Talk:Legalise Cannabis Alliance

message: As modified by myself (please see Laurel Bush) the article aims to provide an objective view of the LCA, representiing faithfullly the LCA's  own aims and beliefs but not therefore endorsing them. The article does rely heavily however on LCA sources (not least Leagalise and untilise 2000. The  party's history is a major portion of the article: this begins with a record of the party's performance in the most recent general election and but then jumps back to the party's origins, to start the story which leads up to more recent events. I aim to update this history after the next general election. Laurel Bush 17:10, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article must be linked in the opening paragraph. Failure to do see is dishonest to our readers. the way I have done it is done in many articles. otherwise you will foirce me to completely rewrite the opening paragraph. LCA is fundamentally about legalising the drug, SqueakBox 16:19, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
I hope you like my new attempt. I don't mind where in the opening paragraph Cannabis (drug) is linked, but it is imperative that it be so, SqueakBox 16:30, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
I am about to put cannnabis as a drug into the opening paragraph. I cant see it as essential. Is there anyone who does not know of cannabis as a drug source?. Laurel Bush 10:11, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cannabis (drug)

message: That "clean up" needs some explanation. Laurel Bush 09:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up tag 

message: Article seems to need update. I believe LCA has become a pressure group rather than a political party. It no longer fields election candidates. Laurel Bush 11:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update needed 

message: :Image:Legalise Cannabis Alliance 2.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Legalise Cannabis Alliance 2.gif

message: i have edited the opening para to include "biomass" and "hemp products"
i am proposing some more updates and need some input
i will move the CLCIA reference to the history section as the LCA previous name was only used for one years election and was LCP (during the year Howard first ran)
i will contact the other founding members and seek usage of various clarification points as well as a correct and free image to use here
i will pm the major contributors to this article and then post here after discussion
Chaosdruid (talk) 05:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  updates 

message: oh dear, someone has decided to put a this huge section at the top of the page and it doesn't really belong there
same person has also put a section which is an opinion and as such should not be included without citing a reference to where these people say it
(for one thing, libertarianism is mostly used to refer to anarchistic groups who seek to denounce the rule of government, pressure group is probably most apt to use as a description for the present LCA agenda. In the previous years it was a single issue political party, the issue being the legalisation of cannabis)
please can 81.154.9.21 respond here and discuss the removals so we can assist him/her to include his/her info in the proper manner.
first removal :-
In our country today, cannabis is causing all kinds of difficulties in our society; huge amounts public money is wasted when police spend their valuable time filling out endless forms and prosecuting offenders; adolescence are becoming involved in smoking it as the market is aimed and the drugs readily available.  Some end up petty thieving or dropping out of school as a result, and some are even choosing the ladder leading to harder drugs as their curiosity and access to these much more dangerous substances grow.
All of these problems certainly has an adverse effect on the public as it is their money that goes down the drain trying to control these problems; ‘AROUND £50m is spent every year on prosecuting people for possession of cannabis’ (ECHO survey finds - Liverpool).  I feel that decriminalizing this world-wide consumed drug and regulating its use and sale would have a major beneficial outcome to everyone.  Not only would it allow our police to spend more time in the public interest, save tax-payers’ money, reduce crime and pollution and rake in vast amounts of government revenue, (‘Netherlands cannabis coffee shops generate 400 million Euros in tax revenue for the Government every year’) but to help preserve the innocence of our children by controlling the availability of it and diminishing the dangerously increasing black market.  Through this ‘black market’ heroin could occasionally be offered to people who would not otherwise have had access to it.
 The revenue received could help towards society’s real problems; the war on incredibly life-destroying drugs like heroine and cocaine. 
Cannabis has its detrimental aspects like any drug, but I feel a lot of people are confused to actually how dangerous it is.  It is said to cause reduced sperm count in men, worsen schizophrenics symptoms (only for those who already have it), create possible minor birth defects in women (whilst pregnant), and have short term memory losses (while under the influence) with no recorded deaths in the history of mankind.  These ‘dangers’ are almost laughable compared to the threats of alcohol and cigarettes which cause thousands of premature deaths each year in our country alone, (in 2006 The Independent newspaper reports that ‘Alcohol kills 22,000 Britons a year’).  Not only does alcohol affect its user, but to those around them; individuals who suffer with domestic violence, those who die in car crashes and alcohol fueled fights every year. 
Unlike most ‘dangerous’ drugs cannabis has many advantages.  The proven benefits of cannabis consumption are far greater compared to the plants’ supposed ‘setbacks’.  It is demonstrated to have therapeutic rewards to users and has many well known medicinal uses for MS sufferers to ease muscle spasm, cancer patients to fight the growth of cancerous cells in the body and even for disorders such as anorexia and anxiety.  As humans we believe in humanity, so why do we deny a sufferers right to be treated as one?  Surely this Act is inhumane through declining treatment and pain relief for those who need it most.  Through outlawing the substance we convert victims of pain and suffering into criminals; definite change in law is needed. 
In an age of global warming, allowing the agriculture of cannabis will add great contribution to saving the planet as it is a sustainable crop.  This I believe is remarkably the most hidden side to its industrial uses and is not usually heard of in Britain.  Hemp is a type of cannabis plant grown for its fiber and used to manufactured rope, canvas, paper, biodegradable plastics, some fuels, clothing and can even be used in skin salves and balms, as well as in nutritional supplements. 
So now I am really asking myself the question, ‘why is cannabis illegal then?’ Home sectary Jacqui Smith says 
“Cannabis is and always has been illegal. It now dominates the illegal drugs market in the UK and is stronger than ever before.” 
It ‘dominates’ the drugs market, giving wealth and power to the criminal gangs that do the dirty work.  Cannabis has not always been illegal, only in the last century has it been made criminal for unjust reasons… 
Our government categorized (without discussion) the drug alongside heroine and cocaine in the 1920s and prohibited its use as a ‘dangerous drug’.  It was the business man who saw hemp as a major barrier to acquire huge profits (from a gap in the market) which he
could make from the synthetic alternatives to cannabis products; chemical drugs, fossil fuels, and chemicals for cotton and wood pulp, (basically monopolizing the industries that cannabis already controlled).  These needed filling as a result of this sudden Law; a huge gap in the market for the cunning to endure a life time of riches.  
How could we let this happen?  The Act was passed when delegates from Egypt convinced British and Indian Governments (with no evidence)  that the drug had adverse effects on sanity from smoking or eating it (todays evidence shows this is false) and alleged that it causes a made-up disease called ‘Chronic Hashism’.  Today this money driven selfishness results in countries around the world polluting our environment a lot more than we have to.  Passing my proposed idea of decriminalizing cannabis seems logical to me and I cannot see why our government has not acted upon hundreds of thousands of pounds of research in favour of it.
'All laws which can be violated without doing anyone any injury are laughed at...’ Spinoza (Philosopher). I believe illegallity of cannabis is the only danger, hence making the law completely hypercritical and illogical.  
Contaminated cannabis is very dangerous for someone to use as they do not know what it contains, which is usually glass fiber or fine sand to make it heavier hence more profit.  This of course is a result of being illegal.  Furthermore, the weak-minded are more likely to turn to harder drugs as they are more readily available on the black market.  Cannabis users have to accociate themselves with bad people to get what they want, occationally being offered something stronger by them.  The availablity of harder drugs will widen, as will the curiosity of the adult or child through the influence of dealers around them.  The law turns victims of pain and suffering into criminals and refuses them the adequet treatment that they want.
Through my reseach I have found evidence of the practicallity in decriminaling cannabis, and evidence against the illegallity of it. I strongly believe that a change in law would have a certain beneficial outcome for not only children but sufferes of pain, society and the government alike.  
Matthew Smith
second removal-
Some people believe that the Legalise Cannabis Alliance has views fom Libertarianism as they believe it is not a criminal offence to use Cannabis and the government to keep out of peoples lives who use Cannabis.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaosdruid (talk • contribs) 04:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  whooaa!! 

message: the LCA has re-registered as a political party, now known as 'CLEAR' this article needs to be updated and a new page created for the new group.--78.105.214.88 (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  CLEAR reform and re-registration