Page 1 of 8 1234 ... Last
Results 1 to 25 of 191

  1. Exclamation
    #1

    Oh yes finally!

    At the 2020 general election there will be a BINDING referendum question on legalized personal cannabis use

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...nment-confirms

    Bring on 2020

  2. Post
    #2
    "Yes's" gonna have it if the poll is anything to go by;
    Name:  Referendum.JPG
Views: 705
Size:  28.9 KB


    How you gonna be voting Grim?

  3. Post
    #3
    As a non user i know several people who do for pain management. While not terminal etc it is the only thing that makes their pain manageable.
    For them alone i would support this.

  4. Post
    #4
    yess

  5. Post
    #5
    Yeah I don't see the issue. Alcohol is more dangerous and useless.

  6. Post
    #6
    Would vote yes but smoking it should be taxed as heavily as cigarettes.

    Smoking anything is bad. Cookies on the other hand, go hog wild.

  7. Post
    #7
    suntoucher wrote:
    Would vote yes but smoking it should be taxed as heavily as cigarettes.

    Smoking anything is bad. Cookies on the other hand, go hog wild.
    This - it's nonsensical to (justifiably) have this smokefree 2025 initiative and then legalise smoking weed.

    edit - just saw it is a binding referendum. That is stupid having lay folk decide something with potentially serious health and medical consequences.

  8. Post
    #8
    Indigo1 wrote:
    This - it's nonsensical to (justifiably) have this smokefree 2025 initiative and then legalise smoking weed.

    edit - just saw it is a binding referendum. That is stupid having lay folk decide something with potentially serious health and medical consequences.
    To be fair you'd have to also go after shisha and vaping if just smoking something was the concern - I'd hazard a guess that the consumption of marijuana on an individual basis is far lower than ciggarettes for the most part, not to mention the health consequences are lower - although there is still risk of COPD in users, and we have a particularly at risk population for the mental health risks carried with marijuana.

    That said, at least you can just eat it if you're worried about the smoke side of things /shrug

  9. Post
    #9
    Well.. That puts an end to my visa worries come 2020

  10. Post
    #10
    ClavulanateV2 wrote:
    To be fair you'd have to also go after shisha and vaping if just smoking something was the concern - I'd hazard a guess that the consumption of marijuana on an individual basis is far lower than ciggarettes for the most part, not to mention the health consequences are lower - although there is still risk of COPD in users, and we have a particularly at risk population for the mental health risks carried with marijuana.

    That said, at least you can just eat it if you're worried about the smoke side of things /shrug
    Shisha (using tobacco) is taxed at the tobacco rate. Weed wouldn't be default taxed, though, because it doesn't have tobacco content.

    Also I'd disagree with the health consequences being lower than tobacco, it's the burning product going into the lungs that's the health consequence of smoking cigarettes. Vaping has its own problems and probably should be considered although it's not as bad as either of them as it's vaporisation rather than combustion. Nicotine isn't the cause of lung and throat cancers.

    On a controlled basis this should eliminate most of the unwanted chemicals in vaping, but likely most of them still are there because it's unregulated.

    Perhaps the tax should be updated to "combustibles intended for inhalation", commercially they could just produce marijuana products that aren't smokable to avoid the tax.

  11. Post
    #11
    Indigo1 wrote:
    This - it's nonsensical to (justifiably) have this smokefree 2025 initiative and then legalise smoking weed.

    edit - just saw it is a binding referendum. That is stupid having lay folk decide something with potentially serious health and medical consequences.
    Like other countries legalizing it means there will be many forms in which it can be consumed

    Coca cola is about to launch Coke with weed in it, Overseas you can all sorts of products with edible weed in it from cookies to cake to whatever

    You don't need to smoke it and even if you did, it's not filled with a million cancerous chemicals like cigarettes

    There is no reason why you wouldn't be able to consume it in a edible, swallowed or drinkable form, then tax the smoking form like cigarettes if you so wish

  12. Post
    #12
    It's a shame that weed culture is so dryballs though

  13. Post
    #13
    suntoucher wrote:
    Shisha (using tobacco) is taxed at the tobacco rate. Weed wouldn't be default taxed, though, because it doesn't have tobacco content.

    Also I'd disagree with the health consequences being lower than tobacco, it's the burning product going into the lungs that's the health consequence of smoking cigarettes. Vaping has its own problems and probably should be considered although it's not as bad as either of them as it's vaporisation rather than combustion. Nicotine isn't the cause of lung and throat cancers.

    On a controlled basis this should eliminate most of the unwanted chemicals, but likely most of them still are there because it's unregulated.

    Perhaps the tax should be updated to "combustables intended for inhalation"
    Yes it's not nicotine, it's the bazillion other chemicals in tobacco which are carcinogenic.

    AFAIK lung cancer rates are far far higher in tobacco smokers vs marijuana smokers but COPD is at least comparable - though I'm going off some data I read a few years ago so my memory on it might not be that accurate and I don't care enough to look into it.

  14. Post
    #14
    ClavulanateV2 wrote:
    Yes it's not nicotine, it's the bazillion other chemicals in tobacco which are carcinogenic.

    AFAIK lung cancer rates are far far higher in tobacco smokers vs marijuana smokers but COPD is at least comparable - though I'm going off some data I read a few years ago so my memory on it might not be that accurate and I don't care enough to look into it.
    Likely but marijuana users rarely chain smoke, in part due to the cost, much like tobacco chain smokers are far fewer than twenty years ago.

    How do they compare in equivalent time spent smoking?

  15. Post
    #15
    suntoucher wrote:
    Likely but marijuana users rarely chain smoke, in part due to the cost, much like tobacco chain smokers are far fewer than twenty years ago.

    How do they compare in equivalent time spent smoking?
    Like I said in my original post, likely much much lower...? I don't think anyone is going to argue that inhaling smoke is ever good for you, and is probably carcinogenic.... the point is the chemicals found in tobacco are the primary cause of cancers rather than just the smoke from the burning leaves.

  16. Post
    #16
    There will be some effect on businesses here

    Some already include weed in their drug testing procedures and imagine many more would start doing it after 2020 too

    However I believe they need to split THC from CBD - and potentially only require employees not to have THC in their system during work hours, but CBD (which is what reduces pain, inflammation etc) should be perfectly fine and has no "high" effect that THC does

    All weed products will need official labels to tell consumers if THC is present so consumers know what they are taking. To be clear, CBD does not make you high, it only relieves pain and inflammation, THC makes you high

    And any THC containing products would need to be R18+

  17. Post
    #17
    Will be interesting to see how many employers continue with their zero tolerance policy in the workplace even if this does get legalised. I personally doubt that my company will change, we'll just get drug dogs coming into the office on a more regular basis.

  18. Post
    #18
    ClavulanateV2 wrote:
    Like I said in my original post, likely much much lower...? I don't think anyone is going to argue that inhaling smoke is ever good for you, and is probably carcinogenic.... the point is the chemicals found in tobacco are the primary cause of cancers rather than just the smoke from the burning leaves.
    Disagree.

    ALA does as well.
    https://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/sm...ng-health.html
    Smoke is harmful to lung health. Whether from burning wood, tobacco or marijuana, toxins and carcinogens are released from the combustion of materials. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke.4-7

    Beyond just what's in the smoke alone, marijuana is typically smoked differently than tobacco. Marijuana smokers tend to inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than cigarette smokers, which leads to a greater exposure per breath to tar.8
    InvisibleShadow wrote:
    Will be interesting to see how many employers continue with their zero tolerance policy in the workplace even if this does get legalised. I personally doubt that my company will change, we'll just get drug dogs coming into the office on a more regular basis.
    Ideally it gets treated the same as alcohol. And employees aren't stupid enough to treat it differently.

  19. Post
    #19
    Don't smoke but I think personal use should not carry convictions. Won't smoke if it's legal either, just not my thing.

  20. Post
    #20
    Goddamn SirGrim! - you're making some well-informed, balanced and sensible points in this thread

  21. Post
    #21
    SirGrim wrote:
    There will be some effect on businesses here

    Some already include weed in their drug testing procedures and imagine many more would start doing it after 2020 too

    However I believe they need to split THC from CBD - and potentially only require employees not to have THC in their system during work hours, but CBD (which is what reduces pain, inflammation etc) should be perfectly fine and has no "high" effect that THC does

    All weed products will need official labels to tell consumers if THC is present so consumers know what they are taking. To be clear, CBD does not make you high, it only relieves pain and inflammation, THC makes you high

    And any THC containing products would need to be R18+
    I'd roll with this.

  22. Post
    #22
    InvisibleShadow wrote:
    Will be interesting to see how many employers continue with their zero tolerance policy in the workplace even if this does get legalised. I personally doubt that my company will change, we'll just get drug dogs coming into the office on a more regular basis.
    Thatís a good point as it sticks around in your system for weeks doesnít it?

  23. Post
    #23
    SirGrim wrote:
    There will be some effect on businesses here

    Some already include weed in their drug testing procedures and imagine many more would start doing it after 2020 too

    However I believe they need to split THC from CBD - and potentially only require employees not to have THC in their system during work hours, but CBD (which is what reduces pain, inflammation etc) should be perfectly fine and has no "high" effect that THC does

    All weed products will need official labels to tell consumers if THC is present so consumers know what they are taking. To be clear, CBD does not make you high, it only relieves pain and inflammation, THC makes you high

    And any THC containing products would need to be R18+
    Agree

    If weed were to become legal, I'd prefer to buy it from an official supplier and it cuts out the need to buy it from dodgy tinny houses or gang pads. Put it into shops and sell it to adults. Have different variations too for a different reaction like aiding sleep, giving a buzz, stimulate the mind, help with pain etc.

    Heck, they could even add some tax to it and spend that tax money on health and education.

  24. Post
    #24
    SirGrim wrote:
    There will be some effect on businesses here

    Some already include weed in their drug testing procedures and imagine many more would start doing it after 2020 too

    However I believe they need to split THC from CBD - and potentially only require employees not to have THC in their system during work hours, but CBD (which is what reduces pain, inflammation etc) should be perfectly fine and has no "high" effect that THC does

    All weed products will need official labels to tell consumers if THC is present so consumers know what they are taking. To be clear, CBD does not make you high, it only relieves pain and inflammation, THC makes you high

    And any THC containing products would need to be R18+
    Seems pretty reasonable.

  25. Post
    #25
    JC wrote:
    It's a shame that weed culture is so dryballs though
    Go halves on a farm in Northlandís rich volcanic fields?

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 8 1234 ... Last