Thai citizens to show id.

[jvs]

I just read in a paper that can not be quoted that from basically now

on all Thai citizens who buy Cannabis will have to show id card to

be placed in a data base.

No mention of foreigners so far .

Too many losses in alcohol sales?Big powerful companies made a phone call?

I know it is a controlled herb but when was the last or first time Thai people had

to show id when buying alcohol?

Is this the beginning of the end ?

 

 

[Wuvu2]

24 minutes ago, jvs said:

Is this the beginning of the end ?

No. This is the middle of ongoing nonsense ????

[nigelforbes]

Quite right too.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis

[jvs]

12 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

Quite right too.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis

What is your personal opinion?

[nigelforbes]

1 minute ago, jvs said:

What is your personal opinion?

I don't have strong feeling either way TBH, if people want to smoke it, up to them. I do however think that when a vast majority of countries continue to make it illegal, Thailand might just be going against the flow and this is not what I would call a progressive country.....think gimmick.

 

I also think that countries that have made it legal(ish), also have fairly advanced medical support and rescue services, including mental health support, Thailand does not. Those countries also have advanced and active law enforcement which is a deterrent to people driving or engaging in other risky activities whilst high, Thailand does not.

 

In case all that come across as prudish, I used to smoke in the 1970's and I have seen first hand extensive links between the use of ganja and harder drugs. I confess to missing the occasional joint but I no longer feel I want to partake, if other do, up to you.

[Wuvu2]

2 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

I have seen first hand extensive links between the use of ganja and harder drugs.

Nonsense. Yes, people who are drawn to harder drugs often also use marijuana, but the  overwhelming majority of marijuana users don't go on to harder drugs. This is an urban myth debunked decades ago ????

[nigelforbes]

3 minutes ago, Wuvu2 said:

Nonsense. Yes, people who are drawn to harder drugs often also use marijuana, but the  overwhelming majority of marijuana users don't go on to harder drugs. This is an urban myth debunked decades ago ????

Is it nonsense whether I've seen this or is it nonsense that they were?

 

 

[dingdongrb]

11 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

Is it nonsense whether I've seen this or is it nonsense that they were?

 

 

Yes, I saw a classmate who took three bong hits of ganja at a party and then later that night was seen doing lines of coke. Then after doing the coke he took a hit of mescaline acid. I heard he was found earlier the next morning passed out with a needle full of heroin stuck in his arm.

 

Marijuana, the gateway drug!!!!   555

 

 

[jvs]

25 minutes ago, Wuvu2 said:

Nonsense. Yes, people who are drawn to harder drugs often also use marijuana, but the  overwhelming majority of marijuana users don't go on to harder drugs. This is an urban myth debunked decades ago ????

Yes,along the same line as"Don't drink beer you will move to drinking

stronger stuff and become an alcoholic"!

Some people just can not let" Reefer Madness" go.

[nigelforbes]

I would not have expected to find anyone in this forum with an objective mind on the subject of addiction so I'm not about to play King Canute! Somebody asked me for my opinion, I gave it, if you don't like it, tough, that's your problem!

 

Everything I've ever read on the subject, which of late is not that much, tells me that the medical jury is out on this subject and that further research is needed. They do however say that some evidence exists to suggest marijuana use does lead to other addictive stimulants and that certainly supports the things I saw in the 1970's in the West Coast. 

 

Now, if anyone wants to post a link to a reliable and widely reputable and acknowledged source of medical information, such as Johns Hopkins standards or similar, I'll be happy to read it and potentially change my opinion. Ad-hoc links by hop heads to their favorite spiritual leaders, will be ignored and posters put on ignore.

[jvs]

27 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

I would not have expected to find anyone in this forum with an objective mind on the subject of addiction so I'm not about to play King Canute! Somebody asked me for my opinion, I gave it, if you don't like it, tough, that's your problem!

 

Everything I've ever read on the subject, which of late is not that much, tells me that the medical jury is out on this subject and that further research is needed. They do however say that some evidence exists to suggest marijuana use does lead to other addictive stimulants and that certainly supports the things I saw in the 1970's in the West Coast. 

 

Now, if anyone wants to post a link to a reliable and widely reputable and acknowledged source of medical information, such as Johns Hopkins standards or similar, I'll be happy to read it and potentially change my opinion. Ad-hoc links by hop heads to their favorite spiritual leaders, will be ignored and posters put on ignore.

I agree with you that some users go on to use heavier drugs but i believe those are the same people who would go from beer to hard liquor.

It is not the drug but the personality of the user.

You are not the only person here that reads and if some one elses

opinion causes you to block people well that just show a lot about you.

 

[nigelforbes]

55 minutes ago, jvs said:

I agree with you that some users go on to use heavier drugs but i believe those are the same people who would go from beer to hard liquor.

It is not the drug but the personality of the user.

You are not the only person here that reads and if some one elses

opinion causes you to block people well that just show a lot about you.

 

Try and read more carefully. Nobody's opinion causes me any problems, only some of the links that people post to try and support self serving points of view. If anyone wants to have the debate, at a serious level, with serious, professional, mainstream data to backup their argument, I welcome that. BUT, if you're going to debate and then post nonsense links, just to try and win a debate, it's meet Mr Ignore List time.

[BritManToo]

2 hours ago, nigelforbes said:

I don't have strong feeling either way TBH, if people want to smoke it, up to them. I do however think that when a vast majority of countries continue to make it illegal, Thailand might just be going against the flow and this is not what I would call a progressive country.....think gimmick.

The USA made it illegal and forced their opinions on the rest of the world.

No other countries were that bothered by it.

Now the USA is no longer all that worried about cannabis, it makes sense that all the countries subservient to American money aren't that bothered either.

[Salerno]

6 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

The USA made it illegal and forced their opinions on the rest of the world.

Nah, they where almost 600 years behind the first banning and there where many before them.

 

Quite interesting history line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_cannabis_law

[jvs]

1 hour ago, Salerno said:

Nah, they where almost 600 years behind the first banning and there where many before them.

 

Quite interesting history line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_cannabis_law

Thanks for posting that,i had not seen that article before,good to see

more countries realize Cannabis use is not so bad after all.

When you compare it to more dangerous drugs it does not appear

to be really dangerous,of course there is always abuse but you can

not blame that on the Cannabis it self.

 

[Dogmatix]

It's boring to see the off topic posts arguing points irrelevant to the topic.  The thread is about the requirement for Thai citizens to have their ID cards and details of their purchases put into a database to sent to Gods knows which government departments.  A fantastic database for Thaksin's next war against drugs when he gets back into power and recriminalizes cannabis. 

 

It's odd that no mention of foreigners was made but I find it unlikely that foreigners will be let off the hook.  Most likely they will also demand passport and visa details or just ban foreigners from buying completely.

[Dogmatix]

Most of the dispensaries have continued to sell online which is already illegal, not to mention the unlicensed sellers of brickweed and the like on FB and LINE.  I guess this will encourage more people to buy on the black market.  Who wants to be in a police database as a drug user?  Very hard to crack down on the black market sales while possession of the substance remains legal. They will have to catch vendors in the act of selling. They could try to bust people for possession without a receipt from a licensed dispensary and a corresponding entry in the database but that would be very onerous and virtually defeat the purpose of decriminalizing.  

[nigelforbes]

4 minutes ago, Dogmatix said:

It's boring to see the off topic posts arguing points irrelevant to the topic. 

I couldn't agree more, they should hang the poster who dared to ask another for their opinion!

[dingdongrb]

3 hours ago, jvs said:

It is not the drug but the personality of the user.

 

Bingo!!!

[nigelforbes]

5 minutes ago, dingdongrb said:

Bingo!!!

So what's to be done, test everyone to see if they have an addictive personality and if so, put them into a database to ensure they aren't allowed to buy any? Oh wait, that means another database, so that's not good and anyway, testing everyone doesn't seem practical. I know, let's sacrifice those "few" people because they're only the minority, allegedly, the needs of the greater masses will have been met. Hmm, seems a little uncaring but the only alternative is to make it illegal, that way nobody can buy it and the lives of those "few" will have been spared. Nope, can't do that either, that's where we just came from....what to do! 

[KannikaP]

18 minutes ago, dingdongrb said:

Bingo!!!

Yep, Bingo is addictive and leads to big money gambling.   555

[josephbloggs]

24 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

So what's to be done, test everyone to see if they have an addictive personality and if so, put them into a database to ensure they aren't allowed to buy any? Oh wait, that means another database, so that's not good and anyway, testing everyone doesn't seem practical. I know, let's sacrifice those "few" people because they're only the minority, allegedly, the needs of the greater masses will have been met. Hmm, seems a little uncaring but the only alternative is to make it illegal, that way nobody can buy it and the lives of those "few" will have been spared. Nope, can't do that either, that's where we just came from....what to do! 

Most people when they pass their driving tests drive sensibly and often can drive their whole life without an accident. However there are some people that drive like lunatics, drive dangerously and end up crashing and killing people.

 

Therefore we should ban cars.

[nigelforbes]

52 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Most people when they pass their driving tests drive sensibly and often can drive their whole life without an accident. However there are some people that drive like lunatics, drive dangerously and end up crashing and killing people.

 

Therefore we should ban cars.

Not the best analogy in the world but we can give it a try.

 

Cars weren't designed or intended to kill people, that was never their primary purpose. Ganja on the other hand was intended to get people high and that remains the primary purpose.

 

If you wanted a different analogy you should have gone down the firearms route. Guns themselves don't kill, people do, that's why most countries don't freely put guns in the hands of the population, except you know where and look at the good that does. Sooo, should we ban guns, because killing is their primary purpose. Well, lots of people want to ban guns, in some countries they even put gun owners into a data base....OMG they do what, you mean like ganja users in Thailand, well I never!!! 

[BritManToo]

6 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

Cars weren't designed or intended to kill people, that was never their primary purpose. Ganja on the other hand was intended to get people high and that remains the primary purpose.

Would point out ganja was designed (by god?) to be a medicinal herb.

Almost any medicine can be abused, but unlike Paracetamol and Aspirin, Ganga can't be used to kill people.

[nigelforbes]

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

Would point out ganja was designed (by god?) to be a medicinal herb.

Almost any medicine can be abused.

Even if I were to smoke a whole passel full of doobies, I don't think I could convince myself that ganja was initially intended or used as a medicinal herb and I can't see much to support that was its primary use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cannabis

[still kicking]

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

Yep, Bingo is addictive and leads to big money gambling.   555

Yep, that's why I invest a few dollars on lotto every couple of months 

[jvs]

1 hour ago, nigelforbes said:

So what's to be done, test everyone to see if they have an addictive personality and if so, put them into a database to ensure they aren't allowed to buy any? Oh wait, that means another database, so that's not good and anyway, testing everyone doesn't seem practical. I know, let's sacrifice those "few" people because they're only the minority, allegedly, the needs of the greater masses will have been met. Hmm, seems a little uncaring but the only alternative is to make it illegal, that way nobody can buy it and the lives of those "few" will have been spared. Nope, can't do that either, that's where we just came from....what to do! 

I did not start this topic to see if any scientific research has been done

on whatever.Just basically wanted to point out the absurdity of being put

in a data base just for buying a controlled herb.

Like i said when was the last time your name was placed in a data base when you bought alcohol?

All my life i have believed that any freedom we have comes with rules

and when you break these rules there are consequences,fair enough.

Buying Cannabis in Thailand is not illegal when you are of age and blah blah.

So why the need for a database?

Gun owner ship in a data base,ok,easy to see why.

A plant that has been around probably longer then people have should be free to use.

I did say use and not abuse.

Some people can handle all kind of drugs,others don't.

Those "few" do not have to be saved,with freedom comes responsibility.

You make some good points but placing links does not do much for me.

Personal fresh ideas is what i like to see in a discussion,make people think instead of hearing the same old things over and over.

[KannikaP]

11 minutes ago, still kicking said:

Yep, that's why I invest a few dollars on lotto every couple of months 

Ooooh you daredevil.

[nigelforbes]

4 minutes ago, jvs said:

I did not start this topic to see if any scientific research has been done

on whatever.Just basically wanted to point out the absurdity of being put

in a data base just for buying a controlled herb.

Like i said when was the last time your name was placed in a data base when you bought alcohol?

All my life i have believed that any freedom we have comes with rules

and when you break these rules there are consequences,fair enough.

Buying Cannabis in Thailand is not illegal when you are of age and blah blah.

So why the need for a database?

Gun owner ship in a data base,ok,easy to see why.

A plant that has been around probably longer then people have should be free to use.

I did say use and not abuse.

Some people can handle all kind of drugs,others don't.

Those "few" do not have to be saved,with freedom comes responsibility.

You make some good points but placing links does not do much for me.

Personal fresh ideas is what i like to see in a discussion,make people think instead of hearing the same old things over and over.

Guns are legal in the US yet people still go into a database, there's plenty of precedents.

 

As for fresh ideas.....give us list of the ones you've heard before and I'll make sure not to repeat them here, just for vous! TBH there are only so many arguments in favour or against anything, sounds like you probably heard them all.

[Wuvu2]

I saw the same dude is over in the Christianity forum arguing the evils of organized religions...as he remembers them from 1970. Go figure ????