Weak sentencing…

[Declan]

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

 The point about this story is that when a conviction for a horrendous proven crime is challenged by default (even under stress) as a racist miscarriage undermines genuine societal problems that most of us should want to fix.

Or is it the reporting of the comment and the subsequent making a big deal of it that does the undermining.

[code99]

On 10/13/2022 at 9:59 AM, HeliX said:

No it isn't. Cannabis had nothing to do with this case other than allowing the defence to try to clutch at straws.

The story makes a better case for banning alcohol than it does for not legalising cannabis.

Drunken people can be violent, dangerous and do despicable things – which is why pubs and restaurants when they see somebody who is ‘over the limit’ refuse to serve them more alcohol, or even serve them at all. What a cocktail of drugs mixed with alcohol does to human brain, and consequently human behaviour, is still being researched from medical and scientific perspectives i.e., it all depends on a myriad of interacting chemical, biological and psychological factors.

It is true that in some countries (e.g., Australia) consumption of medical cannabis is becoming available to more patients, but this distribution is tightly controlled and is restricted to a small range of specific medical conditions. I am in favour of medically prescribed cannabis for patients who will genuinely benefit from them/ have no other effective treatments. But the processes of authorisation and patient follow-up need to be closely supervised.

What I am not at all in favour of is the desire of some IoM residents to turn Douglas into a ‘new’ Amsterdam (in pursuit of a quick profit from expanding the so-called ‘tourism’). Especially, at a time when the ‘real’ Amsterdam is curtailing their own decades-long experiment with ‘drugs-seeking tourists’. Why? Because there will be a range of unintended and unpredictable negative consequences for the wider Island – that I am certain of.  

[manxfisherman]

3 minutes ago, code99 said:

 

What I am not at all in favour of is the desire of some IoM residents to turn Douglas into a ‘new’ Amsterdam (in pursuit of a quick profit from expanding the so-called ‘tourism’). Especially, at a time when the ‘real’ Amsterdam is curtailing their own decades-long experiment with ‘drugs-seeking tourists’. Why? Because there will be a range of unintended and unpredictable negative consequences for the wider Island – that I am certain of.  

There are always consequences and it is wise to try to understand them. I'd like to see cannabis fully legal but totally understand these concerns. That's why I think there should be a two year staging post. Make it legal for people to grow their own for a while, charge them £200 for the privilege, tell them its up to them to act sensibly, see how that goes, if society doesn't collapse then look at broader legalisation allowing cafes/ retailers.

[quilp]

18 minutes ago, code99 said:

Especially, at a time when the ‘real’ Amsterdam is curtailing their own decades-long experiment with ‘drugs-seeking tourists’. Why? Because there will be a range of unintended and unpredictable negative consequences for the wider Island – that I am certain of.  

You don't half make some unfounded assumptions in your usually lengthy posts. Can you provide detail, or a link maybe to these "unpredictable negative consequences for the wider Island" that you are so “certain of"? Tell us what you think these consequences are. 

Amsterdam has been cracking down on unlicensed coffee-shops and cannabis traders for years, it started happening when I lived there decades ago but this is far removed from your claim that Amsterdam is "curtailing" (stopping?) its "experiment with drug-seeking tourists."

Your moniker almost certainly has you as a serving or ex-cop so it's understandable that your long-held view on cannabis and the law is wholly contradicted by this newer, more lateral approach. 

[code99]

10 minutes ago, quilp said:

1. You don't half make some unfounded assumptions in your usually lengthy posts. Can you provide detail, or a link maybe to these "unpredictable negative consequences for the wider Island" that you are so “certain of"? Tell us what you think these consequences are. 

2. Your moniker almost certainly has you as a serving or ex-cop so it's understandable that your long-held view on cannabis and the law is wholly contradicted by this newer, more lateral approach. 

3. Amsterdam has been cracking down on unlicensed coffee-shops and cannabis traders for years, it started happening when I lived there decades ago but this is far removed from your claim that Amsterdam is "curtailing" (stopping?) its "experiment with drug-seeking tourists."

1. You don't have to read my posts;

2. Wrong!

3. https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/amsterdam-mayor-to-move-ahead-with-tourist-cannabis-caffe-ban/

 

[quilp]

1 minute ago, code99 said:

1. You don't have to read my posts;

2. Wrong!

3. https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/amsterdam-mayor-to-move-ahead-with-tourist-cannabis-caffe-ban/

1. I endeavour to read all posts.

2. Don't believe you.

3. Doesn't sound like "curtailing" the cannabis market to me...

[manxfisherman]

8 minutes ago, code99 said:

 

3. https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/amsterdam-mayor-to-move-ahead-with-tourist-cannabis-caffe-ban/

 

This story makes the news every 3 years or so and has done for at least the 20 years I've been nipping over there for a smoke and probably much longer.

There are definitely lessons to be learned from the mistakes that have been made over there though. For an island like ours you would have to produce the cannabis entirely on island, because drugs are illegal elsewhere, and moving them involves smuggling. Smugglers don't just smuggle one thing. This has been a big problem in the netherlands over the years, a lot of heroin and women. Much worse than the cannabis.

[quilp]

The honourable Mayor of Amsterdam was recently interviewed by Bloomberg. What she said about cannabis, coffee-shops, and organised crime bears little resemblance to the catastrophising drama @code99 likes to believe is happening. For starters she thinks cannabis should be legalised, quality-controlled and available...

 

[code99]

6 minutes ago, manxfisherman said:

This story makes the news every 3 years or so and has done for at least the 20 years I've been nipping over there for a smoke and probably much longer.

There are definitely lessons to be learned from the mistakes that have been made over there though. For an island like ours you would have to produce the cannabis entirely on island, because drugs are illegal elsewhere, and moving them involves smuggling. Smugglers don't just smuggle one thing. This has been a big problem in the netherlands over the years, a lot of heroin and women. Much worse than the cannabis.

Thank you for your sensible post - the Island needs to debate these issues, and address/ do them properly (i.e. "we are playing all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order" springs to mind).

[quilp]

2 minutes ago, code99 said:

Thank you for your sensible post - the Island needs to debate these issues, and address/ do them properly

The debate on this issue has already taken place, very shortly medicinal cannabis will be available to those who need it, albeit at an hugely expensive cost to the user. It's but a short step to decriminalisation and regulation. 

2 minutes ago, code99 said:

(i.e. "we are playing all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order" springs to mind).

Do you know what key we're in..? 

[offshoremanxman]

In typical Shaun Ryder style he gets the level of debate right. 

“I’m going to be controversial here and call the Home Secretary a knob” 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by offshoremanxman

[John Wright]

5 hours ago, code99 said:

Thank you for your sensible post - the Island needs to debate these issues, and address/ do them properly (i.e. "we are playing all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order" springs to mind).

 

5 hours ago, quilp said:

The debate on this issue has already taken place, very shortly medicinal cannabis will be available to those who need it, albeit at an hugely expensive cost to the user. It's but a short step to decriminalisation and regulation. 

Do you know what key we're in..? 

Even if Tynwald passed decriminalisation legislation it won’t get Royal Assent.

Bermuda has passed decriminalisation legislation early in 2022. UK government has refused to allow the Governor to sign Royal Assent.

The attitude is that the UK, and it’s dependencies and overseas territories are bound by international treaties that require criminalisation unless for medical or scientific research.

[manxfisherman]

17 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

Even if Tynwald passed decriminalisation legislation it won’t get Royal Assent.

Bermuda has passed decriminalisation legislation early in 2022. UK government has refused to allow the Governor to sign Royal Assent.

What would be the consequences of ignoring it? 

[John Wright]

4 minutes ago, manxfisherman said:

What would be the consequences of ignoring it? 

Without royal assent a bill passed by Tynwald doesn’t become law. To become law legislation has to be passed by Keys, LegCo, signed in Tynwald and get royal assent.

Theres nothing to stop the Minister for Home Affairs and Justice to agree with the Chief Constable circumstances in which the current law won’t be enforced.

That already happens with things like the DARS scheme.

[manxfisherman]

So say the IOM Gov wanted to change the law on something, wrote a new one, passed it in the keys, passed legco, signed it off and the the UK said no, but the IOM said so what we're doing it anyway, what would be the consequences? No one could be prosecuted under the new law cos it isn't an official new law? What else?