Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing Cannabis yet again. This is one of those issues if you will, that I think there is a certain amount of misconception that is sort of floating around about this topic. Most notably, I made a video recently where we discussed, again, to one degree or another and I am not calling out any specific people but the media generally, the ether of the media if you will at the moment seems to not really, I don't know if they have their own motivations or whatever, but they seem to be kind of framing this as "we are in a legal vacuum" or "it is a gray area". I have done the videos on this already where I explain, no based on, and I am coming at this as an exercise in comparative laws, an American Attorney looking at the way the Thai Civil Law system is, or all Civil Law Systems for that matter, one of the basic tenets is the Doctrine of Codification which stipulates that in order to illegalize something a statute has to be promulgated that specifically illegalizes that item, that product, or that act, in order for it to be considered a legitimate restriction pursuant to the philosophy if you will of Civil Law. So again, as we have discussed, there is no gray area, it's clear, it's legal here right now. Yes there are regulations on it as we have discussed in prior videos. It is considered a controlled herb and those who are not 20 years of age cannot partake of it pursuant to current law, as we currently sit at this time. 

That said, there has been discussion about promulgating new legislation that would put restrictions upon this and as I discussed in prior videos and full disclosure, I have serious qualms about that. I think there is a way to do this and that way to do it is what's best in my opinion for Thailand and I am hoping as the title of this video suggests, cooler head sort of prevail if you will in terms of further consideration on this issue because I think it is warranted at the end of the day. I think a lot of folks agree actually. A lot of businesses have come about out of this; there have been knock-on implications as I have noted in other videos. Things like commercial real estate, the commercial real estate sector is seeing some significant benefits as a result of this and this is at a time when we are watching the commercial real estate sector in other jurisdictions absolutely implode. So again, further consideration is I think very warranted and I think that this recent news that I found in the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, I think this further news is quite good. I think it shows a real shall we say, an intention to fully consider all ramifications of this before promulgating some Act that may have knock-on implications that could be detrimental to the economy here in Thailand. 

Again, Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Government delays approval of Cannabis ban legislation. First of all the way that this is being framed by certain outlets "Cannabis ban legislation", that is not what is happening. It's not going to be banned, they have discussed as many, many times. Now how it is categorized may be up for debate but it is not going to be banned. Quoting further: "The Government delayed the approval of a draft Bill that would ban the recreational use of Cannabis as it needs more opinions from other parties Public Health Minister Cholnan Srikaew said after the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. Ministry of Public Health could not submit the Bill to the Cabinet on Tuesday because more time is needed to see views Mr Cholman said." Quoting further: "The previous administration implemented landmark legislation in mid-2022, propelling Thailand to become the first country in Asia to decriminalize Cannabis." As I have said in other videos, that is not the correct terminology. I kind of hate the word ‘decriminalize’ in and of itself because what it really means is law enforcement is not doing their job. Decriminalization is what occurs when you have a law and for example law enforcement just sort of says "yeah, we are not going to enforce that or we are not going to enforce in a certain way." There are times when I think that it is warranted like where people clearly want to see a lot of change and for example a legislative body might not be in session so the enforcement mechanism decides or I should say the executive mechanism decides to go ahead and say yeah that is not going to be our priority, so yeah de-criminalization under certain circumstances I think that is a warranted use of the of the term; that is not a warranted use of the term under present circumstances. As I have discussed in other videos, again this is legal here. Quoting further: "And enabling thousands of marijuana and weed related shops to open." Well I love this whole "allowing". Nothing was allowed. Cannabis just became legal and people that want to sell it are opening shops in order to do so. And again I think it is interesting, the use of the term "ban", again this isn't going to be a ban no matter how we look at it, it is going to be an issue of regulation. 

Now my main concern is this whole notion of a recreational Cannabis to begin with as I discussed in other videos, we don't see a major hue and cry amongst the political establishment and I wouldn't say there is necessarily a hue and cry from the political establishment at the moment but from any parts if you will, any political actors crying out for a ban of any kind on 'recreational’ use of grapes in the form of wine or wheat and honey in the form of beer, or hops in the form of beer. There is no call for a ban to the recreational use of those products notwithstanding the fact as we have discussed in other videos, alcohol does far more damage, and the statistics are out there in terms of lives lost, than does Cannabis. Now a counter argument to that could be "well we haven't seen it legal" although we have seen it illegal and we know it is not an unfair statement to say it doesn't kill anybody in any meaningful way. Somebody quoted, somewhere I saw that was quoted that last year X number of people died as a result of alcohol and like one person from Cannabis and I couldn't figure out what the background was on the one person who passed away because I am fairly certain there are other things going on rather than just imbibing a bunch of Cannabis because again, it just basically does not have that capability. It's my understanding even like high THC content Cannabis you would have to ingest so much of it that it's a practical impossibility. That said, I am not a medical professional, I am not any expert herbologist or something but the point to take away from this video is it has been determined that further consideration is needed; thank you Government, good. This does need further consideration; we do need to look hard at this issue because it can be a major benefit for Thailand, for everyone in Thailand, if we craft a piece of legislation that is crafted in such a way that it does not detrimentally impact the economy and impact large sectors of the Thai economy, while at the same time yes health and safety need to be taken into consideration and we do need regulation. I am not anti-regulation but I just would like to see regulation that benefits rather than creates even a cost benefit analysis.