Between “Reefer Madness” And “Crazy Stoner”, Is The CLEAR Path To Reform
Let’s be clear. Not all stoners are crazy and not all who oppose the reefer are mad. At the two extremes though are the people who stand in the way of reform. Their misguided and arrogant ideas prevent access to cannabis by those who need it as medicine. They undermine the rational and evidence-based arguments for reform, imposing their own selfish standards of behaviour and morality on others.
At the “Reefer Madness” end are the sad, bitter ProHos like Mary Brett and Debra Bell. They are supported by a group of journalists, some of whom share the same views, others who are simply exploiting the subject for their career: Kathy Gyngell, Melanie Phillips, Simon Heffer, Peter Hitchens, etc. In the House of Commons they are represented by Charles Walker, Nadine Dorries and David Burrowes.
At the “Crazy Stoner” end are the sad, delusional fools who think that displaying their use of cannabis in public is somehow going to persuade our political leaders and the non-using majority that reform is a good idea. They disrespect the fears and concerns of non-users and act as if defiance and bullying are ways to achieve change. They adhere to the idea that cannabis should be treated the same as carrots or tomatoes. They have a few bloggers on their side who exist in the same haze of hopeless hippy hypocrisy. No one represents them in the House of Commons.
The CLEAR path to reform is responsible, evidence-based and sensitive even to the concerns of the extremists. Writers such as Mark Easton, Tom Chivers, Derek Williams and Jason Reed support our policies. They are represented in the House by Paul Flynn, Peter Lilley, Tom Brake, Julian Huppert, Bob Ainsworth and an ever-increasing number from all parties who are realising the truth about cannabis.
Pragmatism, respect, compromise and evidence are the CLEAR way forward.