Scots Weed Cafe

That would be a matter of policy by the Chief Constable of the force area, hence me using the term "policies and opinions".

For a matter like this, it is likely that ACPO(S) would have discussed policy and agreed what line to take. It is likely that they were simply making the point that the re-classification from B to C did not alter the fact that the offences themselves were extant. They were also making the point that to flaunt (or inded flout) the law is such a flagrant manner was stupid.

I fully expect them to take the position that user quantities will not be treated in a criminal manner. Customs have been doing this for many years, for first offences. User quantity of dope = fine. Do it again and there will be more severe penalties.

J'Pol

Agree with that.

As I understand it, the Purplehaze Cafe is a members only club where a "blind eye" will turned to people who partake in the weed. However, it is no smoking club so it looks like Alice's Restaurant style brownies will be the order of the day.

I believe the Edinburgh constabulary simply wanted to remind people that class C is still illegal even if the penalties are minor.

After the initial fuss I think the Cafe will lose its news worthiness and the Edinburgh patrons will largely be left in peace. I would much rather our finest spent more time chasing up the underage drinking brats who made off with my car ariel. But that is perhaps simply me having a somewhat skewed perspective due to personal interest. :rolleyes:

jpol.
read the article... it actually highlights the stupidity of the whole difference. How is it misinformed? it reported the fact that a cafe opened (this is indeed legal as long as nobody actually uses any drugs on the premisses, one could legally open a brothel as long as there were no prostitutes and no sex took place ) it reported the fact that the owner was one of those arrested and it reported his statement about the differences. It reported that there is a campaign.

It REPORTED something that happened. It didn't say cannibis has been made legal.....just how was it misinformed pish?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by vidcc@31 January 2004 - 16:46
How is it misinformed? it reported the fact that a cafe opened (this is indeed legal as long as nobody actually uses any drugs on the premisses, one could legally open a brothel as long as there were no prostitutes and no sex took place)

---

Do you really expect me to reply to this in any meaningful way. It is simply preposterous.

Your position is that cafés, are legal as long as no-one takes drugs and brothels are legal, as long as there are no prostitutes and no sex.

If this is the case, then the café is just another café and the brothel is in fact a convent.

What on earth are you talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Biggles@31 January 2004 - 16:46

As I understand it, the Purplehaze Cafe is a members only club where a "blind eye" will turned to people who partake in the weed. However, it is no smoking club so it looks like Alice's Restaurant style brownies will be the order of the day.

---

Unless the people will be bringing their own brownies, the club will be selling them one supposes. In which case they will be knowingly concerned in the supply of a proscribed substance. It would hardly be surprising for the Police to act, particularly if it was being rubbed in their faces.

Or is it just a place where people can bring their own brownies to eat. In which case, so what. There are probably hundreds of them, I am sure the cognoscenti know which establishments do not object to people eating their own cakes.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+31 January 2004 - 18:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 31 January 2004 - 18:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@31 January 2004 - 16:46
How is it misinformed? it reported the fact that a cafe opened (this is indeed legal as long as nobody actually uses any drugs on the premisses, one could legally open a brothel as long as there were no prostitutes and no sex took place)

---

Do you really expect me to reply to this in any meaningful way. It is simply preposterous.

Your position is that cafés, are legal as long as no-one takes drugs and brothels are legal, as long as there are no prostitutes and no sex.

If this is the case, then the café is just another café and the brothel is in fact a convent.

What on earth are you talking about. [/b][/quote]
that&#39;s the whole point of the stupidity...... he was able to open this cafe and have members register....he broke no laws even though the company policy was to allow people to smoke and in fact it was to encourage it...it was only once the police found drugs that they could make arrests....are you just not understanding the whole ironic nature of the post?
The whole point of opening the establishment was to highlight the confusion in the law as it stands.
Sometimes the hampster falls asleep in the wheel <_<

What confusion in the law ?

As I understand it, it is BYOB. :rolleyes:

I don&#39;t believe the club proposes to sell much of anything other than tea and coffee and a pleasant place to meet. As I said, I think that, unless it becomes a focal point for real criminals, it will only periodically appear on police radar.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Biggles@31 January 2004 - 23:32
As I understand it, it is BYOB. :rolleyes:

I don&#39;t believe the club proposes to sell much of anything other than tea and coffee and a pleasant place to meet. As I said, I think that, unless it becomes a focal point for real criminals, it will only periodically appear on police radar.

---

Now that makes sense, as does the posturing of L&B.

I dont get it, why dont they just legalize it and tax it..