Police launch investigation after discovery of cannabis factory in Harlow
Crime / Thu 20th Apr 2023 at 02:23pm
ESSEX Police has launched an investigation after the discovery of a cannabis factory in Harlow.
An Essex Police spokesperson said: “Officers are currently on scene at an industrial estate in Burnt Mill, Harlow following the discovery of a suspected cannabis factory.
We were called around 9:30am on Wednesday, 19 April following reports of suspected cannabis plants being discovered.
Around 150 plants have been discovered so far and specialist officers remain on scene whilst enquiries continue.
No arrests have been made at this stage.
This should be legal as should all drugs time to end the lost war on drugs = still it makes a good career for the police and justice system to fight it
Less drugs not more! drugs ruin lives. Can smell cannabis a mile of growing it or smoking it. Police should do more foot patrols around these warehouses there’s probably a lot more..
Adam Taylor - you obviously have little understanding as to WHY these products are banned to begin with. To give you some insight, the primary focus of these investigations is to ensure that a harmful product is not entering the public. Unregulated means uncontrolled, meaning anything could be put into the product you inhale, smoke, drink, eat, consume in any which way. And that would mean more sick people, with more illnesses and risks, more deaths and of course more harm - which, if you haven't worked out yet - means more cost to the NHS, more cost to the policing situation and of course - more deaths, along with more crime. So, no, there is a point to the whole "war on drugs" - if you cannot understand this, you should perhaps go and learn a little about the legal system and the reason why the one we have simply, works.
Adam Taylor - you obviously have little understanding as to WHY these products are banned to begin with. To give you some insight, the primary focus of these investigations is to ensure that a harmful product is not entering the public. Unregulated means uncontrolled, meaning anything could be put into the product you inhale, smoke, drink, eat, consume in any which way. And that would mean more sick people, with more illnesses and risks, more deaths and of course more harm - which, if you haven't worked out yet - means more cost to the NHS, more cost to the policing situation and of course - more deaths, along with more crime. So, no, there is a point to the whole "war on drugs" - if you cannot understand this, you should perhaps go and learn a little about the legal system and the reason why the one we have simply, works. (Comment including full name as required).
Graham (Renfield), it’s such a shame that no body is interested in a friendly, maybe even lively, exchange of ideas and opinions anymore, nope! It all seems to be that if opinions conflict, one party is always telling the other party to ‘go and educate yourself on the topic’, who knows, maybe with the misguided belief that if they do so, then the opinions of both party’s wil, at last, align. Also, I t’s problematic to tell someone that their are wrong and to go and study up on an issue because it’s entirely unhelpful. There is zero chance that they will heed your advice and a good chance it will likely cause conversation to flare up further and give rise to more misinformation being thrown around. I am curious to know, since you suggested that Adam go and educate himself on the war on drugs as a subject as a whole, what might your own level of education and experience with the topic be? Have you fully looked into it yourself, the history and provenance of the term, who phrased it and at what point in western history did it start to be a philosophy of governments and law enforcement alike? Or do you have a more surface understanding, that you believe in it because it’s the word of a trusted source like a government, that it seems like a legitimately useful policy because mainstream media is always just showing drugs in an evil damaging scourge on individuals and society? Unless you have a passion for the topic then really, all this exhaustive research would seem all too much and a waste of time really as the issue is really quite simple …. But it’s not. Like so many things in life, it’s never black and white, hence why your assertion that the ‘war on drugs is currently being won’. If that were the case, we’d no longer hear of this or be discussing it in anything but the context of our modern history. This so called ‘war’ has been running for more than 40 years now, a very long time for the issue not to have been resolved. And it’s not just that it hasn’t been resolved yet either, it’s the fact that todays illegal drug market is bigger and more global than it ever was. How is that winning? Like so many people do, you’ve brought up the issue that illicit drugs are dangerous because they are uncontrolled, meaning they are clandestinely made in less than ideal circumstances and using ingredients from sources that if a human consumed on its own would surely cause death. Not to mention that there are times these uncontrolled substances are being sold to the end user by less than reputable people who may themselves tinker with the product to stretch their supply or increase their profits and make it even more dangerous in the process. My question is: well, what if these substances were made in a more controlled manner, using only quality sources and made according to strict guidelines, like in a regulated lab? This would guarantee the end user is buying exactly what they want without surprises. What then? Do you just assume that everyone would just lose all self control and do copious amounts of this safer product, overdose and still be a burden to health systems? Some might, sure, just like we have nice and legal alcoholics … or people addicted to cigarettes. Hell, there’s a case to be made that even sugar can have some level of addiction tacked to its consumption. But do we ban them? In my long experience with drugs, I’m quite confident in forecasting that if these uncontaminated versions of drugs were available, you would NOT actually see such a scenario where everyone would start to take drugs and in copious quantities. Society wouldn’t collapse to a point where it was assumed safe so everyone was just high all the time. I also want you to ponder this …. If someone is able to take a drug or drugs that makes them feel happier, and remain in this realm of functional addiction, and doesn’t get involved in stealing or crime, is able to keep down a job, has a social life, pays their bills, has all their teeth and even gets regular checkups to make sure their health is OK, what business is it of yours whether they use drugs or not? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to? Why is it that they must enjoy life being happy without them is far more important than being able to sustain the same sort of life with them? I am sure the argument against it would be that functional addiction doesn’t exist, but as someone who has decades of actual experience with substance use and it’s effects in people, I assure you that it does. And for the record, for anyone who just assumes that because it’s illicit it’s poisonous to take and will ruin one’s health over time, that too is b.s.! For example, like caffeine, regular therapeutic doses of chemically pure opiates will not impact health adversely. Regular therapeutic doses of amphetamines also is not unhealthy, as evidenced by those suffering ADHD and narcolepsy and being treated with this drug for the last 30 years has shown. Surprisingly, nicotine is also absolutely fine and easily processed by the human body, what makes smoking bad for people is everything else that’s in the smoke inhaled from burning tobacco and the paper it’s contained in.