THE CASES FOR AND AGAINST LEGALISING CANNABIS (2 OF 2)

I AGREE with the many valid points made by Elizabeth Clark in her recent
letter of support for cannabis cafes (Evening News, April 23).

Cananbis is simply a particular variety of the hemp plant containing a
substance which exerts a psychoactive effect on the mind - but then, so
does caffeine.

However, it is now a known fact that within the human brain the receptors
specifically designed to welcome and appreciate that chemical commonly
known as THC. Why should this be, other than as part of the original human
design?

As a plant, hemp is incredibly versatile. There's a myriad of ways
humanity could gain through its reintegration into agriculture.

Many of the products we currently get from oil can also be produced from
the hemp plant, including a form of petrol, as well as paints, plastics,
lubricants and fuels.

Hemp is a fast-growing plant which would flourish in many of the currently
impoverished or environmentally damaged areas of the world, as well as in
the UK.

For about 80 years now, we have been denying ourselves the benefits of this
previously essential plant, although it was widely grown by both sides in
the Second World War for a variety of uses. As far as I am concerned, the
resurgence of hemp farming globally is the only way this planet is ever
going to sort itself out.

Hemp / cannabis has more in common with rosemary than with paracetamol, and
I feel it should not be part of the "war against drugs."

A legal redefinition of cannabis as a herb rather than a drug might serve
to remove the stigma of illegality at a stroke, allowing humanity to
progress from its current dependency on finite and fast-diminishing natural
resources of crude oil - and consequent conflicts of national interest.

Jeremy Crisp

St Benedicts

Norwich