Skip to main content

Europe: British Home Secretary Announces New Marijuana Possession Penalties

Submitted by Phillip Smith on (Issue #556)
Consequences of Prohibition
Drug War Issues
Politics & Advocacy

When marijuana is rescheduled from a Class C to a more serious Class B drug in Britain on January 26, repeat marijuana possession offenders will face more severe sanctions, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced Monday.

Marijuana had been down-scheduled to Class C in 2004, but the Labor government ignored the advice of its drug policy panel, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, and moved to reschedule it earlier this year. The move came against a background of sensational British tabloid press reports on marijuana-induced madness and more down-to-earth concerns about links between teen marijuana use and a slightly increased incidence of schizophrenia, especially with "skunk," the apparent British name for any high-quality marijuana.

Although teen marijuana use has decreased since 2004, the British are in the throes of a full-blown reefer madness. Reports of "cannabis factories" being raided and hooligans blaming pot for their crimes are staples in the press.

According to Home Secretary Smith, first-time pot possessors will continue to receive warnings, as is the practice with marijuana under Class B, but second-time offenders will be hit with a $138 fine and third-time offenders will be arrested. It's for your own good, she said.

"While cannabis has always been illegal, reclassifying it to a Class B drug reinforces our message to everyone that it is harmful and should not be taken. Fewer people are taking cannabis, but it is crucial that this trend continues. I am extremely concerned about the use of stronger strains of cannabis, such as skunk, and the harm they can cause to mental health," she said.

"This is the next step towards toughening up our enforcement response -- to ensure that repeat offenders know that we are serious about tackling the danger that the drug poses to individuals, and in turn communities," Smith continued. "We need to act now to protect future generations."

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) had supported the reclassification and welcomed the new penalties. "There is evidence of increasing harms to community safety associated with criminal behavior around the cultivation, distribution and the use of cannabis," said Tim Hollis, the ACPO Lead on Drugs. "While enforcement alone will not provide the total solution to a crime that is a global problem, this will act as a deterrent, along with better education about the impact of drugs. Where cannabis use is repeated or where there are aggravating circumstances locally, officers will take a harder line on enforcement and escalate their response accordingly. Every encounter at street level provides intelligence and helps us to act against the criminal gangs who seek to profit from cannabis production and distribution."

But while the new penalties sound tough enough, there is a loophole, the London Times reported. According to the Times, warnings for a first possession offense will not be recorded on the national police computer, making it difficult for police to verify if someone was a first- or second-time offender, particularly if the person was caught by different police forces.

Even with the apparent loophole, the move won no kudos from Danny Kushlick of the Transform Drug Policy Foundation. He told the Times the rescheduling of marijuana was little more than "populist posturing," adding, "Escalating penalties for possession only serve to further marginalize and criminalize millions of otherwise law-abiding people."

Home Secretary Smith has admitted smoking pot herself as a university student. She did not say whether she should have been warned, fined, or arrested, nor did she say whether she would have benefitted from being busted for her offense.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.

Comments

Malkavian (not verified)

When Gordon Brown talks about "lethal cannabis" and largely ignores every single scientific advisor and simply states that contrary to any evidence he "believes ...." we're getting close.

The skunk-vilification is an insanity of itself. Sure skunk can be strong stuff, but it's definitely not any more "madness inducing" than pot (the latter which, I assure you, can be quite strong stuff if not mistreated).

And the psychosis/schizophrenia thing. Well, the latest hysteria came with the rather good and very big meta study done by Stanley Zammit and others: "Cannabis use and risk of psychotic or aff ective mental health outcomes: a systematic review"

The results of that report was STAGGERING: a 40% increase in the risk of contracting schizophrenia. Who wants 40%, right, unless it's a pay raise?

Well, thing is ... the base likelihood of getting schizophrenia is approx. 0,005, or 0,5% expressed differently. What Zammits people found was that among the population of cannabis smokers this likelihood went up to a whopping 0,007. Which is EXACTLY a 40% increase in relative percentages.

Even there Zammits folks are quite well aware of a nasty, annoying, stupid fact: that in no nation in the world has the frequency of schizophrenia significantly increased when comparing before and after cannabis became popular. Usage rates simply do not even correlate with how many schizophrenics a country has. Schizophrenia rates are remarkably stable - annoyingly so for those in favor of fining, humiliating, manhandling, imprisoning and killing pot users and producers.

Zammit uses one single, pathethic line to refute this otherwise intesting fact, dismissing it on obscure grounds of "time lag" as I remember.

Thing is that Zammit and his people did good work. They really DID adjust for everything they could imagine. That's why they claim they have found a causal relationship, which they quantify as a 0,002 increase in marginal likelihood, or a 0,2% increase in risk.

Yet ... this causal effect just doesn't seem to be measurable. Even if the effect only hits young people at a certain age these alleged cannabis _caused_ increases should STILL increase the average in countries with a greater cannabis use. The laws of big number tell us as a rule of thumb that the big populations should be able to show statistically significant effects.

Now, clearly I may need the proper data for these young people, but no one is volunteering the data. So please don't snipe at me by calling be stoned out of my mind., Instead, do as any good scientist: CHALLENGE my ideas! Provide the data. Gimme ;o)

Wed, 10/22/2008 - 10:24am Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

Your statement is total BS... there is NO scientific basis for your claim. Those who experience mental trama is not from pot but from conditions already in their genes before ever doing pot and would manifest with or without pot...
I'm 58, have smoked 45 years, just got major health check,
including mre, cat and other test and am extremely healthy...
There is use and abuse... more people die from cigarettes, alcohol or prescription drugs than all the illegal drugs combined...
Look at all the disclaimers on prescription drugs and tell me why they should not get the same wrath pot receives...
You are really out of touch with reality...

Wed, 05/06/2009 - 9:40am Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.