MurrayM:

 

Fred99:

 

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of tax/excise and "commercialisation".  Governments get too fond of the revenue, and regardless of some public statements about social responsibility, the alcohol (and tobacco) industry spent a century lobbying politicians.  Their objective - to sell as much of the stuff as they possibly can.  It's a business - primary objective is to make a profit, and as much profit as you can.  I can't see a huge difference between that (commercialisation which will inevitably end up being controlled by major corporates) and the gangs.  The corporates will be much less prone to kill people, but much better at marketing. 

 

Decriminalisation shouldn't require "commercialisation".  I'm pretty sure you can grow a perfectly satisfactory cannabis plant if you want with about the same ease as growing a tomato, locking it in to a revenue model (for govt and corporates) similar to how we ended up with the present alcohol disaster is plain stupid.

 

 

I think there's a large group of people that would only accept cannabis reform if it was regulated and taxed. They see that as a benefit (increased income for the government that can be spent on health, etc) and wouldn't be interested in change unless they can see benefits like this.

 

I think that you're right, but that they're being told this by people with vested interest in ensuring that it happens that way.