According to a cannabis reform organisation based in Washington DC, thats exactly what Mr Brown has done, when he spoke recently about the reasons behind his almost unilateral quest for the further criminalisation of cannabis. Stop The Drug War(.org)
Stop the Drug War (DRCNet) is an international organization working for an end to drug prohibition worldwide and for interim policy reform in US drug laws and criminal justice system.
Scott Morgan wrote recently in the "Chronicle Blog" ;
"As British PM Gordon Browne prepares to ignore the recommendation of his own Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs and increase penalties for marijuana, he reveals once again how little he actually knows about the subject:
"I don't think that the previous studies took into account that so much of the cannabis on the streets is now of a lethal quality and we really have got to send out a message to young people -- this is not acceptable," Brown said. [Reuters]
Any way you look at it, this is just a total lie. The word "lethal" as defined by dictionary.com means the following:
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or causing death; deadly; fatal: a lethal weapon; a lethal dose.
2. made to cause death: a lethal chamber; a lethal attack.
3. causing great harm or destruction: The disclosures were lethal to his candidacy.
Even the 3rd definition, which may be the one Browne intends, is essentially figurative and is only used to describe non-living things, in this case a political campaign. Lethal
The word is derived from the latin letalis, meaning death. It's just an incredibly poor adjective to describe a substance that has never killed anyone in human history. Lie
He says he wants to "send out a message to young people," but his message is just a big lie." Irrational
So even in the USA, the irrationality of criminalising cannabis and its users by reclassifying back to a class B drug, is thought to be a ridiculous policy change, making the Labour party a laughing stock around the world.
If this law change is meant to send a message to our young people I think its succeeded with aplomb, except the message which its delivered has done little to convince sometimes "long-term" cannabis users to stop, and the publicity has actually had the opposite effect, by hi-lighting the greater cannabis debate, introducing it into the lives of people who were not necessarily involved in it previously.
In America this is especially the case since February, when the ACP (American College of Physicians), spoke out in favour of medical marijuana.
Clarity
Which should bring things once and for all, into stark perspective, if we are looking for truly evidencial based drugs policy.
There are a great many doctors around the world, who believe in the benefits of using marijuana as medicine. Unfortunately a great many of them choose NOT to speak in favour of cannabis, for fear of being ostracized in the work-place.
The one or two that have spoken out were often discredited, labeled as "quacks" by the greater pharmaceutical community. Those with a vested interest in making sure people were not able to self-medicate by growing cannabis.
But thankfully, respected names such as Dr Phillip Leveque , a practising physician from Oregon, and Dr Lester Grinspoon who is Professor Emeritus of Phsychiatry at Harvard University, (a man who was researching for an "anti-cannabis" paper, and who's mind was changed by the research he unearthed), have stood up to the barrage of negative publicity because they were sure of their opinions, founded as they were on the language they speak daily - the language of scientific evidence.
Former US Surgeon General from the Clinton era, and a current professor emeritus at the University of Arkansas School of Medicine Dr Jocelyn Elders thinks there should be absolutely no ambiguity regarding the medical worth of cannabis.
Dr Elders was speaking in support of the American College of Physicians. A 124,000 strong group of doctors specializing in internal medicine and related subspecialties, including cardiology, neurology, pulmonary disease, oncology and infectious diseases, and who have overtly given their support to the use of marijuana as medicine.
Dr Elders has called for more research, but she also added a critical point, "The efficacy of medical marijuana has already been established, and it's time for studies designed to determine the best dose and route of delivery."
At this stage the "anti-cannabis" brigade are generally chirping about the fuzzy boundaries which exist between medical cannabis, and recreational cannabis. US presidential candidate Rudi Giuliani went one further when he announced "The pro medical marijuana movement is just a pre-cursor for greater marijuana legislation change and nothing else".
We're not here to argue one way or another, but the fact remains that 124,000 doctors have backed marijuana as medicine, without any dire warnings regarding health issues or concerns about the "lethality" of cannabis the drug.
Sure they didn't say "go ahead - fill your boots" either, but the paper is on the table for the first time in around 9 decades, which is a step in the right direction.
Anyone who regularly follows the cannabis debate already knows this, and yet, the Labour government under Gordon Brown have not so much as acknowledged this information even exists, as they try once again, to hammer home a "message" which is based on policies which have absolutely nothing to do with public health, and everything to do with another agenda entirely.
Child psychiatrists have long practised the theories that young people are really just young adults and react well to being treated as such.
But the message the UK cannabis community is receiving has little to do with tolerance and understanding, and everything to do with the public "doing as they are told" and anyone bringing up a "stroppy teenager" or two will know how that policy generally goes down?
Like a lead ballon.
We published a story recently saying cannabis could be the "death of the Prime Minister", as commentators forecast an early demise to his career after a poor showing in the polls, and if recent events are anything to go by, his expiry could be sooner than we all first thought.
But whether it happens or not, isn't it about time the cannabis debate was discussed on an open level playing field, using all of the scientific evidence which exists currently?
If the government wants to send a message on behalf of the Great British public then its about time the Great British public was asked for its opinion, by way of a National Referendum on cannabis.
This should put the topic to bed once and for all!
Join us on the Canna Zine cannabis forums and have your say. Canna Zine - Daily zine for the global cannabis scene - Join us!
|
