To not understand why drinking alcohol while your kids are asleep is ok but smoking weed is not?

[QuackPorridgeBacon]

I know this may sound like a twattish thread and I understand I may get a lot of shit for it.

The thing is though, I don't understand how wine and gin (two favourites on here) are seemingly ok to consume while kids are in bed sleeping, yet having a smoke is terrible.

Now, putting legalities aside (I don't think they matter seeing how some places are now legalising it can't be that bad) what is the issue with smoking but there seems to be no issue with drinking?

I see friends on fb and the like talking about having a few bottles almost every night some with really small babies (I'm terribly anxious so the younger the child the more I worry, even though I probably shouldn't lol) yet if you have a smoke you are deemed irresponisble and a druggie right up there with crack fs.

One person I know, would drink almost every night and would complain that her partner (now ex) would smoke weed. Yet I see them both as the same really, maybe I see the drinking as worse though because once you are drunk that's it there is no way to really stop that in an emergency. Smoking, you tend to snap out of it need be and are always alert and just snacking will make you feel how you did before anyway.

Basically, wondering what others views are?

When Op said when the kids are in bed, she didn't mean that you then go and hover over your children smoking a spliff. No one at any point has even implied that they smoke around their children. So all the stuff about second hand smoke etc is irrelevant. Also it looks like the most that speak about it, are talking about an occasional thing. Not an all day every day smoking habit. There is absolutely no way these people walk about stinking of weed or smoke. Also Definitely seen more drunk people unable to walk than stoned people.

To all the people saying they wouldn't smoke it because it's illegal. Would your views change if it were legalised?

I wouldn't smoke it purely because the smell makes me heave. A neighbour of mine smokes weed & it just smells like sweat to me.

When Op said when the kids are in bed, she didn't mean that you then go and hover over your children smoking a spliff. No one at any point has even implied that they smoke around their children. So all the stuff about second hand smoke etc is irrelevant.

Actually, OP has given no information about that at all. Also, you don't have to be hovering over someone for there to be a risk to them from passive smoking. So no, not irrelevant in the slightest. It is relevant though that it's possible to use cannabis in a way that doesn't involve a passive smoking risk. The only way anyone's at risk from the smoke in hash cakes is if you manage to set the place on fire while you're making them!

I know, you're right. You don't need to be hovering over someone for there to be risk of passive smoking. And you're also right, op didn't say that. I just got the impression that the question was more about the effects that cannabis has on the person over alcohol. Since op did say when the kids are asleep, I think was hinting at them not being around. But maybe I got the wrong end of the stick.

I think the issue is as much that alcohol is legal rather than weed is illegal. Both are potent mood altering substances.

You said all of that brilliantly ink and I agree with you.

To clarify. I did in my original post say when the kids are in bed purely to avoid the argument of second hand smoke around them etc. I wanted people's views on the consumption of weed vs the consumption of alcohol. That is also why I said "legalities aside".

I don't care for the legal reasons I wanted to know people's views based purely on the taking (I did say smoking in my op though) of weed and alcohol.

People are clearly very hung up on the legalities though and I understand that but it has nothing to do with the effects of taking it.

it has nothing to do with the effects of taking it.

Of course it does - legal = regulated, contents standarised, supply chain standardised.

But is the "knowing what you're getting" etc really people's issue with it? Or if you grow it yourself and therefore know exactly what you are taking, are you fine with it in this instance? I think most weed smokers have a pretty good idea of what they are smoking and the effect that it has on them.

Not all laws are good laws, or just. We should continue to question each of our laws, just like we should re-examine and update our own attitudes and principles regularly. Things change, knowledge grows and all that.

I think the illegality of weed will become an issue of economics. Taxing it will bring a great deal io the Treasury, quality control will save society another great deal.

For me, yes knowing what you're getting is very important. Obviously you can grow your own, or buy from someone you know and trust, but clearly not everyone can or does do this.

That means people are being put at risk and, just as importantly, don't have the usual consumer protections or legal recourses if they receive an inferior or dangerous product. If you found a dead worm in your gin bottle, you'd get a refund. If it had been laced with a harmful substance and made you ill, you might be able to get compensation and in extremis, the person or company responsible could be in deep doodoo. Personally I think this is very significant. I think consumers should have protection and the reassurance of adequate regulation. I might know straight away if my gin or meat was dodgy, but nobody would think that's an argument against consumer protection laws!

The Treasury point is another salient one. Think of the VAT being lost!

You are being very naive if you think that the legalities do not have an impact on the effects of consumption.

You are being very naive if you think that the people who produce and sell the majority of cannabis in the Uk are not the same people who produce, procure and sell class A drugs, prostitution and people trafficking. I'm not ok with this. You either are ok with this or are a victim of some serious cognitive dissonance.

You are being naive to think that if a small child or baby got a hold of your illegal drugs at home and ingested them it would be taken as seriously as if they took a swig from your glass of wine. (Neither ok)

You are being naive to think that if your children are exposed to parental cannabis use from a young age they will not try it whilst still teenagers. And in doing so will increase their chance of developing some mental illnesses.

As well as there being evidence to suggest that regular cannabis users are more likely to be at fault in car accidents than be hurt in them. They are more likely to do less well at work and school than those who do not use it regularly.

The smell permeates everything. I work with kids. I know which parents smoke dope. The kids are clean, but the smell is on their school bags...their jackets..their homework.

National Crime Agency

Royal College of Psychiatrists

Brilliant post mandate Mandy!!!!!

Spot on

Your right OP......... It is a twattish thread.

Mandate. You should never keep harmful substances in a place a child could get them. Should prescription medicines or dishwasher powders be banned because a child can get them?

All this you're being naive stuff is very assumptive.

Also to everyone talking about the legalities, would this change your view on it? Because the government says actually it's ok, then it's ok? Is this how you want to make all of your decisions? Do you not have a thought for yourself? Also op did say legalities aside so I don't know why this keeps cropping up.

itsmehi

Agreed

Because you can't just brush legality aside. For one point alcohol is very strictly regulated. You know what strength it is by reading the bottle. You can roughly work out how much alcohol will be in your blood after drinking different amounts. This isn't the case for illegal substances of any kind.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/11/does-smoking-skunk-trigger-psychosis-arent/

Because we can’t yet fully model psychosis in animals, the mental-health equivalent of painting tobacco tar on mice to prove carcinogenicity isn’t possible. However, there have been 13 epidemiological studies worldwide, looking at outcomes for cannabis users 10 to 20 years on.

‘Eleven suggest a significant increase in onset of psychosis in cannabis users, and the other two trend [towards it],’ Sir Robin Murray says, adding, ‘we’re as sure as we can be’ that cannabis triggers psychosis. Results don’t yet factor in high-strength skunk, as it ‘hasn’t been around long enough’.

My post is a quote from the article

I'm asking to brush them aside because it doesn't matter and it's comething that clearly clouds a lot of people's views.

If it was legal what would your view be it's really not rocket science to work out your answer.

The thing about not knowing strength etc. You don't have a toke and then are suddenly wasted. The same way with alcohol. You don't have a sip and then are immediately drunk. Any pot smoker is capable of having a couple of tokes then deciding if enough is enough. You're all making this far more dramatic than it needs to be.

People listing possible negatives ofsmoking weed as though that wins an argument of some sort. It doesnt justify it being illegal- if it did alcohol and cigarettes would be illegal too. Basically the argument is the unimaginative alcohol is legal and weed isnt. Remove that and you have nothing.

If i smoke a spliff that i grew myself at home on my own i dont harm anyone. Same if i drink prosecco.

The world would be far more peaceful and relaxed if everyone stopped drinking tomorrow and instead got stoned to the equivalent level.

Weed being illegal never stopped me getting any. Its a failed experiment. Take your fingers out of your ears, stop stamping your feet, acknowledge youre wrong and accept it

I'm going to ignore the main point of the thread, so skip me if you'd like.

A 10 from your local dealer doesn't have any medicinal purposes. Promise.
Smoking weed won't cure your pain or help your cancer (as many many people believe)
The weed you smoke to get high is different - you get high off of THC.
CBD (Cannabidiol) doesn't get you high, is non psychoactive and side effects (negative ones) are fewer than smoking weed. Oil contains/is derived from this. NOT THC!
The illegalization of the plant effects the use of medicine, but a 10 bag that was possibly up someone's arse at some point won't help you or someone you know if you are ill.

Unless youre in prison, the likelihood of a 10 bag being transported in someones arse is 0. A pocket is more likely used

However, there have been 13 epidemiological studies worldwide, looking at outcomes for cannabis users 10 to 20 years o

Can't you link the studies rather than an article that has them behind a paywall? 10 people is nothing in any decent study, and if the study is only of 20 people that sounds heavily biased and isn't discussing any of their lives.

You need the full statistics to make an actual judgement of whether weed = psychosis.

Yh, I've never heard of it being delivered by arse.

I get what you mean I think but CBD isn't proven completely free of negatives because the THC is taken out.