… and not very well
Mr Brown backed Mr Johnson’s decision and defended the right of elected ministers to reject the advice of scientists at times. He said: â€œOn climate change, or health, for example, we take the best scientific advise possible. But in an area like drugs we have to look at it in the round.
In the round? Ah, yes, I see here you have proved that 2+2=4. But, you see, in this area, we have to look at it in the round, so I declare it to be 3.
Lots of random “for the children” and “mixed messages” nonsense, and then.
He rejected the argument that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes.
â€œWe’ve seen brands of cannabis that are distorted by other products and ingredients. That’s one of the reasons why it’s important to send a message that drug abuse is not acceptable and a criminal offence.â€
(Yeah, your spliff becomes dangerous when cannabis is mixed with tobacco, but that’s because of the tobacco.)
There’s so much wrong with those sentences…
All he is doing is repeating his message. He can’t really defend it. Look at this statement. Drugs are a health issue, yet:
On climate change, or health, for example, we take the best scientific advise possible.
So they admit that his advice is scientific and that they’re ignoring it.
Coming on the heels of the UK fiasco, Senator Grassley is trying to keep legalization (and even decrim) off the table in Jim Webb’s criminal justice commission bill:
Wow, that’s a rather blunt admission of irrationality and stupidity, especially for a non-American drug warrior.
Obviously insofar as marijuana is adulterated with anything (and I’ve never heard of “rat poison laced pot”), it’s because of the black market.
Will the UK dump drug prohibition once America collapses and they no longer have to kiss our ass? I hope so.
Jacob responds to Jon Ferry on David Nutt firings
Mr Ferry… why do you not come out strongly when the RCMP (Or, as it was last week, the OPP) issue press releases with unsubstantiated and alarmist statements about the danger of marijuana cultivation facilities?
This bit is farking nuts in so many ways:
How’s about the mixed message of ignoring objective peer-reviewed scientific data, Gordon?
And targeting young people? Please. From what I’ve seen, if one has access to primo bud, it’s more of a matter of keeping young people, middle-aged and old hippies from bugging the shit out of their dealers.
BTW, Pete, the title of this post is full of win!
I think the statement just after ignoring science is just as rediculous
“We have got to look not just at what medics and scientists are saying to us â€” and we take that very seriously â€” but also what impact different decisions can have on young, vulnerable people.”
So we’re going to ignore science AND doctors. Who needs empirical evidence and concurring anecdotal evidence, when we can just make shit up?
UKâ€™s Drugs Czar Fired For Marijuana Truths
Cybrary list of opposing articles…
More Resignations Amid Drugs Row Nov 1, 2009 U2b
He’ll be gone soon enough. The conservatives are probably going to win the next election.
Trouble is, they probably have as small a regard for liberty as Labor in the UK. The last administration on that police state island that cared even a little for freedom was the Thatcher admin.
“Weâ€™ve seen brands of cannabis that are distorted by other products and ingredients” – Yes because it is illegal to produce so therefore not regulated or controlled, our laws CREATE the problems, anyone who cannot see this is BLIND.