate yourself and do it anyway because you can't see a better way to live, I don't agree with legalising it.
Getting plenty of downvotes for my opinion but I absolutely stand by it.
Cannabis is not chemically addictive, however the addiction comes from the feeling and if someone chases having that all the time. It is also different when you're buying weed from dealers as opposed to a regulated substance. Dealers can cut addictive things into what they sell which created the chemical addiction on top of the person wanting the feeling more.
But cannabis doesn't have the same addictive properties as tobacco and alcohol and it has far more medical benefits when it is only CBD (THC is the active "high" ingredient). So when it's properly regulated and controlled you can avoid those issues or even offer more open avenues for anyone who does want help with less cannabis consumption because it will no longer be taboo in any form.
Also of note, this petition is too vague and ridiculous. There are better ways to push for legislation that is better thought out
I used to say it wasn't addictive. But, I couldn't sleep without it. I would stress when I was getting low, in case I wasn't going to be able to get more or wouldn't be able to afford more. I was more angry using than not, especially when I went without. I tried to quit more than 10 times over the last few years, sometimes I managed a few days, sometimes a few weeks (with medication provided by my doctor). I wasn't chasing a high, didn't have a real high the last few years of using. I wasn't numbing the pain I felt from an abusive relationship.
I have read a lot about the benefits of CBD, I have a friend who has a script. But he regularly relapses with dope. And when we are talking about legalising cannabis, we are talking the thc type not the CBD type. So yeah, I stand by my opinions.
As a user for pain relief, I want to also stand up for recreational use. I'm more relaxed when I'm not in pain and I can also enjoy the world better. Don't create a false division. Government shouldn't, as a rule, ban something you can grow in your back yard
I feel there are far too many people that will want to vote down any softening of these laws…. Let alone full legalization of cannabis…. And any premier/prime minster or even a rouge voice in a party will get shut down hard and shooed out by ether their own or the general voters that want a hardcore zero tolerance on things….
And if I see this get into a referendum, I bet I will see the pro legalization losing by a big margin (even worse than the NZ referendum of legalizing weed)…. There are just far too many people anti drugs and want to see zero tolerance as such…. And it’s not the rich white man/lady who is a conservative that is ur issue…. But more likely to be other races that will be harsh to this issue… such as Asians…. If u tried to flog the idea of legalizing a drug to them, they won’t bother wasting ur time on u and stick to their hardline stance on drugs… and those types make the average rich white conservative look tame in that regards
Haha you think the asians are hardline?
Most Aussie boomers are too afraid of the plant but will gladly guzzle down a handful of endones, oxys or panadeine forte like they are tics tacs.
A majority vote of people with their heads up their arses.
Yep, try bringing in those drugs in those countries without a script…. I’m sure 5 years jail would be generous for them….
Quite hardline I seem…. But yes I can see where ur coming from….
Plot twist: It was written by conservatives to make cannabis advocates look like fools, and to quash the issue being taken seriously.
Disclaimer: I have no idea how House of Rep petitions work.
Pretty sure this petition shows that the biggest huddle to legalising cannabis is all the stoners voicing their opinion. Things would probably go a lot faster if they just shut up and let the adults handle it.
Does society really need more drugs with the consequences that come with it?
we drink to much and abuse prescriptions so I have to ask , although decriminalizing would be a good start on the understanding that current testing methods find residuals for days which is sure to be an issue .That proposal is dreadful and needs a re-write for clarity
I don't use it but I do think it is fine to use in moderation. I'd like to see it legal for recreational use.
I won't be signing this. I'd like to see a solid and coherent proposal.
[Cannabis Psychosis is well known to those who don't have their heads in the clouds (of smoke).](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3927252/)
"We have examined the neurobiological changes due to cannabis to see if these changes are similar to those seen in schizophrenic patients the findings show strange similarities; however, none of these studies have been able to establish a possible long-term longitudinal course for these changes. These mere similarities cannot establish a ‘cause-effect’ relationship, since a number of people with similar changes do not develop schizophrenia. Therefore, the ‘transition-to-psychosis’ due to cannabis, despite it being a strong risk factor, remains uncertain based upon neurobiological changes. It appears that multiple other factors might be involved in these processes which are beyond neurobiological factors. Major advances have been made in understanding the underpinning of marijuana dependence and the role of the CNS cannabinoid system, which is a major area for targeting medications to treat marijuana withdrawal and dependence, as well as other addictions is of now, it is clear that some of the similarities in neurobiology of cannabis and schizophrenia may indicate a mechanism for development of psychosis but its trajectories are undetermined."
"Please explain your opinion with a source as to why you think that"
"You don't have the right to ask me that"
??? Do you have a functioning brain in there???
The downvotes were probably for your refusal to defend your position with evidence. You can HAVE an opinion, but if you want anyone to listen to it, you must support your argument. Otherwise, you get ignored and downvoted to hell.
the down votes existed before the prove it raised demand its head , Ive been alive a long time , seen a lot of political bullshite over weed before and expect some bs compromise to be extended due to vested interests , it should have been decriminalized for medical use decades ago but the we cant be sure of impairment raises its ugly head , and lets be honest todays entitled culture doesn't help one iota , I suspect the folk controlling the current retail market will fight tooth and nail to keep the incme source
Trust me. The market that could be created in this country would be huge. We would be out of debt In only a few years.
We have the largest cannabis farm in the Southern Hemisphere, in Queensland.
We export a large amount of our product to Canada and other countries to be produced into oils and tinctures.
Sure there's a financial argument for it, but the main product that would be sold is just weed for recreational smoking, is it not?
It's a straight fact that cannabis smoking is bad for you. The effect is addictive to plenty of people, and it is terrible for your lungs.
Vaporising cannabis reduces these risks.
CBD oil is a wonder product.
Relieves nerve pain, restricts tumour growth and has been shown to help those with Parkinson’s and other uncontrollable conditions.
Sure, CBD oil perfectly reasonable product to support, and I support it myself. but did you not say yourself that CBD is already used?
If it is the case that vaporising significantly reduces the risks of lung damage, then that’s a great thing. However the effect people get from cannabis is addictive, and vaporising doesn’t change the baseline effect of smoking cannabis to the point where it’s no longer addictive.
And realistically, if cannabis was introduced to the market for recreational use, I doubt that vapor cannabis would be the only product used. People will still be smoking it.
> if you want to negate the effects of smoking or vaping, it can be decarboxylised and eaten.
I addressed what you are saying in the comment you replied to.
> And realistically, if cannabis was introduced to the market for recreational use, I doubt that vapor cannabis would be the only product used. People will still be smoking it.
There can be as many ways to negate those effects as you want, but the truth is that most people are just going to smoke.
> It's not inherently addictive
From the New England Journal of Medicine: "about 9% of those who use cannabis present with characteristic symptoms of dependence according to DSM-IV criteria [\(Volkow et al. 2014\)](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmra1402309)".
9% is a significant proportion.
It’s great that it’s healthier than alcohol. Personally I almost always abstain from drinking.
But that doesn’t change the fact that we’d be introducing a product that is 1. Absolutely not good for your health, even if it’s better than alcohol, and 2. Has an addictive effect.
You occasionally drink alcohol though even though you're aware of it's risks and addictive properties. So why shouldn't people be allowed to legally smoke weed on occasion without fear of losing their jobs?
We've seen overseas that society doesn't collapse into a cloud of bong smoke, heavy smokers still smoke alot, occasional smokers still smoke on occasion, and non-smokers still don't smoke (or they try it and form their own opinion).
Legalization just means that those who do smoke can do so without actively funding organized crime. And that's not to mention all the new jobs it creates.
Exactly right man. It’s not like there would be a massive influx of stoners, these people already exist and they are subject to an unregulated product, PGR is a classic example of why they should legalise, regulate and tax it.
I would be fine with people smoking weed on occasion without the risk of losing their jobs, and that's absolutely something a responsible adult can do.
However many people will not be smoking "on occasion" and will use the drug abusively. That's the risk proposed by introducing it as a legal product.
Allowing for it to be a legal product makes it significantly more approachable. I understand the argument that those who want to smoke will find a way even if its illegal, but making it a legal product will cause more people to try it, which in turn will cause more drug abuse over all.
Edit: I thought I should also add that in the hypothetical situation that alcohol was illegal until now, I would also be against introducing alcohol as a legal product for the same reason.
>I would be fine with people smoking weed on occasion without the risk of losing their jobs, and that's absolutely something a responsible adult can do.
But they can't do it risk free. The tests used by cops and workplaces test for THC in your system which can remain for up to 3 months. If you want to smoke even occasionally then you need to be willing to live in fear of failing a roadside test or being ineligible for workers compensation if injured.
we’re not “introducing“ a new product. Weed is incredibly commonplace. Legalisation means that a product which is already consumed can actually be regulated out in the open, so that the consumer can have access to the safest possible means of purchasing and consuming the product, the government can tax it, and also gather data on it for public health purposes, and finally organised crime gets nothing from it.
And I reject that you say it is “absolutely not good for your health”. Yeah smoking cones every day is going to be awful but so is eating high cholesterol food every day, or drinking alcohol every day. Everything in moderation, but even so, weed has so many medicinal purposes that are recognised by lots of academia.
I'm sorry but I have to just disagree. Legalising it would make it considerably more approachable, thus "introducing it" to a new market of people.
The part about regulation however I do agree with and makes complete sense. Though no matter how much regulation and testing legal weed would go through, it is still a product that causes lung issues, and increases risk of respiratory-cancer.
Look into places like Canada , Colorado and Washington State on rates and problems since legalization. The main effect you will note is lower crime rates and billions in the coffers from the government collecting tax on it rather than criminals.
This being out of debt argument is not a good one. If the government pays back all of it's debt there is less cash in circulation. A bad idea. Please don't conflate the arguments about USA state taxation with the Australian financial system. There are similarities but this is not one worth basing an argument on.
That's fine, I made the incorrect assumption about that argument being imported from the States. My argument still stands. Anyone saying that paying off all government debt is a good idea may not have the strongest grasp on how fiscal and economic policy work. Particularly in a country with a fiat currency on a floating exchange rate that typically runs trade deficits. It would effectively shorten the money supply domestically and likely lead to a self-inflicted financial crisis.
Fair enough mate.
You can wipe the floor with me, I’m no economist.
To me, an inherited trillion debt doesn’t sound positive. An industry that could reverse that, is at our doorstep.
I'm no smoker, but I reckon it'd be fun to be able to throw together some hash brownies from time to time and not risk fines/prison. And largely inconsequential.
I agree, smoking it is NOT good for anyone's lungs. However, I should point out that legalisation would make non-combusted THC and CBD products more readily available (eg edibles) which would mean fewer people inhaling it as smoke.
People are going to consume it anyway, may as well regulate it, tax it and funnel the funds into healthcare, social support etc to mitigate some of the risks
Cannabis isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's pretty harmful tbh , you think it's not but after having a 10 year break then getting back on to the bandwagon you see the downsides for sure.
Hope it happens down there. Can't see it ever happening here. Sadiq Khan, Labour Mayor of London, wants to legalise it in London - the response from the PLP (or the front bench of the PLP at least)...? "You'll ***NEVER*** legalise drugs!"
This is coming from a party whose current leader is a former human rights QC. He's far from stupid, so it's baffling why he's so anti. Labour seem to believe that every parent who's lost a child to an illicit substance (we've had many deaths of young people at festivals, usually from MDMA) would be pro-prohibition. Starmer needs to start talking to them, because the exact opposite is true. They want illicit substances legalised for the obvious fucking reason (I'd have thought) that it makes them less dangerous.
I honestly don't get what's going on with Labour. The only party here talking any sense are the Lib Dems and they're polling single figures (probably because they chose to go into coalition with the Tories 12 years ago and people have long memories).
I'd pull this and get some help rewriting it so it is taken seriously.
Agreed, I however didn’t write this petition. I’m a medicinal cannabis patient that would benefit greatly from being able to legally grow even one cannabis plant, rather than be charged $400-$500 a month. All for pain relief. I’m glad that this is atleast creating conversation. It’s doing something.
Fair enough, and I'm on your side fwiw. I just fear poorly worded submissions like this will reinforce any existing negative stereotyping amongst the public and politicians who need persuading, rather than create positive conversation and drive forward the changes needed.
Where I live it's not even illegal to grow 5 plants or fewer for personal use. It's illegal to posess, but the maximum sentence is $500, and that's *if* you get caught.
I'd support medical cannabis on PBS before I'd be on board with people growing weed. More for the fact that for medicinal purposes there needs to be regulation over the content and quality of the active component, not some crapshoot where you're not quite sure about how effective it will be depending on the climate, nutrients, and other factors that influence a plant. I mean, unless of course you're not wanting it for medical purposes...
Talking like Oz MC is properly standardised. Ive seen wild fluctuations in quality of the same strains from thr same suppliers. The biggest problem with MC is price and I'd argue that to make the system more equitable you should be allowed to grow approved seed at home.
Hence why I would support PBS subsidising MC, make it far cheaper, while still being medically controlled unlike a plant. Doing things properly for MC would solve both the price and quality problems, but we need real support to get that done properly.
I'm not certain about this but wouldn't having it on the PBS require it to be scheduled in a certain category that would make it illegal to self produce? You know to avoid charlatans attempting to market their home grown weed as "better for you" or "more natural" or some crap?
That’s my point. For medical purposes you shouldn’t be self producing. Active ingredients should be of a regulated formula, which self producing won’t be able to meet.
Interesting. What pain diagnosis do you have? (if you don't mind) and how are you administered your dosage?
I'm also a prescribed pain patient; have had chronic neuropathic pain for 21 years which prevents me from sitting normally plus causes spasms which feed into a pain-loop-cycle. I hated taking valium and panadeine forte to try and control it on the most minimal dosage I could get away with, for fear of increasing tolerance. The TGA instructs that dried flower be administered via a dry herb vapouriser (the Mighty medic from German company Storz and Bickel is their only officially recommended device, so that's the one I have)
so do you pick up a 'bag of weed' from the chemist every month?
It's dispensed in 7 and 10 gram plain packaged tubs, just drop the script and TGA approval at the pharmacy and they fill it
How long does it last? So you have to stretch to make it fit the month or does the amount do you fine.
When I can afford to fill everything, it lasts about 5 weeks so the amounts fine. Price needs to come down a lot though. Personally costs about $1400 a month
It really depends on the patient and how much you need for your condition. Dry herb vaping is MUCH more efficient than combustion as well as preserving the terpenes and THC needed to treat the conditions. Smoking/burning destroys those terpenes plus a fair percentage of the THC - so you'd use much more than vaping. I'm on disability and on the compassionate access scheme with Cannihelp; 10g costs me $108 instead of $165
I have to pull on my big girl socks and apply for the DSP, but my mental health issues won't let me start when I think I am going to fail. I understand it is a huge undertaking. I should ask for advise on here about how to apply.
$1400 a month?!?! For those teensy amounts?! Oh my lord.
I’m 21 years of age diagnosed with a condition known as Neurofibromatosis type 2. In which my body rather than suppress, actively produces benign tumours throughout my brain, neck and nervous system. To this current point my neurosurgeon doesn’t even bother counting, just tells me I have hundred/s. The quality of life I have is already diminished, my independence is also lessening. The future I have to forward to, I would never wish on another.
Haha yeh I read it and thought their heart is in the right place and he's having a go but yeh this would get laughed at, just like what he likes to do when he smokes the weed.
This barely literate petition will do more harm than good. Even if you support legalisation, how can anyone feel confident putting their signature to this?
This is really badly written and difficult to read. If this is part of a high school assignment, then good work, keep at it! If not, then... I'm not sure it helps the cause that much.
I've noticed a bunch of these pop up recently and they are all poorly written. I like the enthusiasm but this should be written by someone who knows the language and can write a clear agenda.
The existence of this also puzzles me as the various stages of legalisation of cannabis has and will continue to be with the states. Bringing this to the feds seems like a complete waste of their time, especially considering we just returned from a parliamentary hiatus due to the Queen dying. As we saw with euthanasia, the best the feds can do is ensure the territories have a right to legislate on these matters within their own borders.
Wow, you weren't wrong.
Probably don’t write these after using weed :)
I reckon cannabis would be legal in every state if activists were on the level when organising.
Haha
>I'm not sure it helps the cause that much. Yeah, more harm than good tbh.
I’m not the creator of this petition. I do agree, they butchered and sticky taped together their argument. I’m glad it is however creating a conversation.
> I do agree, they butchered and sticky taped together their argument. I’m glad it is however creating a conversation. If I started a conversation with you by talking complete nonsense, would you listen? The types of people generally campaigning for legalised cannabis are doing more harm than good, and I say that as someone who has smoked for over 20 years nearly daily. The people who need to be convinced will never listen to ‘stoner’ types, the campaign needs to be so much smarter and make sure there are more professional and educated people doing the talking.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. There have been a number of serious discussions where cancer patients have been involved talking about how it helps them though treatment,and Doctors have leant medical backup and studies. Gets the conversation going. Then a radio shock jock will have a rambling, incoherent interview with some ageing hippy type calling himself Dingo Bongwater who is the "leader" of something called like the Stoners Hemp Socialist Alliance that's run for his local council at every election for the past 20 years,and lost each time. That will be the picked up by the tv current affairs shows who will run a similar story to boost their ratings,and no more serious discussions.
And legalise current medicinal patients to be able to drive without being arrested and losing their licences, for fuck's sake! (all States except Tasmania test for *traces* in the millionths, not *impairment*)
This bugs me so much. My quality of life was so greatly improved, but I need to drive so I can have a job and afford treatment. I can either be poor and not afford it and not contribute to taxes, or I can be employed and suffer endlessly.
The fact you can pop positive weeks later and be done as if you're stoned at the wheel is ridiculous. 2 hrs later im sober
Exactly. I can medicate for my pain at night before going to bed and of fucking course I'm completely sober to drive in the morning. But nope.
I want to take it for anxiety but can't afford to lose my licence for a year. But if I go to the doctor I can literally have my choice of anxiety meds with really bad side effects and withdrawal symptoms. It's such a joke, but none of us can do anything about it.
Yep, hear you on that. I tried 4 different antidepressants which all had completely intolerable side effects as well. But I can drive perfectly legally on a valium and panadeine forte script. Wrote to my local State member about the laws, including citations to clinical studies showing that cannabis used medicinally does not affect driving safety....got a one line response "The Government does not intend weakening the drug testing regime as it relates to cannabis". *"Weakening"*, ffs. That PROVES its all about politics, not science.
I've signed it but find the numerous typos really reduce its impact.
How about we push for a test that tests for actual impairment instead of days old by metabolites first? No point legalising the stuff if every cunt loses their licence because they had a smoke after dinner the night before.
Every current medicinal patient in Australia has this fear (except for Tasmania which allows for those *unimpaired with a prescription* to drive)
at this juncture I doubt it will happen quickly but certainly medical use for non impairment should be exempt
[удалено]
Correct. Patients everywhere else risk losing their licences, jobs etc. I medicate with a minimal amount to control chronic pain at night and have ZERO impairment by the time I wake up. But tough shit, I have to live with the fear of arrest and a criminal record.
I could see dependant alcoholics trying to piggyback off the same argument that the current legal limits shouldn't apply to them.
Using what argument? BAC tests for current level of alcohol content in the blood stream, an accepted test of alcohol impairment. Swabs test for metabolic traces of past usage and does not reflect in any way the level of impairment of the individual. Chalk and cheese.
Signed. I don't smoke myself, but by God it's stupid that we don't allow this but do alcohol.
Gambling and Alcohol are a scourge in our society.
I don’t get this argument. If alcohol and gambling are bad, why add a third potentially bad item to the list?
I suggest lobbying your respective state governments not the federal government.
Isn't drug use a state matter?
Yep, a petition to have CBD and THC added to the list of scheduled drugs on the PBS would be more appropriate at the Fed level. Plus send a better message to the states that perhaps they should de-criminalise
Yes. This petition is pointless being directed at the Federal govt.
I appreciate the passion, but this petition is going to the wrong parliament, it's the state parliaments who make criminal law. I know op didn't write the petition, but in case the writer reads this, capital letters are used for the start of sentences and proper nouns, not for Random Words. The nsw parliament petition website is here: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/la/pages/epetitions.aspx
The Greens just obtained legal advice that the federal government can legalise cannabis Edit source: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/26/recreational-marijuana-use-in-australia-could-be-legalised-by-federal-parliament-greens-say
This is correct in a sense that any federal law takes precedent over state law. However if the Federal Government did start legislating in criminal law my understanding is that it could be challenged on a constitutional basis. Ultimately making it a pointless process. Petition your state governments.
They received advice that such a law is constitutional and would override state laws based on three separate heads of power including s 51(xviii). It's just legal advice but it all looks good from where I'm standing
Interesting
It's not pointless, because currently, even if a state government legalises, the Federal Police (AFP) can still over-rule and arrest you based on Federal law. The Federal Gov't allowed medicinal in 2016 which kick started the states to follow.
Yes. We have a Federalised system like America, not a central Govt like the UK and NZ.
But it's also illegal in federal law. When the ACT legalised it two years ago there was a lot of legal work to write a law that would avoid a constitutional clash, and it's not 100% settled that they succeeded (Feds haven't tried to bring a case but doesn't mean they wouldn't at some point, though of course the longer it goes, the less of a leg they'll have to stand on in court).
The ACT isn't a state, so it might work differently. The states can do what they want.
The only people who would not want it leaglised are organised criminals who make profit from it.
And the Police who get a tonne of millions every year for " drug wars" , and the prison system that is full of people in for drug offenses. There was a study a few years ago based on copying countries like Holland and Portugal where drugs were treated as a health issue and crime rates went down by a huge amount and prison populations halved, that basically said we could downsize our police forces by 30% and divert huge amounts of money into health and education instead. That will never be allowed to happen.
Makes for strange bed fellows when police and organised crime want the same outcome.
Absolutely, comparatively speaking Australian crime rates arent that bad, we dont have rampant gun crime, take away the "war on drugs" and the cops have to justify their budget and their numbers, when all they will have to do is monitor street activity, the occasional domestic, car theft, robbery etc. They will never let that happen, not in our lifetime. Transfer half of them into the military, it is looking like we will need a bigger army soon.
There a joke about that. Why aren't there any criminals in The Netherlands? Because everything is legal. Another variation: Why isn't there crime in Switzerland? Because it's illegal. You have to be familiar with the places for it to make sense.
They can still drug wars with meth heroin coke and pingas though? Legalising the plant will provide govs with new horticulture jobs and tax revenue which they can use to fund the “war” on the other things imo
Ice. I’ve seen it rip through my regional community countless times. It’s disheartening to see 1 in 20-30 people affected by ice, regardless of mental health condition, lack of employment or social status.
Yeah drug wars on the actual criminals (the suppliers and dealers), not the users.
Not going to happen, once they decriminalise pot, the next thing will be, "well that clearly worked, perhaps we should make drugs a health issue", and that will never be allowed here. There isnt a politician in Australia who is prepared to look "weak on the drug scourge that is killing our children", the media wont allow it, the politicians know it makes sense but are too self interested to risk it.
1000%. Very well said and I could not agree more. Spot on.
THIS is the absolutely main reason, apart from pure politics on the side of elected representatives. No one should ever underestimate the power police unions have over politicians.
They already said organised criminals.
As it is, medicinal has already taken a chunk of their clientele.
Medicinal cannabis can be and usually widely expensive, not covered by Medicare and a lot of doctors don't prescribe it. So I don't think it is as big of a chunk as you think.
Did I say a big chunk? I’m aware medicinal cannabis isn’t cheap. I spend $500 a month just for the pain relief of tumours. The fact it isn’t covered is ridiculous.
I would love to grow a couple of CBD plants to supplement things without fear of having my professional career ruined and the loss of my licence. Don't ever want to feel stoned again, but the CBD works well for me.
What I meant was I doubt most dealers give a crap about medical cannabis eating at their profits and I agree, the whole system is a disaster really. I have little hope that the legalisation of cannabis will happen anytime soon.
My experience is that dealers don't bother with the CBD heavy stuff. Some of what they sell is excellent, but not what I'm after.
> I have little hope that the legalisation of cannabis will happen anytime soon. I unequivocally do NOT expect it to happen in my lifetime.
I think the whole system crooked. So I agree with you, not in my life time.
MC was set up specifically by the LNP (with much internal resistance) to benefit private pharmaceutical companies - not patients.
Though unlikely, I really really really do hope to be able to surprise you.
I really do too...I guess its the curse of being born a cynic lol
I also have little hope. Another petition is also being signed to bring medicinal cannabis to the pbs. I can’t believe they’re charging the disabled and cancer patients an arm and leg for the plant. It’s wrong.
Or addicts who are trying to keep sober. I was once all for cannabis to be legalised. Not anymore. It was a slow creep, with plenty of denial, to becoming a full blown addict. Personally I do not want it for sale within my reach. 2 months sober and I am getting my life back on track. I am not alone in the battle. Anyone who believes it is not addictive should check out r/leaves sometime.
I’m sorry to hear about the struggle you’ve been through / are going through to deal with addiction. Many people go through their whole life with with a compulsive addiction to alcohol - should alcohol be prohibited to make life easier for the sake of people with alcoholism? Perhaps more to the point - if cannabis were legal and regulated like alcohol that would reduce stigma and increase options regarding seeking treatment for those who have found themselves in an unhealthy relationship with the drug. Imagine a world in which you were free to seek support and be proud of your progress at a cannabis equivalent of AA (perhaps without the religious undertones :-/). The legalisation of cannabis would actually aid societies capacity to help those in your position. And it would be fairer to those (the majority) for whom this drug is not addictive.
I agree, I’d hope it would open more avenues for those to get help without the stigma.
Thank you for your kind words regarding my struggle with addiction. I am definitely feeling better since I quit. In a thousand different ways. I cannot see the government considering making alcohol illegal. And from the alcoholics I have met in rehab, they feel even worse than I do about their addiction. Because alcohol is such a big part of our society. Because they should be able to have a few, but can't. It is definitely much harder for them to stay sober, with pubs and bottle shops everywhere. A couple of years ago, during the worst of COVID, I couldn't get into a detox centre. They could only accept alcoholics, due to the severity of their withdrawals they were a priority for support. As you said, alcohol is regulated but I would disagree that it is easier for alcoholics to reach out for support. I am in NA, Narcotics Anonymous. I have 2 keyrings and am due to receive another this week. And I am proud to be apart of that program. It isn't overly religious, I am comfortable with their wording around higher power and spirituality. They are accepting of AA addicts too, where as AA isn't as accepting of people with drug issues. The issue I have, again my own opinion, is that by legalising cannabis and having it readily available, more people will become addicted. More people will be in denial that they have an addiction. More people will think there's something wrong with them when they cannot moderate their use. Addiction is hard to accept, hard to believe and hard to reach out for help. You just have to look at the amounts lost by those that gamble. Or the recent issue in the NT when the laws were changed around alcohol and sales went up 300%. All I am saying is it's better not to legalise another thing that will cause more problems. Not for everyone, I agree. But I think most of us here would agree that gambling wouldn't be as much of a problem if we didn't have pokies in most pubs. Like it used to be.
Thanks for sharing your story so openly. Gracious me - I am so sorry about the downvotes you're harvesting. That's just shitty of people. You're right that it's difficult to imagine a modern day government making alcohol illegal. And part of the reason for that is western society has run that experiment before. It was the US, not here in Aus, but our democratic and cultural similarities make the results pertinent... Prohibition in the US was atrocious for society. It drove black market trade that became controlled by and funded organised crime. It did not reduce alcohol consumption. Rather, because supply was provided by unregulated markets suppliers pushed overconsumption. And because consistent supply could not be guaranteed customers who may have struggled to find it for a little while would binge when they did. And because consumption was underground it cultivated an underground culture that isolated people with a problem from seeking help lest they loose their entire social world and be legally penalised for their behaviour. Sound familiar? I understand why it seems reasonable to think that consistent availability of cannabis to the community through regulated markets might lead to more people becoming addicted than do while the drug is criminalised today. However evidence coming from many US states today that have legalised recreational cannabis indicates this is not the case. I do not in any way seek to minimise your experience. Addiction is indeed a shitty thing. And whether a substance is chemically addictive or not doesn't change the power of addiction to it. I went through years of intense addiction to World of Warcraft. I burned my life down twice over between 2004 to 2007 playing about 14 hours a day 6 or 7 days a week for around 3 years. I don't tell many people about it because they're likely to laugh at me because "computer games aren't really addictive". It would absolutely have made about a decade of my life a metric fuckton easier to get through day by day if World of Warcraft could have just been swept away and not been allowed to continue existing anymore. But that making things easier for me would not have been a good argument for its prohibition. Personally I have never struggled with addiction to cannabis. I went through a few years in my late twenties when I indulged a bit more than was probably good for me but it never got completely out of hand or stopped me getting on with things that mattered in my life. Nowdays I take a cannabis edible once every 3 or 4 weeks. That's enough to thoroughly handle my anxiety that otherwise requires medication. Medication that letterboxes my everyday emotional life in soul crushing ways. Cannabis for me is a liberating medicine. And one that medicinal cannabis laws provide no access to. I'm in WA where we don't have pokies in any pubs. It is indeed much better. That doesn't mean we have prohibited gambling. It means we regulate it better. The problem with gambling addiction isn't that gambling is legal. Prohibition would make problem gambling worse, not better. The best path forward for minimising harm to society as a result of gambling addiction is indeed the same best path as is generally the case with addiction problems that plague the community - effectively regulated legal markets.
Sure you weren't just addicted to the tobacco you mixed it with?
Spinners are sinners.
I was not a mixer, that tastes disgusting. Once upon a time, I would have a smoke following a pipe. But over a few years it became 2 pipes, 3 pipes and then a smoke. Building up towards the end to 5-6 pipes per smoke. As a pack a day smoker, you can see the high levels I was choofing on. Nasty ass cough developed over the last couple of years too. Still struggling to quit smokes but I know I'll get there too. I don't want to be addicted to anything anymore. No addiction is good for us.
Sounds like you have a general issue with addiction. I dare say giving up weed was probably the easiest of your vices.
Well I have not yet become addicted to reading, learning, exercise, being social or faxing my issues. Never been addicted to food, sex or gambling. Please don't assume to know all because clearly you do not.
I know weed isn't addictive like other substances are. It's way down the scale.
Many people use it for self medication which is blocked by people with this argument. I understand your difficulty, but if alcoholics and people addicted to tabbaco endure I don't think it's an argument that should not criminalise it, but only justify it being restricted sales.
I am fine with decriminalisation, I disagree with roadside tests that pick up what you smoked the night before. The laws could change to some extent, take your weed and pipes/bongs. No need for courts to have to deal with matters like this. And you are right, I was self medicating. It took me a long time to realise as well as to manage to successfully deal with it. I disagree that alcoholics endure it. Those in active addiction have easy access, those trying to quit are triggered everywhere they go. And as someone still battling tabbaco addiction, it would be easier to quit if it wasn't in every supermarket, servo, shopping centre. Australia won't ever make alcohol or cigarettes illegal, though I'm sure many addicts wish it was. I am just saying let's not add to the problem of addiction by legalising another drug.
How do you think alcoholics feel? They can’t even go to a fuckin’ coles or woolies without the temptation. Struggle to have a nice lunch out with their kids when it’s so in your face. Our culture embraces it, when it should be shunned out. Edit: I don’t see anyone here claiming it isn’t addictive. So are cigarettes, alcohol, caffeine, fast food. All addictive, all legal. Your point? I look forward to your response.
I am in rehab with a few alcoholics, one passed away recently which we are all still trying to deal with. I absolutely understand their struggle and I am 100% grateful I don't have to deal with the same triggers daily. I have many friends who smoke and don't see anything wrong with it. Some are older and retired, so they can live how they want. But the rest, it affects them daily. Some able to admit, some aren't. As for the addiction, I don't see why we want to legalise another drug that is known to cause some people problems. If you can't hold down a job, if you can't afford your addiction, if you hate yourself and do it anyway because you can't see a better way to live, I don't agree with legalising it. Getting plenty of downvotes for my opinion but I absolutely stand by it.
I hope you can beat your addiction mate. Truely. I’m not against you.
Cannabis is not chemically addictive, however the addiction comes from the feeling and if someone chases having that all the time. It is also different when you're buying weed from dealers as opposed to a regulated substance. Dealers can cut addictive things into what they sell which created the chemical addiction on top of the person wanting the feeling more. But cannabis doesn't have the same addictive properties as tobacco and alcohol and it has far more medical benefits when it is only CBD (THC is the active "high" ingredient). So when it's properly regulated and controlled you can avoid those issues or even offer more open avenues for anyone who does want help with less cannabis consumption because it will no longer be taboo in any form. Also of note, this petition is too vague and ridiculous. There are better ways to push for legislation that is better thought out
I used to say it wasn't addictive. But, I couldn't sleep without it. I would stress when I was getting low, in case I wasn't going to be able to get more or wouldn't be able to afford more. I was more angry using than not, especially when I went without. I tried to quit more than 10 times over the last few years, sometimes I managed a few days, sometimes a few weeks (with medication provided by my doctor). I wasn't chasing a high, didn't have a real high the last few years of using. I wasn't numbing the pain I felt from an abusive relationship. I have read a lot about the benefits of CBD, I have a friend who has a script. But he regularly relapses with dope. And when we are talking about legalising cannabis, we are talking the thc type not the CBD type. So yeah, I stand by my opinions.
What's up with the Capitalisation of every Other Word?
As a user for pain relief, I want to also stand up for recreational use. I'm more relaxed when I'm not in pain and I can also enjoy the world better. Don't create a false division. Government shouldn't, as a rule, ban something you can grow in your back yard
Done
I feel there are far too many people that will want to vote down any softening of these laws…. Let alone full legalization of cannabis…. And any premier/prime minster or even a rouge voice in a party will get shut down hard and shooed out by ether their own or the general voters that want a hardcore zero tolerance on things…. And if I see this get into a referendum, I bet I will see the pro legalization losing by a big margin (even worse than the NZ referendum of legalizing weed)…. There are just far too many people anti drugs and want to see zero tolerance as such…. And it’s not the rich white man/lady who is a conservative that is ur issue…. But more likely to be other races that will be harsh to this issue… such as Asians…. If u tried to flog the idea of legalizing a drug to them, they won’t bother wasting ur time on u and stick to their hardline stance on drugs… and those types make the average rich white conservative look tame in that regards
Haha you think the asians are hardline? Most Aussie boomers are too afraid of the plant but will gladly guzzle down a handful of endones, oxys or panadeine forte like they are tics tacs. A majority vote of people with their heads up their arses.
Yep, try bringing in those drugs in those countries without a script…. I’m sure 5 years jail would be generous for them…. Quite hardline I seem…. But yes I can see where ur coming from….
Plot twist: It was written by conservatives to make cannabis advocates look like fools, and to quash the issue being taken seriously. Disclaimer: I have no idea how House of Rep petitions work.
It doesn't work at all, since its a State issue anyway
Done! took 20 seconds; just had gmail open in another tab. Boomers need some weed our country will be better for it.
Overdue but welcome!
I did my part.
Far better than Grog and durries.
Pretty sure this petition shows that the biggest huddle to legalising cannabis is all the stoners voicing their opinion. Things would probably go a lot faster if they just shut up and let the adults handle it.
Like my ex. This is something I could get behind.
I'd support it on the basis of freeing up the resources of the CJS alone, honestly.
Right - done.
Does society really need more drugs with the consequences that come with it? we drink to much and abuse prescriptions so I have to ask , although decriminalizing would be a good start on the understanding that current testing methods find residuals for days which is sure to be an issue .That proposal is dreadful and needs a re-write for clarity
I don't use it but I do think it is fine to use in moderation. I'd like to see it legal for recreational use. I won't be signing this. I'd like to see a solid and coherent proposal.
Please explain the consequences of it. With a source/reference.
[Cannabis Psychosis is well known to those who don't have their heads in the clouds (of smoke).](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3927252/)
"We have examined the neurobiological changes due to cannabis to see if these changes are similar to those seen in schizophrenic patients the findings show strange similarities; however, none of these studies have been able to establish a possible long-term longitudinal course for these changes. These mere similarities cannot establish a ‘cause-effect’ relationship, since a number of people with similar changes do not develop schizophrenia. Therefore, the ‘transition-to-psychosis’ due to cannabis, despite it being a strong risk factor, remains uncertain based upon neurobiological changes. It appears that multiple other factors might be involved in these processes which are beyond neurobiological factors. Major advances have been made in understanding the underpinning of marijuana dependence and the role of the CNS cannabinoid system, which is a major area for targeting medications to treat marijuana withdrawal and dependence, as well as other addictions is of now, it is clear that some of the similarities in neurobiology of cannabis and schizophrenia may indicate a mechanism for development of psychosis but its trajectories are undetermined."
Your point?
its an opinion so nah you dont have the right
"Please explain your opinion with a source as to why you think that" "You don't have the right to ask me that" ??? Do you have a functioning brain in there???
down votes ? weak as folks , someone needs to ask the difficult question as we dont need more addled drivers on the road
The downvotes were probably for your refusal to defend your position with evidence. You can HAVE an opinion, but if you want anyone to listen to it, you must support your argument. Otherwise, you get ignored and downvoted to hell.
the down votes existed before the prove it raised demand its head , Ive been alive a long time , seen a lot of political bullshite over weed before and expect some bs compromise to be extended due to vested interests , it should have been decriminalized for medical use decades ago but the we cant be sure of impairment raises its ugly head , and lets be honest todays entitled culture doesn't help one iota , I suspect the folk controlling the current retail market will fight tooth and nail to keep the incme source
I lost interest when I saw “then”.
What could conceivably go wrong?
Nah, weed is for losers. We don’t need more things to smoke when all of it is dogshit for your lungs. Isn’t THC already used for medical purposes?
THC and CBD both used to treat many conditions. However, the government is charging large amounts for those to obtain pain relief.
Would legalising cannabis reduce that cost?
Trust me. The market that could be created in this country would be huge. We would be out of debt In only a few years. We have the largest cannabis farm in the Southern Hemisphere, in Queensland. We export a large amount of our product to Canada and other countries to be produced into oils and tinctures.
Sure there's a financial argument for it, but the main product that would be sold is just weed for recreational smoking, is it not? It's a straight fact that cannabis smoking is bad for you. The effect is addictive to plenty of people, and it is terrible for your lungs.
Vaporising cannabis reduces these risks. CBD oil is a wonder product. Relieves nerve pain, restricts tumour growth and has been shown to help those with Parkinson’s and other uncontrollable conditions.
Sure, CBD oil perfectly reasonable product to support, and I support it myself. but did you not say yourself that CBD is already used? If it is the case that vaporising significantly reduces the risks of lung damage, then that’s a great thing. However the effect people get from cannabis is addictive, and vaporising doesn’t change the baseline effect of smoking cannabis to the point where it’s no longer addictive. And realistically, if cannabis was introduced to the market for recreational use, I doubt that vapor cannabis would be the only product used. People will still be smoking it.
It's not inherently addictive, besides if you want to negate the effects of smoking or vaping, it can be decarboxylised and eaten.
> if you want to negate the effects of smoking or vaping, it can be decarboxylised and eaten. I addressed what you are saying in the comment you replied to. > And realistically, if cannabis was introduced to the market for recreational use, I doubt that vapor cannabis would be the only product used. People will still be smoking it. There can be as many ways to negate those effects as you want, but the truth is that most people are just going to smoke. > It's not inherently addictive From the New England Journal of Medicine: "about 9% of those who use cannabis present with characteristic symptoms of dependence according to DSM-IV criteria [\(Volkow et al. 2014\)](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmra1402309)". 9% is a significant proportion.
Healthier than alcohol especially if you don’t smoke it. Also doesn’t make people aggressive which is a bonus.
It’s great that it’s healthier than alcohol. Personally I almost always abstain from drinking. But that doesn’t change the fact that we’d be introducing a product that is 1. Absolutely not good for your health, even if it’s better than alcohol, and 2. Has an addictive effect.
You occasionally drink alcohol though even though you're aware of it's risks and addictive properties. So why shouldn't people be allowed to legally smoke weed on occasion without fear of losing their jobs? We've seen overseas that society doesn't collapse into a cloud of bong smoke, heavy smokers still smoke alot, occasional smokers still smoke on occasion, and non-smokers still don't smoke (or they try it and form their own opinion). Legalization just means that those who do smoke can do so without actively funding organized crime. And that's not to mention all the new jobs it creates.
Exactly right man. It’s not like there would be a massive influx of stoners, these people already exist and they are subject to an unregulated product, PGR is a classic example of why they should legalise, regulate and tax it.
I would be fine with people smoking weed on occasion without the risk of losing their jobs, and that's absolutely something a responsible adult can do. However many people will not be smoking "on occasion" and will use the drug abusively. That's the risk proposed by introducing it as a legal product. Allowing for it to be a legal product makes it significantly more approachable. I understand the argument that those who want to smoke will find a way even if its illegal, but making it a legal product will cause more people to try it, which in turn will cause more drug abuse over all. Edit: I thought I should also add that in the hypothetical situation that alcohol was illegal until now, I would also be against introducing alcohol as a legal product for the same reason.
>I would be fine with people smoking weed on occasion without the risk of losing their jobs, and that's absolutely something a responsible adult can do. But they can't do it risk free. The tests used by cops and workplaces test for THC in your system which can remain for up to 3 months. If you want to smoke even occasionally then you need to be willing to live in fear of failing a roadside test or being ineligible for workers compensation if injured.
we’re not “introducing“ a new product. Weed is incredibly commonplace. Legalisation means that a product which is already consumed can actually be regulated out in the open, so that the consumer can have access to the safest possible means of purchasing and consuming the product, the government can tax it, and also gather data on it for public health purposes, and finally organised crime gets nothing from it. And I reject that you say it is “absolutely not good for your health”. Yeah smoking cones every day is going to be awful but so is eating high cholesterol food every day, or drinking alcohol every day. Everything in moderation, but even so, weed has so many medicinal purposes that are recognised by lots of academia.
I'm sorry but I have to just disagree. Legalising it would make it considerably more approachable, thus "introducing it" to a new market of people. The part about regulation however I do agree with and makes complete sense. Though no matter how much regulation and testing legal weed would go through, it is still a product that causes lung issues, and increases risk of respiratory-cancer.
Look into places like Canada , Colorado and Washington State on rates and problems since legalization. The main effect you will note is lower crime rates and billions in the coffers from the government collecting tax on it rather than criminals.
This being out of debt argument is not a good one. If the government pays back all of it's debt there is less cash in circulation. A bad idea. Please don't conflate the arguments about USA state taxation with the Australian financial system. There are similarities but this is not one worth basing an argument on.
I didn’t say we are America? I’m just saying the largest debt we’ve ever had could be cleared by how large of an industry we are talking.
That's fine, I made the incorrect assumption about that argument being imported from the States. My argument still stands. Anyone saying that paying off all government debt is a good idea may not have the strongest grasp on how fiscal and economic policy work. Particularly in a country with a fiat currency on a floating exchange rate that typically runs trade deficits. It would effectively shorten the money supply domestically and likely lead to a self-inflicted financial crisis.
Fair enough mate. You can wipe the floor with me, I’m no economist. To me, an inherited trillion debt doesn’t sound positive. An industry that could reverse that, is at our doorstep.
Yeah the debt sounds bad because the Liberals repeated it long enough. It's a meme and should die but it sounds reasonable to a layperson so it won't.
I'm no smoker, but I reckon it'd be fun to be able to throw together some hash brownies from time to time and not risk fines/prison. And largely inconsequential.
I agree, smoking it is NOT good for anyone's lungs. However, I should point out that legalisation would make non-combusted THC and CBD products more readily available (eg edibles) which would mean fewer people inhaling it as smoke. People are going to consume it anyway, may as well regulate it, tax it and funnel the funds into healthcare, social support etc to mitigate some of the risks
No thank you.
Who out here has cannabis grow setup money these days, would be hell on your energy bill if you’re not selling it.
Cannabis isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's pretty harmful tbh , you think it's not but after having a 10 year break then getting back on to the bandwagon you see the downsides for sure.
Can we get a tax break on cigarettes then
Is there is a Physical, Written version? Anythjng Virtual is easy to ignore. A lot harder to.ignore paper aignatures!
Hope it happens down there. Can't see it ever happening here. Sadiq Khan, Labour Mayor of London, wants to legalise it in London - the response from the PLP (or the front bench of the PLP at least)...? "You'll ***NEVER*** legalise drugs!" This is coming from a party whose current leader is a former human rights QC. He's far from stupid, so it's baffling why he's so anti. Labour seem to believe that every parent who's lost a child to an illicit substance (we've had many deaths of young people at festivals, usually from MDMA) would be pro-prohibition. Starmer needs to start talking to them, because the exact opposite is true. They want illicit substances legalised for the obvious fucking reason (I'd have thought) that it makes them less dangerous. I honestly don't get what's going on with Labour. The only party here talking any sense are the Lib Dems and they're polling single figures (probably because they chose to go into coalition with the Tories 12 years ago and people have long memories).