Yeah, they are pretty interesting questions. I suppose a question like 'Who is profiting from illegal weed?' is part of that as well. Here's PH opposing the motion "This house would legalise cannabis" at a debate in Southampton a couple of months ago.Cunt wrote:Peter, and the most convincing bit was asking 'who would profit from legalized weed', along with 'who is funding the push to legalize weed'. I don't know the answers, but they are interesting questions.Brian Peacock wrote:Christopher or Peter? And what did they say?Cunt wrote:I am not such a big supporter of legalizing weed. I used to be, but recently had my opinion changed by a guy called Hitchins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M76LEySMxU8
Hitchens at c.23 minutes. His argument: it's illegal but the law is not enforced, so effectively legal, but cannabis is stupifying and users are prone to mental health difficulties. The 'billionaire big dope' lobby are knowingly pushing a harmful substance just like 'big tobacco' have done and continue to do. This lobby are ramping up for marketing and advertising, and in so doing are preparing to cynically abuse the public. If made legal the cannabis lobby would be handed a bona fide motivation to lobby government and donate to political parties etc - thin end of the wedge. Medical use is a red herring. Maintaining the current status quo reduces supply and demand - which is a good thing.
Seems to me that his argument against cannabis could apply equally to alcohol or tobacco.
For my part, I think we each own our own body and therefore carry personal responsibility for what we do with it and what we put in it. Nobody has a problem with this when it comes to alcohol, which despite its potential for harm we are encouraged to partake of responsibly. Hitchens' points about profiteering from intoxicants are valid ones, but he treats cannabis as a special case and thus reduces his point to a rather shakey moral argument about the inherent irresponsibility of doing 'Drugs': Cannabis, a 'Drug' because it is illegal, cannot be taken responsibly precisely because breaking the law to partake is irresponsible - therefore to legalise cannabis would be to encourage irresponsibility in consumers, producers, and retailers. Basically saying that cannabis cannot be legalised because it is illegal, and therefore a bad thing, doesn't really stand up that well - though it's a point he forwards with some force.
I don't do weed btw.