Colby Hanks: As a long-time beneficiary of medicinal cannabis, I very much support its use (“Australians still waiting for grass to grow for medicinal cannabis use”). The current schedule is too narrow in scope and most GPs have little interest in prescribing it. Legalising it for recreational use would not only introduce a host of laws regarding quality, but it would also bring in untold taxation benefits — and all at the expense of organised crime!
When the health deficits of cannabis are less than either alcohol or tobacco, what’s not to like?
Daniel Phelan writes: I have had chronic pain for some 15 years, which has badly affected sleep. I have had a hip transplant, sacroiliac nerves burnt out, psoas tendon treated and many sleeping tables, opioids, etc, taken — all unsatisfactory. Over the past three years, small amounts of medicinal THC cannabis taken at bedtime give me a good night’s sleep.
Warwick Hempel writes: I am in my mid-70s. I suffer from muscle aches and pains and have been on Prednisone for the pain for at least five years. I’m now told that I am on it for life because my body can no longer produce the natural chemicals it requires to combat pain.
A few years ago I got my doctor to prescribe medical cannabis. There was a complicated procedure while the TGA approved my use. I live on the Central Coast of NSW. The cannabis oils, containing both CBD and THC, had to be ordered from Brisbane. It was quite expensive — $500 for two small bottles. I took them as prescribed. I think they did help me sleep a little better, but they did not relieve much pain. After about a year the pharmacy in Brisbane stopped replying to my order requests. No reason given.
As I was not getting any relief from pain, the cost was prohibitive and I was told the cannabis could show up in a police roadside drug test resulting in the loss of my driving licence. I didn’t try to continue with medical cannabis.
Alex Jimenez writes: I am a professional HC (truck) licensed driver. I have driven more than 25,000 kilometres happily stoned around Australia without any problems. No speeding fines, no near-misses and no threats to anyone because the effect of driving stoned is to raise one’s awareness of the dangers of the road (“Is NSW ready for cannabis reform? Weed activists prepare for the election”). But then I was tested at a random drug test in South Australia and was fined nearly $1000 for possessing less than 25 milligrams of cannabis and the accompanying peace pipe, and another $1000 for driving while happily stoned in a peaceful, non-violent or illegal manner. I will now lose my licence for three months, my livelihood and my good reputation with no prior criminal convictions for making the tedious work of professional driving “safely tolerable”.
While visiting Denmark where cannabis is legal, I witnessed a healthy, educated, advanced society where police resources are better employed in counselling and teaching and towards more pressing criminal activities such as white-collar crimes and corrupt conduct. The question of legalising cannabis is not if but when, and the sooner the better. It will be good for the public, good for police, and bad for lawyers and criminals who profit absurdly while this natural weed is made illegal.
David McAllister writes: Check the statistics for all the states in the US that legalised marijuana. After years, there have been reductions in crime, increased revenue for the governments and more employment opportunities. It’s a win-win, a no-brainer.
Stu Martin writes: Marijuana should not be decriminalised — it should be legalised for adults. If it were only decriminalised it would still be a black market product. There would still be a criminal element to its supply. Full legalisation, as has been done in many US states and many other countries, Canada and Thailand, for instance, means that it becomes a legal product for adults (over 18). This is far superior to decriminalisation. It would allow shops to open, and allow people to grow their own plants if they wished.
It is a given that the law must be changed. Australia looks increasingly backward and still uses the laughable description “dangerous drugs” when someone is found in possession of a joint. I do not use it, although I have in the past. The law needs to change, but please go for full legalisation, not decriminalisation.
Heather Tyler writes: I live in Byron Bay and have done for nearly 20 years. First because of the infamous “bush doofs” (aka psytrance parties) every weekend. And second because world famous Nimbin really was the jewel in the crown — world famous due to the ease of purchasing cannabis in the streets.
What is so special about this area is that it is one of the best cannabis-growing regions in the world. And not just for medicinal and recreational uses. Anything made from plastic can be made from hemp. All things needed to build houses can be made with hemp. It has a huge manufacturing jobs industry potential.
Neil Allinson writes: America has its war on drugs, and we all know nobody is winning. Demand will always create supply, no matter what penalties the authorities place on narcotics possession, supply or manufacture. Drug use is a health issue, not a law-and-order issue. The property crime created from illicit drug use stems from the cost, availability and stigma attached to it. Wouldn’t it be better if a drug user first had to register with their health provider, then get a health check and receive counselling? Then and only then could they receive a script and be dispensed their drugs, without risk of contaminants.
The income generated from sales could be used to provide better services when an addict chooses to stop using. The money saved from not having to police the current unworkable and imprudent illicit drug laws would be a bonanza for any government with the guts to look at the problem and take the only action possible to end organised crime networks from operating in the drugs distribution racket.
The black market for illicit drugs would collapse. Crime rates would plummet and every time a young person attended a dispensary, they would be offered drug counselling as a first line of helping them.
If you’re pleased, peed off or piqued, tell us about it by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
The ‘war on drugs’ has not only been a failure it has been a self inflicted disaster.
Anyone who wants to consume illegal drugs will do so. The facts are that many people have done so and only a small minority end up coming to significant harm. Despite illegal drugs being readily available the vast bulk of the population spends the vast bulk of its time not under the influence. This is not because drugs are illegal, it is because most people have other more important things to do most of the time.
Perhaps the worst aspect of the ‘war on drugs’ is that it has handed over the control of drug supply to organised crime. There is a tragic irony in the way the ‘war on drugs’ has essentially attached a turbo charger onto the engine of organised crime spreading its corrupting tentacles far and wide.
We already have in place a sensible and effective model which has been put in place for many years to deal with the most dangerous addictive drug – tobacco. I can vividly remember pubs & clubs in the 1970s and 1980s where it was difficult to see the other side of the room for all the cigarette smoke. Since then smoking has been effectively combatted on numerous fronts particularly advertising bans and health warnings. Notably the one thing that was avoided was universally criminalising buying, selling and possession.
The lesson from the management of the dangerous drug tobacco is that the problem of dangerous drugs needs to be understood as a health problem not a criminal problem. Treating drugs as a criminal problem not only fails to solve the problem, it creates more crime caused by additional illegal activity to fund drug habits, it creates even more crime by turbocharging organised crime.
It’s time this madness was brought to a halt. The lesson should have been learnt from the experience of Prohibition in the USA in the 1920s.
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana.
I have no axe to grind against recreational use, and quite of few of my chronic clients control spasms, stress, pain and anxiety with it very successfully.
But you, Alex Jimenez, are clearly a delusional Jane-f**ked old fool who needs if necessary to be prevented from going anywhere near any piece of bigger than coffee machine using physical force.
Don’t drive a Heavy stoned, you dangerous, arrogant cretin.
The ‘Republican Reptile’ PJ O’Rourke gave a presentation at the California Club to an older conservative audience where he explained how it works.
Comparing cannabis with alcohol when driving etc. is false equivalence due to the opposite effects both induce, as the former is ‘caution’ while the latter is ‘aggression’.
PS My understanding of heavy vehicle accident causes as reported in media has mostly been ‘meths’ (literally truckloads of ‘speed’, pardon the pun), like alcohol leads to aggressive and incautious behaviour.
You’re wrong. Extensive studies have made it clear beyond reasonable dispute that THC in the bloodstream and nervous system, in almost all individual’s physiologies, contributes to significant reductions in response time, depth perception, motor control, spatial and temporal judgement, concentration, task sequencing, mental organisation and general situational awareness. As a helicopter pilot I’m particularly aware of aviation-focused tidies that all conclude this. There’s also a growing body of opinion warning of the cumulative impact of lifelong use. Since the legalisation of pot in so many US States these issues have been of profound interest to cashed-up airlines attuned to the prospects of future litigation. A heavy-smoking, Heavy truck driver who has avoided killing someone in his career has done so purely on dumb luck.
The unhelpful confusion/wilful misinformation arises from the fact that another of dope’s biochemical constituents, cannabidiol, also very helpful as a therapeutic agent, doesn’t appear to have THC’s impacts. But it’s THC bucolic buzz that rec users enjoy.
Don’t drink and drive. Don’t toke and truck. Good to see that Alex’s bilge has been politely dis-advertised by Crikey.
“…Alex’s bilge has been politely dis-advertised…” – so much for the ludicrous claim the contents here are not routinely retrocleansed.
yep. I shouldn’t celebrate, you’re right.
And, anyway I stuffed up – of course it hasn’t been removed. Apols
One has neither suggested zero risk nor relying on anecdotal evidence.
However, you have credible controlled & behavioural studies linking dangerous or suboptimal driving, while comparing cannabis with alcohol &/or no substances?
My understanding of available literature is that the risk of vehicle accidents under the influence of alcohol far outweighs that of cannabis.
For example, article drawing on available research ‘The Effect of Cannabis Compared with Alcohol on Driving’ (Sewell, Poling & Sofuoglu 2010) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722956/
For example, article drawing on available research ‘The Effect of Cannabis Compared with Alcohol on Driving’ (Sewell, Poling & Sofuoglu 2010) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722956/
Alcohol = “She’ll be right”
THC = “What if…..?”
Spot on!
I’d add a few more to booze – ‘so what!’, ‘who cares?’, ‘oo yoo lookin’ at?’ etc.
“…most marijuana-intoxicated drivers show only modest impairments on actual road tests.”
Yep, thanks for that link, Drew. Good study by the looks. Your point is taken but my counter-point I suppose is the same I made to Outis above: a ‘road test’ is just that: a set-piece controlled assessment over a defined period of driving. I would imagine you’d find the same heightened concentration (and commensurate redcied accident stats) if you looked at actual license test stats. or, say, accident rates when drivers are being followed by cops, or any other set of heightened compensatory ‘safety self-awareness’ circumstances.
What kills when operating machinery of all kinds tends to be passive familiarity/complacency, more than active recklessness. Complacency, by definition, isn’t a risk multiplier in heightened self-aware modes, whatever the cause. Quite clearly a trucker who drives tond to ‘make the tedious work of professional driving “safely tolerable”, claiming that simply being stoned automatically makes him safer ‘because the effect of driving stoned is to raise one’s awareness of the dangers of the road’.
Another way to do that is to drive sober, un-ripped, and to just…erm…concentrate on said dangers, focus on mitigating tfor them, and take regular breaks to refresh yourself so you can overcome the tedium without leaning on narcostics (of any kind) to do it for you. The bonus is you don’t have to degrade all those useful motor and cognitive skills. Cool, huh, Alex – who is not, of course, the only Heavy trucker in history who can boast ‘no speeding fines, no near-misses and no threats to anyone.’
Really? Did you also examine the terms of reference and the supporters of such studies?
The problem with alcohol and driving is not the loss of perceptive ability, but is the reduction in the ability to accurately assess risk, a fundamental tool of most mammals and reptiles, which is severely impaired under alcohol, but not under THC.
Both, though – surely? They are not mutually exclusive. THC may well not reduce risk assessment ability but it certainly trashes much else that’s necessary to safely manoeuvre twenty tons of truck at speed.
I don’t pretend to be an academic expert. But I have far too much rec use of both THC and alcohol in my own personal backstory, at various times, to be under any illusions about what either does to my capacities! Occasionally driving under the influence of each and both is among the stupidest of the many stupid things I did when younger. Like Alex got away with it without anyone (but myself).
You’re wrong about the door ‘caution’ bit, I meant, not the meth stats. which certainly sound plausible from my limited experience (am a Medium truck driver only, not Heavy/long haul).
‘dope’ not door
PS: And the day I take advice on anything from that narcissistic burnt-out one-joke Boomer poser O’Rourke is the day I give up on ideas completely. Like all allegedly ‘libertarian’ Gonzo ‘legends’ the man was a self-serving reactionary con artist his whole life.
In 1983 Sydney Uni conducted extensive testing on the effects of alcohol & cannabis on driving at the decommissioned Callum Park asylum (so that afterwards the stoners could after around the extensive grounds safely?).
The results confirmed what anyone paying attention had known for yonks – both impair the cognitive functions/ability – but the stoner driver is safer because they KNOW that they are impaired and therefore concentrate.
This is the exact opposite to a drink who feels omniscient, invulnerable and eager to take ludicrous risks.
As for meth. users I’d be happier if they were not even walking the streets, especially after a skinful of booze as well.
“…afterwards the stoners could
afterWAFT around…”.Back in the pre-woke days of genuinely subversive academic study there used to be a prac. experiment at Melb Uni for RAAF Academy future-pilots doing BSc’s where-in you would drink progressively while performing the military pilot entry selection hand-eye coordination tests (clunky old steam driven computer game precursors). It became a kind of unofficial competition to max out the number of drinks – vodka shots were a standard I think – consumed while still being deemed ‘suitable’ for top gun glory. From memory the record was 26 or 27. You’re right in that performance tended to increase over the first dozen or so drinks, due to short term compensatory focus and concentration, etc.
But of course that’s a total red herring in the context of a lifelong habit of driving 14-18 hours each and every working day nonged off your skull, as a default setting. Or flying, FTM!
Your point about Callam Park is pertinent. The link b/w sustained THC self-dosage and bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and other dissociative mental health dysfuctionalities is beyond clear, now. I have no problem with those who like to check out off material reality, even often. I am more sympathetic to them, in fact, the more insane the real world becomes.
I just don’t want them in charge of machinery than can kill others while they are doing so.
I made no reference to “…performance tended to increase over the first dozen or so drinks…” in the Sydney uni driving performance tests – quite the opposite.
No level of booze was anything but deleterious, due to the attitudinal/emotional perceptions which changed in the first glow, the hero before becoming a zero.
Exactly what I tried to post to comment above but to moderation; research supports this too.
My elderly Mum was prescribed medicinal cannabis for chronic arthritis pain and found it really effective. The trouble was the cost. It was over $100 a script and that was with DVA Gold card concession. Her pension is her only income and we rent, so we simply couldn’t afford it, especially when the capsules became unobtainable and she had to have an oil with a very leaky dispenser- lots of wastage.
I strongly suspect the poor uptake is down to the expense of the thing. I notice more and more pharmacies and GP practices are promoting it, but many who would benefit from it can’t afford it.
The US’s “war on drugs” has been a miserable failure. And like the Prohibition, only served to further corrupt the Law enforcement and the Courts and further entrenched Crime into the many layers of Government.
Its had much the same effect here in Australia too.
Surely Albanese can do a Whitlam, who legalised Home Brewing of Beer, so too can Albanese guide the rectification the appropriate Commonwealth legislation and “encourage” the States to decriminalise Marijuana.
Not sure that “The US’s “war on drugs” has been a miserable failure.”
In terms of the intentions of Nixon, Haldeman & Ehrlichman – the marginalisation and disenfranchisment of vast swathes of the population – it has a roaring success.
It was never about restricting the supply of drugs.
In addition to medical and other purposes, many of us choose cannabis over and/or with alcohol for personal recreational use; that’s by far the most significant cohort, but our wowserism precludes legalisation for simple enjoyment?