:mad: a certain few people have took to smoking a substance called skunk in my local hostelry (never heard of this substance before but can understand how it got its name) is this legal?
the management are turning a blind eye (or should i say a blocked nose) to this problem.
do you think the local police would be interested, if so , how do i report this without my id being known.

Skunk is a form of Cannabis... unsure as to the current stance of the police on this though...

I don't think you have to give any personal details when reporting a crime - just phone up your local station.

I may stand corrected on this though.

tell them you cant give your name because you fear for them finding out... I think skunk is a class B drug? so they'd be interested most likely, from my understanding its a more potent form of cannibis? or at least has similar effects?

It's crimestoppers you need for annonimity

*goes to look for link*

Edit: http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/giving/

Originally posted by xafier
tell them you cant give your name because you fear for them finding out... I think skunk is a class 2 drug? so they'd be interested most likely, from my understanding its a more potent form of cannibis? or at least has similar effects?

More potent. I think it's been genetically modified or had something altered during it's growing to make it stronger. I picked up this information at the cannabis museum in Amsterdam but can't remember all the details for some reason!

Skunk's a class A - I'd not put up with people smoking it in my presence. Go with crime stoppers - you'll be doing the right thing. I've nothing against people doing it in the safety of their own homes but in a public place smacks of a heck of a lot of inconsideration.

Originally posted by Swan_Vesta
Skunk's a class A - I'd not put up with people smoking it in my presence. Go with crime stoppers - you'll be doing the right thing. I've nothing against people doing it in the safety of their own homes but in a public place smacks of a heck of a lot of inconsideration.

Skunk is still only class C (like all cannabis), although there was talk of specifically raising it to class B. It is just a form of cannabis grown to have more THC in it than regular to make it stronger.

Its just weed - Class C still.

Give me the details - I'll happily go round, impersonate a copper and confiscate their stash :heyhey:

Call the licensing enforcement unit at West Bar; the landlord is less likely to turn a blind eye if he thinks his licence is at risk. Or you could write and complain anonymously to them

I think the police would be very interested. What you have described is highly illegal. If thge landlord is permitting it in his pub he will loose his licence at the least.

You owe it to the decent members of society to report it (anon if you wish) and make that pub a more pleasnat place in future.

I imagine the police wont be interested in the slightest. They will probably have a wander in if they have nothing better to do, and if they magically catch them in the act they may even go as far as giving them a stern word.
The landlord would be in more trouble for allowing it to happen in his/her boozer.

What exactly is 'highly illegal'? Please enlighten me and I shall stick to things that are only a little bit illegal.

Slim - this is meant in the least horrible way possible, but its this type of thing (weird attitude, intolerance, whiter than white, holier than thou crap) that make you a woman repellant.

Originally posted by floyd77
Slim - this is meant in the least horrible way possible, but its this type of thing (weird attitude, intolerance, whiter than white, holier than thou crap) that make you a woman repellant.
Well if Slim were advertising his approval of such activities - hey why not go all the way and actually become a dealer, Slim - I for one would be gagging for it from him NOT :mad:

Some people :loopy:

Originally posted by Swan_Vesta
Skunk's a class A
Nonsense. Skunk is a variety of herbal cannabis, nothing more, and as such is a class 'C' drug. It’s not genetically modified either. The only class 'A' form of cannabis is cannabis oil.

Most cannabis sold as Skunk isn't Skunk at all. The name is commonly used to distinguish weed with a high THC content from the imported crap that looks like Weetabix and is about as effective at getting you high.

You can report this if you think there is something going on that requires police involvement but I'd be more concerned about the people getting drunk on alcohol.

No don't be silly.

Let them enjoy their joint in peace.

You don't find people acting stoned and disorderly

its still illegal unless they have changed the law in the past 24hrs shop the lot of em!!!i say ruining your local :clap:

its illegal but pretty low key these days
tbh id just forget about it............or join in :)

they are thinking of upgrading skunk again but tbh that is unworkable, do you think your run of the mill copper knows the difference when somebodys smoking jamaican weed or purple haze..........very much doubt it

Originally posted by Strix
Well if Slim were advertising his approval of such activities - hey why not go all the way and actually become a dealer, Slim - I for one would be gagging for it from him NOT :mad:

Some people :loopy:
I did not mean that by loving drugs he would instantly become a babe magnet - its his attitude, you would think he was from the 1940's or something

"Oh My God - someone smoking a joint!!:o " Its hardly front page news is it? Saying its 'Highly Illegal' when most would reserve that term for murder or something. His opinions (which he is perfectly entitled to) alienate sections of society with his black/white, right/wrong beliefs as he tries to make himself seem superior to others when he is so obviously a social misfit. And I'm not just talking about weed or drugs.

Are they personally bothering you?

Have you been abused/robbed/disturbed by them?

Are you just interfering with probably nice people wanting to have a chill and a smoke when it is nothing to do with you?

Hmmm, the 'walk on by' attitude :suspect:
My favourite :mad:

It's not a walk on by attitude it's a not doing any harm so why bother them attitude.

It's called minding your own business

Originally posted by mjlacey21
Are they personally bothering you?

Have you been abused/robbed/disturbed by them?

Are you just interfering with probably nice people wanting to have a chill and a smoke when it is nothing to do with you?

not only bothering me but other people as well

not interfering with nice people, only with the skunk takers who should use this in the privacy of their home.

only my sense of smell has been abused by this filthy stuff

yes strix it's the "walk on by, nothing to do with me" attitude

Originally posted by melthebell
its illegal but pretty low key these days
tbh id just forget about it............or join in :)

they are thinking of upgrading skunk again but tbh that is unworkable, do you think your run of the mill copper knows the difference when somebodys smoking jamaican weed or purple haze..........very much doubt it

"ello ello ello what's all this then? do I smell a Northern Lights/Big Bud cross? Lucky for you that's not Skunk #1 sunshine, or you'd be up for possession of Class B"

I, for one, will be trying to get on the training programme for 'Hemp Strain Recognition by Pyrolysis 101'.

The cannabis grown in Sheffield is ... so good it's virtually hallucinogenic" (Senior SYP Offcier quoted in the star)

Whether you should inform the police or not depends entirely on your own conscience. TBH, I don't think tokers should be risking a publicans licence like that, and the socially responsible thing to do is smoke hemp under the public radar (discretely, at home or where others will not notice)

If you wanted to take any action, my advice would be talk to the publican, and say that whilst you like the pub, you feel uncomfortable in such close proximity to (illegal) drug taking.

Ask her nicely whether she thinks she is risking her licence by allowing them to smoke hemp in the pub.

You may find she has a quiet word with the offenders.

Of course, if you lived in the USA, you would be compelled to report this crime within 24hrs, or you would find yourself on drug charges too.

Thankfully we live in a country where we police ourselves more or less consistently and have no need for such draconian legislation. yet..... And Charles Clarke, if you happen to be reading this, ID cards are not going to help with the 'drugs problem' either.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
And Charles Clarke, if you happen to be reading this, ID cards are not going to help with the 'drugs problem' either.

nope it wont, but it'll be the most fun job for hackers in the world when that system goes online with every detail they can think of about every single one of us...

but dont worry, the government will have got the best men in for the job, that database WILL be secure, our information won't be hacked into within a week or two... honest :rolleyes:

can you see I have doubts in the government and the fact they always get THE worst sub-contracters in for all of their systems country wide? :hihi:

I'm sorry you feel your sense of smell has been abused, but cigarette smoke is a lot more offensive anyway. If the pub is turning a blind eye at their own risk I don't understand why you feel the need to interfere. I genuinely think that it is nothing to do with you if the pub is not bothered.

It's because the boundaries are being pushed, then they'll be pushed further and further still. Word gets round, and soon this little 'safe' place for smoking can easily become a handy place for dealing......

It's easier to put a stop to these things before they get out of hand

It's because the boundaries are being pushed, then they'll be pushed further and further still. Word gets round, and soon this little 'safe' place for smoking can easily become a handy place for dealing......

Talking from experience eh Strix. I would have thought you would have been better off dealing from a place where people were not smoking, but I guess you are more experienced in these matters!

They are less likely to be dealing if they are openly smoking - they're not going to advertise the fact.

What do you mean by out of hand? They may turn to crime to feed their habit? They may go on a drug crazed killing spree?

Chances are the pub would prefer to have them in smoking quietly than a group of ****** up beer boys.

Originally posted by mjlacey21
Chances are the pub would prefer to have them in smoking quietly than a group of ****** up beer boys.
:confused: I thought pubs existed to sell beer. They are not public sitting rooms :loopy:

People chilling out, enjoying themselves, not causing any trouble - surely not something to get too hot and bothered about??

Perhaps those getting flustered could do with joining them ?!? (hee hee)

And as for 'sense of smell' being abused, perhaps we should make personal hygeine a legal requirement as well...

chances are that the ****** up beer boys will be spending money and the stoned ****heads won't!
its still illegal and should be treated as such by the landlord because its his livelyhood thats being put at risk.

I do think that smoking hemp in a pub is taking the mick and if you openly commit an offence you should be prepared for the consequences - in this case probably a warning and confiscation of any hemp they may be in possesion of.

In my opinion the situation is like psilocybe mushrooms and other naturally occuring entheogens. Proponents of naturally occuring illegal mind altering substances have two choices.

[list=a]
quietly get on with their theophagy, without advertising the fact - and let everyone else get on with it if they want to, and remain blissfully unaware if they don't. This way everyone is happy.
make a big deal about it, sell their organisms openly, and generally give the law abiding public the finger, until the law is forced to intervene or appear impotent and irrelevant.
[/list=a]

Those of us who treasure the insights and experiences that these exceptional organisms unlock would do well to choose option a), and carry on doing what we love without ruffling the feathers of prohibitionists and moral arbiters.

Those of you who choose option b), and draw the eye of an ever critical and ignorant (unaware - not stupid) public are simply creating a more intolerant and repressive atmosphere for our chosen pursuits, which is not only counterproductive from your point of view, but intensely irritating to those of us who do not flaunt our breaches of the law.

Originally posted by mjlacey21
...Chances are the pub would prefer to have them in smoking quietly than a group of ****** up beer boys.
I'm with Strix on this one.

Actually, the chances are that the landlord would prefer the "(whatever) up beer boys", so long as they bought all the alcohol at her/his establishment...

...rather than a bunch of "smokers" sat round a "complimentary" glass of water with 8 straws.

Of course, I could be wrong. ;)

Why not just take the "recreational" smoking home guys, or won't mummy let you?

:suspect:

Why wouldn't they be spending money? Are all smokers poor? Would any establishment let any group sit without spending money. That's a ridiculous argument. The landlord is obviously happy to take the risk or they would be asked to leave pretty fast.

Yes it would be taking the **** if the landlord didn't like it but if they're not bothered why are you?

No my mummy wouldn't let me smoke at home, but it would be a very long way to travel for a spliff anyway.

Originally posted by Strix
They are not public sitting rooms

Ah, no. The large entertainment conglomerates want pubs to sell food and alcohol, and this is self evident in many establishments; but historically pubs have always been public sitting rooms. The unspoken contract that worked so well being:

"sit here -warm your bones and drink my porter"

Less male dominated now, but if you didn't have a 'sitting room', and plenty of people didn't - then a pub was about your only choice.

Perhaps you are right, Phanerothyme.

Although, if you believe a law to be wrong isn't it your duty to speak out about it? I am talking slightly from a devil's advocate point of view, but do wonder if your line of thinking would encourage change of attitude. If, for example, everyone who was homosexual had gone with your option a), would laws and attitudes would have changed about this issue? Is it not better to stand up and be counted rather than hide away breaking a law you disagree with?

going the quiet root is implicit acceptance of your wrong doing and the right of the moral arbiters to impose their morality on you though.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
I do think that smoking hemp in a pub is taking the mick and if you openly commit an offence you should be prepared for the consequences - in this case probably a warning and confiscation of any hemp they may be in possesion of.

In my opinion the situation is like psilocybe mushrooms and other naturally occuring entheogens. Proponents of naturally occuring illegal mind altering substances have two choices.

[list=a]
quietly get on with their theophagy, without advertising the fact - and let everyone else get on with it if they want to, and remain blissfully unaware if they don't. This way everyone is happy.
make a big deal about it, sell their organisms openly, and generally give the law abiding public the finger, until the law is forced to intervene or appear impotent and irrelevant.
[/list=a]

Those of us who treasure the insights and experiences that these exceptional organisms unlock would do well to choose option a), and carry on doing what we love without ruffling the feathers of prohibitionists and moral arbiters.

Those of you who choose option b), and draw the eye of an ever critical and ignorant (unaware - not stupid) public are simply creating a more intolerant and repressive atmosphere for our chosen pursuits, which is not only counterproductive from your point of view, but intensely irritating to those of us who do not flaunt our breaches of the law.

I see your point, but homosexuality isn't a helpful analogy at all.

Stand up and be counted - have a Smokey Bear Picnic, March on Parliament, Sign the petition, Join the UKCIA, vote green.

But don't give the rest of us tokers a bad name by skinning up in Cinemas, Pubs, and other public venues, when you know there are going to be people around who take a very different view, and who are just going to go home thinking


Grrr! this drugs problem is out of control, kids are smoking crack or whatever on the street. I'm gonna write to my MP/police chief/newspaper and kick up a stink. If everyone kicks up a stink maybe we can frighten the government into some dumb knee-jerk legislation


If you want to 'free the weed' you need to be as straight as they come and attack the prohibition policy by raising public awareness without appearing to satisfy the deeply etched and most damaging stereotypes held about hemp smokers and other theophagers - which are quite evident in this thread.

Originally posted by Cyclone
going the quiet root is implicit acceptance of your wrong doing and the right of the moral arbiters to impose their morality on you though.
wrong.

I can campaign against prohibition

And quietly trip atop Mam Tor.

these are not mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by mjlacey21
...Yes it would be taking the **** if the landlord didn't like it but if they're not bothered why are you?

No my mummy wouldn't let me smoke at home, but it would be a very long way to travel for a spliff anyway.
...and what would dear old mummy think of your inability to hold a conversation together without resorting to foul language?

Is this perhaps a result of the over indulgence in certain substances, combined with a rather laissez-fair attitude to people sharing the same "air" space?

Lets not forget, it’s illegal to smoke this "stuff" in a public place, and it’s against the rules of this “family friendly” forum to use bad language, even when masked.

What? You think my mummy would care that I used the term taking the ****? The censoring makes it look worse - if I'd realised it got censored I would have said mick or something, but I don't get why you're barking on about that anyway.

I have never said I smoke in public spaces - why are you trying to patronise me because I have a different viewpoint to you?

There are several pubs around sheffield where this is openly permitted, one not to far away from eccllesall road springs to mind.

This has been going on since i can remember so i doubt you are the first person to have this problem and i shouldnt think yours would be the first call to the police about it. Experience suggests that the police will do very little about it unless they are actually causing a disturbance.

IMO though, if they were doing it when you first went in the pub then dont say anything. On the other hand if it has just started and is putting you off your pint then say something.

Perhaps its because those who smoke who *don't* fit into the 'crusty' 'toker' etc stereotype don't stand up and be counted that the general public tend to maintain their opinions?

If all those with 'responsible' jobs, the 'pillars of the community', the doctors, lawyers, social workers, teachers etc etc etc admitted they were smoking cannabis then that would (I believe) be extremely helpful in challenging ignorance on the subject.

(and I don't think my homosexuality analgoy was unhelpful...)

Originally posted by mjlacey21
...I have never said I smoke in public spaces...
Good, I'm very glad to hear it...

...but you have defended others "rights" to do so, implying that anyone who was bothered by this practice is a busybody. To quote you:

“when it is nothing to do with you?”

“It's called minding your own business”

“I genuinely think that it is nothing to do with you if the pub is not bothered”

“Chances are the pub would prefer to have them in smoking quietly than a group of ****** up beer boys.”

Since when has smoking an illegal substance, which then travels into other peoples "airspace" been nothing to do with them?

If these people haven't got the common decency to undertake this "pastime" at home rather than in a Public House, then I have no concern, or sympathy for them when they fall foul of the law...

...and since the publican could be brought to book over the incident, they should care too, if they don't I have little sympathy for them either.

In short fridgeman, if this practice bothers you, or any of the other "regulars", feel feel to report away...

...if the "smokers" don't like it, they can go home, I'm sure they won't be missed by many.

Originally posted by chickmonk
Perhaps its because those who smoke who *don't* fit into the 'crusty' 'toker' etc stereotype don't stand up and be counted that the general public tend to maintain their opinions?

If all those with 'responsible' jobs, the 'pillars of the community', the doctors, lawyers, social workers, teachers etc etc etc admitted they were smoking cannabis then that would (I believe) be extremely helpful in challenging ignorance on the subject.

(and I don't think my homosexuality analgoy was unhelpful...)

Most people do not take up homosexuality in the same way they start drinking tea or smoking hemp. For most people (I understand) homsexuality runs deep in their identity from the moment they awaken sexually. And being celibate does not stop you being a homosexual. If you never smoke hemp, are you still a toker?

The way to challenge ignorance on the subject is definitely not to flaunt your contempt for the law in the face of others. To hold one part of the law in contempt is not to disregard the rule of law, and its necessity.

Lots of luminaries do admit to smoking hemp, and have stood up to be counted many, many times. But they don't often spark up a huge blunt at No10, because that kind of confrontational tactic always fails.

So does wild evangelism.

Keep it discrete when you're smoking. That way you also help keep the number of convictions down, and hemp appears to be less of a problem, making legitimate lobbying for legal reform a lot easier.

Sorry to barge in! but Strix if ur reading this could u sort out ya inbox its full!!!
Thanks!!!

Sorry! Just cleared you some space :thumbsup:

You seem to assume that I smoke the weed! Interesting!

Whether or not homosexuality is 'innate' or not is not the issue. Whether you disagree with a law because of your 'identity' or whether you disagree with it on moral reasons because it impairs on your freedom of choice still leads to the question of being open and honest about your views.

I agree that overly confrontational tactics are not generally the best way to go about things but this is not what you suggest in your original post:

quote:
a)quietly get on with their theophagy, without advertising the fact - and let everyone else get on with it if they want to, and remain blissfully unaware if they don't. This way everyone is happy.

b)make a big deal about it, sell their organisms openly, and generally give the law abiding public the finger, until the law is forced to intervene or appear impotent and irrelevant.

your option a) does not suggest in anyway increasing any forum for debate or improvement in education. Option b), however (one could argue) may force a change in the law or at least force the issue into the debating arena.
'Giving the abiding public the finger' suggests that the 'law abiding' are morally in the right which implies that weed
smokers are not. If people who smoke weed do not feel that they are morally in the wrong then it follows that they might want to publicly express this. And take the consequences if necessary...

that's what I was getting at with my post.
Option a) doesn't say, practice it in private whilst publicly admitting it and lobbying for a change in the law. It says to hide it away and go about your life as a good citizen, not challenging the moralizers who see fit to tell you what is right and wrong.

Originally posted by Cyclone
going the quiet root is implicit acceptance of your wrong doing and the right of the moral arbiters to impose their morality on you though.

Yep! I just expanded on it a bit! (read 'waffled...') :thumbsup:

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Ah, no. The large entertainment conglomerates want pubs to sell food and alcohol, and this is self evident in many establishments; but historically pubs have always been public sitting rooms. The unspoken contract that worked so well being:

"sit here -warm your bones and drink my porter"

Less male dominated now, but if you didn't have a 'sitting room', and plenty of people didn't - then a pub was about your only choice.

There are pubs that throw people out for not drinking. It can become a problem. It's selling beer that pays their bills!

AND - faced with the choice of frequenting a drug den, and drinking elsewhere, there are plenty of people who will vote with their feet ;)

'A drug pen'


That's hilarious!!!! Thankyou!!!

Originally posted by chickmonk
Perhaps you are right, Phanerothyme.

Although, if you believe a law to be wrong isn't it your duty to speak out about it? I am talking slightly from a devil's advocate point of view, but do wonder if your line of thinking would encourage change of attitude. If, for example, everyone who was homosexual had gone with your option a), would laws and attitudes would have changed about this issue? Is it not better to stand up and be counted rather than hide away breaking a law you disagree with?

Bad analogy. Sex in public is still illegal :roll:

There is a tolerance towards both homosexuality and cannabis, but only in private :thumbsup:

Isn't there a pub in the Hunters Bar end of town that has an outdoor area well known for tokers? I think it pulls in quite a lot of business because of its reputation for turning a blind eye. I guess it depends on your clientelle...

Originally posted by the fonz
IMO though, if they were doing it when you first went in the pub then dont say anything. On the other hand if it has just started and is putting you off your pint then say something.
This approach gets my vote :thumbsup:

There are a couple - with a really nice relaxed atmosphere
but we keep quiet about the names...

Good thing too. Let the tokers carry on in peace I reckon :thumbsup:

Originally posted by chickmonk
Isn't there a pub in the Hunters Bar end of town that has an outdoor area well known for tokers? I think it pulls in quite a lot of business because of its reputation for turning a blind eye. I guess it depends on your clientelle...
:roll: go on. Get every pub in Hunter's bar raided why don't you :roll:

The police know and don't care.

the police are probably the main instigators

Originally posted by Strix
Bad analogy. Sex in public is still illegal :roll:

There is a tolerance towards both homosexuality and cannabis, but only in private :thumbsup:

See your point, but my anaolgy was meant to illustrate how keeping quiet is not necessarily the way to bring change of public attitute. If people feel strongly about an issue and campaign hard for a change in the law by standing up for their views publicly (as was the case with homosexuality) then things CAN change.

Smoking cannabis is still illegal in public OR in private (whether it is tolerated or not) and many would wish for this to be changed.

Originally posted by Swan_Vesta
Skunk's a class A - I'd not put up with people smoking it in my presence. Go with crime stoppers - you'll be doing the right thing. I've nothing against people doing it in the safety of their own homes but in a public place smacks of a heck of a lot of inconsideration.



lol, damn what kinda skunk you smoking??

its class C, and will probably always be class C because its not that strong, compared to other drugs.

no-one has ever died from cannabis, you cant overdose unless you smoke about a kilo which is impossible to do in one night!! infact they use it for illnesses......

Originally posted by chickmonk
See your point, but my anaolgy was meant to illustrate how keeping quiet is not necessarily the way to bring change of public attitute....

Yep. But homosexuality didn't get it's new status by people giving public demonstrations of the activity :rolleyes:

Don't get them started using schizophrenia as an argument Leanah...

Originally posted by Strix
:roll: go on. Get every pub in Hunter's bar raided why don't you :roll:


lol, this post made me chuckle...

Originally posted by Strix
Yep. But homosexuality didn't get it's new status by people giving public demonstrations of the activity :rolleyes:

I dunno - you never heard of Gay Pride? Just because people weren't having homosexual sex in the street didn't mean that people weren't exhibiting openly homosexual attitudes. (and I don't think the police take too kindly to hetrosexuals bonking in public either...)

There are police reading these pages too Leanah ;)

They've ruffled a few feathers round here before

Originally posted by mjlacey21
Don't get them started using schizophrenia as an argument Leanah...


who mentioned schizo??

i was just saying that skunk will probably always be a class C

some think it does cause schizos but i bet thats very rare.

the people of Amsterdam are constantly smoking strong skunk, all different types and strengths.

and if anyone in here has ever been there, then they know that it is so relaxed, hardly ever have fights in clubs, bars, even on the streets.

its so safe compared to england and other places, everyone gets on, they have repect for people and crime over there is very minimum.

why???

cause skunk is proven to make people more relaxed

I think there's some pubs in Meersbrook as well that have tokers, and Crookes, and Broomhill (just thought I'd give the Police a bit more work to do...)

Actually only about 20% of people in Amsterdam smoke weed

Originally posted by Strix
There are police reading these pages too Leanah ;)

They've ruffled a few feathers round here before

im not saying anything wrong!
i dont smoke cannabis myself or my friends dont.
but i have been to amsterdam once for a weekend, and no i didnt smoke it, but the place was so relaxed and calm.

i like to have a drink, and the bars over there are so good, its a nice atmosphere, not like sheffield, were there fights every night.

just my opinion

Originally posted by mjlacey21
I'm sorry you feel your sense of smell has been abused, but cigarette smoke is a lot more offensive anyway. If the pub is turning a blind eye at their own risk I don't understand why you feel the need to interfere. I genuinely think that it is nothing to do with you if the pub is not bothered.

I have a friend who was given a random drugs test when given a medical by the company he worked for, and as I understand it, this is becoming more common. I would have thought that spending nights in a pub near a group of people smoking drugs could give you a positive test, so it really has to do with anyone that would like to drink in the pub... besides the fact that it is against the law, of course. Keep it to your own home.

Originally posted by mjlacey21
Actually only about 20% of people in Amsterdam smoke weed


have u been?????

amsterdam is very big.
i bet you find its alot more than that

I think that that is much more to do with the attitude of the place rather than the smoking. It's famous for the smoking, but that it such a minor part of an amazing place.

And yes I have been - I got back yesterday. It's more the tourists that smoke a lot.

Originally posted by mjlacey21
And yes I have been - I got back yesterday. It's more the tourists that smoke a lot.


the centre of amsterdam is nothing but smokers, the only place thats quiet and non smokers is near the diamond museum and round there..

my brother in law lives there, about 5 minutes from the train station, he lived there for 6 years, hes only seen 3 fights in the centre and they were tourists, that was " drunk " .

why isnt alcohol illegal?? that causes more than 60% of the violence that goes on in pubs and bars etc, were in amsterdam theres no fighting anywere its safer..

My friend lives in Amsterdam and says that the locals aren't so into it so I reckon 20% might well be true. As you say, its a big place...

Oh, and last time I went, I did find it was getting to be more aggressive in atmosphere. Lots of people trying to sell 'hard' drugs on the streets. Did you not think this Leanah? (p'raps I went to more dodgy places...)

Originally posted by LEANAH
...why isnt alcohol illegal?? that causes more than 60% of the violence that goes on in pubs and bars etc, were in amsterdam theres no fighting anywere its safer.
What, don't they sell alcohol in Amsterdam?

:suspect:

'In Amsterdam, 55 per cent of people who say they have tried cannabis only end up using it a couple of dozen times or less. The rest may have used it more often, but more than half have not used it in the past month. The data shows, that legalising cannabis may make you more likely to try it, but it does not make it more likely that you will continue to use it.'

Originally posted by Strix
Yep. But homosexuality didn't get it's new status by people giving public demonstrations of the activity :rolleyes:

it didn't get it's status changed because everyone kept quiet about it. it took protests and complaints over a period of years.

Had to speed read thru this so if anyone put the current legal posish on already, sorry

The position over a year ago was that while they were trying to declassify some drugs it is still illegal for publicans to allow or encourage anyone smoking the 'erb, it was reported in one of the beersellers guides that this is punishable by extremely large fines (can't remember exact figure-thousands tho), loss of license and/or up to 14 years in prison. Can't see authorities giving anyone such a stiff sentence but that was the legal position as reported then.

I once had a young un light up in our pub. I got the small fire extinguisher, slammed it down in front of him and told him if he didn't put it out I would. It got a laugh from everyone and defused the situation. He was good enough to put it out gracefully after that.

Oh, I can't remember who started this thread but hope it gets resolved. Not only does skunk smell obnoxious I've seen too many people damaged by this drug, it really is responsible for mood swings, exacerbating mental illness etc. Enough people complain about passive smoking after all, get 'em all together n lobby the pub. Good luck with the situation

Now, back to the travel guide....oh yeah, we were in Amsterdam!

Tune in tomorrow for Paris.

Originally posted by Cyclone
it didn't get it's status changed because everyone kept quiet about it. it took protests and complaints over a period of years.

but people didn't get it on in pubs to try and further the cause of freedom from repression.

Are you seriously trying to elaborate on an analogy between hemp smokers and homosexuals? I have to say thats the weirdest digression on this thread so far.

You can complain and protest against hemp prohibition as much as you like, but lighting up doobies on the bus, in the pub etc is not the way to do it effectively.

weird digression! Ah well, I try!

and I think people did get on in pubs! (in the Gay Bar Gay Bar)

:smile:

I'm going to give up on this line of argument because I think we are at cross purposes and all that has been said about my 'weird digression' has been said.

If you light up in your own home that is your business. If someone lights up on the bus then it is theirs and they should be prepared to take the consequences.

I do wonder tho whether if everyone who smokes the weed turned up at the police station, spliff in hand on the same day and asked to be arrested if the law might change?

(and also it would make me laugh)

They've been having Smokey Bear Picnics in this country down in my old stomping ground (Portsmouth) since the mid 90s.

not really caught up with the uk.rec.drugs.cannabis crowd that would turn up, but I'm not sure it's still going.


maybe something for sheff?

Originally posted by fridgeman


only my sense of smell has been abused by this filthy stuff



its the best smell in the world :)

way better than normal ciggie smoke anyway :)

anyway this forthcoming ban on smoking in public places will stop ALL smoking so thattll solve yer problem :)


tbh All smoking is filthy to none smokers, not just skunk / weed ...so dont just weed out those smokers :P (sorry for the pun, ill get my coat)

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
but people didn't get it on in pubs to try and further the cause of freedom from repression.

Are you seriously trying to elaborate on an analogy between hemp smokers and homosexuals? I have to say thats the weirdest digression on this thread so far.

You can complain and protest against hemp prohibition as much as you like, but lighting up doobies on the bus, in the pub etc is not the way to do it effectively.

I think the difference of opinion came about because of the wording of option a) which seemed to imply keeping quiet and doing nothing, not smoking it in private and protesting in public.