The War on Drugs
The War on Drugs
Could we try to define a state of affairs in which this could be declared won? What would constitute victory? Who would have won it and who would have lost?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
spot;1010399 wrote: Could we try to define a state of affairs in which this could be declared won? What would constitute victory? Who would have won it and who would have lost?
I have my own definition, and it would be when not one dollar of profit is made from illicit drugs.
I have my own definition, and it would be when not one dollar of profit is made from illicit drugs.
The War on Drugs
Lon;1010471 wrote: I have my own definition, and it would be when not one dollar of profit is made from illicit drugs.
By whom? Break it down, list the categories of people who mustn't profit before the war's won.
By whom? Break it down, list the categories of people who mustn't profit before the war's won.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
spot;1010500 wrote: By whom? Break it down, list the categories of people who mustn't profit before the war's won.
Profit period, irrespective of the recipient.
Profit period, irrespective of the recipient.
The War on Drugs
Okay, I'll say "in that case it's won if..." and then you refine your definition.
It's won if all drugs are declared licit. Nobody can then profit from trading in illicit drugs.
Your turn.
It's won if all drugs are declared licit. Nobody can then profit from trading in illicit drugs.
Your turn.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
spot;1010529 wrote: Okay, I'll say "in that case it's won if..." and then you refine your definition.
It's won if all drugs are declared licit. Nobody can then profit from trading in illicit drugs.
Your turn.
Let's exclude prescription meds and consider just those that are deemed to be illicit by international drug agencies. After all, that's the Drug War that they are talking about winning.
It's won if all drugs are declared licit. Nobody can then profit from trading in illicit drugs.
Your turn.
Let's exclude prescription meds and consider just those that are deemed to be illicit by international drug agencies. After all, that's the Drug War that they are talking about winning.
The War on Drugs
Lon;1010591 wrote: Let's exclude prescription meds and consider just those that are deemed to be illicit by international drug agencies. After all, that's the Drug War that they are talking about winning.
Each country has it's own list of illicit drugs - there is no central international register.
Given that, any single country could take Spot's route and declare all drugs legal, instantly winning their war on drugs according to your definition.
Was that your intention?
Each country has it's own list of illicit drugs - there is no central international register.
Given that, any single country could take Spot's route and declare all drugs legal, instantly winning their war on drugs according to your definition.
Was that your intention?
The War on Drugs
Bryn Mawr;1010599 wrote: Each country has it's own list of illicit drugs - there is no central international register.
Given that, any single country could take Spot's route and declare all drugs legal, instantly winning their war on drugs according to your definition.
Was that your intention?
No, my intention is to try and not let Spot turn this discussion around to Pharmas and their grubby profit making capitalistic ways via legal prescription drugs. I'm trying to focus our discussion on what we deem to be illicit drugs. If their were no profit to be made with sale of illicit drugs, the war on drugs would be won.
Given that, any single country could take Spot's route and declare all drugs legal, instantly winning their war on drugs according to your definition.
Was that your intention?
No, my intention is to try and not let Spot turn this discussion around to Pharmas and their grubby profit making capitalistic ways via legal prescription drugs. I'm trying to focus our discussion on what we deem to be illicit drugs. If their were no profit to be made with sale of illicit drugs, the war on drugs would be won.
The War on Drugs
Lon;1010624 wrote: No, my intention is to try and not let Spot turn this discussion around to Pharmas and their grubby profit making capitalistic ways via legal prescription drugs. I'm trying to focus our discussion on what we deem to be illicit drugs. If their were no profit to be made with sale of illicit drugs, the war on drugs would be won.
I hadn't a thought in my mind about pharmas. If you declare all drugs you currently deem to be illicit drugs to be lawful and start selling them in corner stores legally next to the cigarettes and whiskey you've won your war on drugs, according to your definition. That's why I'm asking you either to delve deeper or to say wow, okay, that would win it.
I hadn't a thought in my mind about pharmas. If you declare all drugs you currently deem to be illicit drugs to be lawful and start selling them in corner stores legally next to the cigarettes and whiskey you've won your war on drugs, according to your definition. That's why I'm asking you either to delve deeper or to say wow, okay, that would win it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
I would consider it won, when as a general cultural rule human beings don't feel the need en masse to view reality through the prism of drink, or coke, or dope or any other recreational drug. However, human beings being weak, foolish, and easily deluded by their own desires will continue to do all these things. So I don't see there ever being a situation where people won't feel the need to get off their heads to be themselves. Sad.
Its an interesting question, but I suppose slightly to one side. What effect would you say it has had that many of the traders, bankers, hedge funders, and other financials are mostly young arrogant men, coked out of their brains most weekends, with as much easy money, sex with numerous young women, drugs and endless opportunities to misbehave (and be lauded for their machismo) had on their totally irresponsible attitude to what they were actually doing with other people's money?
Its a strange time, when all the rock stars are timid vegitarian middle aged men, and the bankers are totally irresponsible, young, crazy drug-fuelled hedonists.
Its an interesting question, but I suppose slightly to one side. What effect would you say it has had that many of the traders, bankers, hedge funders, and other financials are mostly young arrogant men, coked out of their brains most weekends, with as much easy money, sex with numerous young women, drugs and endless opportunities to misbehave (and be lauded for their machismo) had on their totally irresponsible attitude to what they were actually doing with other people's money?
Its a strange time, when all the rock stars are timid vegitarian middle aged men, and the bankers are totally irresponsible, young, crazy drug-fuelled hedonists.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The War on Drugs
Fact is, there is no war to be won. As long as there is a market for drugs, both illicit and legal, there will be profit to be made, and thus the war is not winnable. I don't know what the effect of legalizing and controlling presently popular drugs would be. It seems like it would reduce the huge profits that are made and curtail some of the violent crime. Whaddathink?
The War on Drugs
Lon;1010686 wrote: Fact is, there is no war to be won. As long as there is a market for drugs, both illicit and legal, there will be profit to be made, and thus the war is not winnable. I don't know what the effect of legalizing and controlling presently popular drugs would be. It seems like it would reduce the huge profits that are made and curtail some of the violent crime. Whaddathink?
Education before prohibition every time
Education before prohibition every time
The War on Drugs
Lon, you have a prior example of legalizing what was previously an illegal drug when Prohibition was lifted on alcohol. Alcohol kills more people than all the illegal drugs added together but it was still considered less harmful to society to take its distribution out of the hands of criminals. Isn't that the same issue that's at stake today? The criminality? There's no criminality associated now with the production or distribution of alcohol other than that associated with tax avoidance which happens in any area of trade, it's not drug-specific. The profits have been brought inside the tax system and declared legitimate, they're part of pension funds just like any other enterprise.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
The war on drugs cannot be won. Young folks are into recreational drug usage.. folks my age think they are above any of those labels they apply to kids, simply because their drugs of choice are of the prescription variety.
And it seems that everyone is taking something for something... if they aren't we usually wish they were..:rolleyes:
And it seems that everyone is taking something for something... if they aren't we usually wish they were..:rolleyes:
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
The War on Drugs
Galbally;1010638 wrote: I would consider it won, when as a general cultural rule human beings don't feel the need en masse to view reality through the prism of drink, or coke, or dope or any other recreational drug. However, human beings being weak, foolish, and easily deluded by their own desires will continue to do all these things. So I don't see there ever being a situation where people won't feel the need to get off their heads to be themselves. Sad.
Its an interesting question, but I suppose slightly to one side. What effect would you say it has had that many of the traders, bankers, hedge funders, and other financials are mostly young arrogant men, coked out of their brains most weekends, with as much easy money, sex with numerous young women, drugs and endless opportunities to misbehave (and be lauded for their machismo) had on their totally irresponsible attitude to what they were actually doing with other people's money?
Its a strange time, when all the rock stars are timid vegitarian middle aged men, and the bankers are totally irresponsible, young, crazy drug-fuelled hedonists.
That doesn't really address the War on Drugs though, does it. A general cultural rule of human beings rejecting en masse a view of reality through the prism of drugs includes tobacco and alcohol before anything else, they're the most powerful of the drugs in my opinion. Tobacco's the most addictive, alcohol's the most lethal. There might be exceptions like crack but, let's face it, if there's a shop-ful of legal drugs to be selected from what idiot's going to choose crack? People choose crack when nothing else is on offer when they go out to score and the dealers know they've a monopoly for the night.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
Its an interesting question, but I suppose slightly to one side. What effect would you say it has had that many of the traders, bankers, hedge funders, and other financials are mostly young arrogant men, coked out of their brains most weekends, with as much easy money, sex with numerous young women, drugs and endless opportunities to misbehave (and be lauded for their machismo) had on their totally irresponsible attitude to what they were actually doing with other people's money?
Its a strange time, when all the rock stars are timid vegitarian middle aged men, and the bankers are totally irresponsible, young, crazy drug-fuelled hedonists.
That doesn't really address the War on Drugs though, does it. A general cultural rule of human beings rejecting en masse a view of reality through the prism of drugs includes tobacco and alcohol before anything else, they're the most powerful of the drugs in my opinion. Tobacco's the most addictive, alcohol's the most lethal. There might be exceptions like crack but, let's face it, if there's a shop-ful of legal drugs to be selected from what idiot's going to choose crack? People choose crack when nothing else is on offer when they go out to score and the dealers know they've a monopoly for the night.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Grizzled_Bear
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:30 pm
The War on Drugs
Tobacco's the most addictive, alcohol's the most lethal.
I think that this is only true because of their commonality. In much the same way that sparklers are the most dangerous firework and swimming pools accidentally kill more children than handguns.
I think that this is only true because of their commonality. In much the same way that sparklers are the most dangerous firework and swimming pools accidentally kill more children than handguns.
The War on Drugs
Grizzled_Bear;1010733 wrote: I think that this is only true because of their commonality. In much the same way that sparklers are the most dangerous firework and swimming pools accidentally kill more children than handguns.
I'm speaking of individuals, not of total incidents. Minds become addicted to all sorts of things. Opiates can addict certain personalities in certain circumstances. When the circumstances change the addiction's not there - addiction is a psychological dependency, the chemical aspect of it is far less powerful. Anyone can walk away from mere chemical addiction so long as they're not using the drug as an emotional crutch.
Nicotine is as chemical a grip as it gets - other than, as I mentioned earlier, crack, so I'm told. I've never tried crack so I don't know personally. I know quite a bit about emotional and chemical dependence first hand though. The roughest thing I'd face getting off is caffeine and that's purely chemical and not emotional, I get blinding headaches within a day if I go cold turkey, it's far worse than any other addiction I've handled. Similarly, alcohol addiction is shockingly powerful once the body reaches that stage with it, far far worse than mere heroin.
I'm speaking of individuals, not of total incidents. Minds become addicted to all sorts of things. Opiates can addict certain personalities in certain circumstances. When the circumstances change the addiction's not there - addiction is a psychological dependency, the chemical aspect of it is far less powerful. Anyone can walk away from mere chemical addiction so long as they're not using the drug as an emotional crutch.
Nicotine is as chemical a grip as it gets - other than, as I mentioned earlier, crack, so I'm told. I've never tried crack so I don't know personally. I know quite a bit about emotional and chemical dependence first hand though. The roughest thing I'd face getting off is caffeine and that's purely chemical and not emotional, I get blinding headaches within a day if I go cold turkey, it's far worse than any other addiction I've handled. Similarly, alcohol addiction is shockingly powerful once the body reaches that stage with it, far far worse than mere heroin.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The War on Drugs
spot;1010728 wrote: That doesn't really address the War on Drugs though, does it. A general cultural rule of human beings rejecting en masse a view of reality through the prism of drugs includes tobacco and alcohol before anything else, they're the most powerful of the drugs in my opinion. Tobacco's the most addictive, alcohol's the most lethal. There might be exceptions like crack but, let's face it, if there's a shop-ful of legal drugs to be selected from what idiot's going to choose crack? People choose crack when nothing else is on offer when they go out to score and the dealers know they've a monopoly for the night.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
I'd like to pursue this legal/lethal drug thing. Many folks take daily maintenance shots of one kind or another to stay alive and yet many of those drugs can be lethal.
Prescription sleep meds are used extensivley and many people are hooked
big time. I have had chronic sleep problems for years and have been the sleep clinic route and tried all the proposed sleep aids and cures. I limit myself to three pills a month so I can at least look forward to three nights of decent sleep. It's damn tempting to want to do it more often. The problem is that it would take increasing amounts to get the same benefit, and then, I don't like the idea of potential addiction.
Speaking of educating people as to drug usage---------right now, given the plethora of TV ads for one drug or another to solve all erectile, bowel, bladder, anal, oral, optical, mental, vascular, coronary, skeletal problems, the education is championing drug usage. It's no wonder there is a problem.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
I'd like to pursue this legal/lethal drug thing. Many folks take daily maintenance shots of one kind or another to stay alive and yet many of those drugs can be lethal.
Prescription sleep meds are used extensivley and many people are hooked
big time. I have had chronic sleep problems for years and have been the sleep clinic route and tried all the proposed sleep aids and cures. I limit myself to three pills a month so I can at least look forward to three nights of decent sleep. It's damn tempting to want to do it more often. The problem is that it would take increasing amounts to get the same benefit, and then, I don't like the idea of potential addiction.
Speaking of educating people as to drug usage---------right now, given the plethora of TV ads for one drug or another to solve all erectile, bowel, bladder, anal, oral, optical, mental, vascular, coronary, skeletal problems, the education is championing drug usage. It's no wonder there is a problem.
The War on Drugs
spot;1010728 wrote: That doesn't really address the War on Drugs though, does it. A general cultural rule of human beings rejecting en masse a view of reality through the prism of drugs includes tobacco and alcohol before anything else, they're the most powerful of the drugs in my opinion. Tobacco's the most addictive, alcohol's the most lethal. There might be exceptions like crack but, let's face it, if there's a shop-ful of legal drugs to be selected from what idiot's going to choose crack? People choose crack when nothing else is on offer when they go out to score and the dealers know they've a monopoly for the night.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
You wish to adopt the permissive approach to taking currently illegal drugs, and I understand that argument well, and I symapthize with it, however, it won't solve the misery that is involved in being dependent on any mind altering substance. What it will do is take away some of the economic power of criminal gangs, but it won't stop people making a personal descison to regularly take drugs, far from it.
In my country right now (and for as long as I can remember), the the number one issue in society is alcohol abuse, its crippling us if you ask me. We have one of the highest male suicide rates in the developed world, we have one of the highest rates of domestic violence, our towns become battlegrounds every weekend night, young people are destroying their lives literally and figuratively through massive substance abuse. We have recently removed most of the rules regarding the sale of alcohol, and the result has been an explosion in alcohol spending and consumption and everything that comes with it.
The response to these issues, which essentially centre around concepts of self-respect and self-restraint seems to be to remove the remaining socially imposed restraints, leave it all up to individual choice (a bit like global finance) and hope an educational pep talk will somehow counter the massive cultural pressure people are under to consume drink and drugs and have sex, being barked at them through all the forms of cultural media we posses. To give into this agenda of allowing our populations the right to escape into a dreamworld of drinking, hedonism, drugs, shopping, and sex is a council of despair is you ask me, and indicative of our almost total moral bankruptcy.
On a broader front I'd agree with you, educate people off their dependencies. And I'd start with the lethal ones which happen to be the legal ones at the moment anyway.
You wish to adopt the permissive approach to taking currently illegal drugs, and I understand that argument well, and I symapthize with it, however, it won't solve the misery that is involved in being dependent on any mind altering substance. What it will do is take away some of the economic power of criminal gangs, but it won't stop people making a personal descison to regularly take drugs, far from it.
In my country right now (and for as long as I can remember), the the number one issue in society is alcohol abuse, its crippling us if you ask me. We have one of the highest male suicide rates in the developed world, we have one of the highest rates of domestic violence, our towns become battlegrounds every weekend night, young people are destroying their lives literally and figuratively through massive substance abuse. We have recently removed most of the rules regarding the sale of alcohol, and the result has been an explosion in alcohol spending and consumption and everything that comes with it.
The response to these issues, which essentially centre around concepts of self-respect and self-restraint seems to be to remove the remaining socially imposed restraints, leave it all up to individual choice (a bit like global finance) and hope an educational pep talk will somehow counter the massive cultural pressure people are under to consume drink and drugs and have sex, being barked at them through all the forms of cultural media we posses. To give into this agenda of allowing our populations the right to escape into a dreamworld of drinking, hedonism, drugs, shopping, and sex is a council of despair is you ask me, and indicative of our almost total moral bankruptcy.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The War on Drugs
Galbally;1010754 wrote: You wish to adopt the permissive approach to taking currently illegal drugs, and I understand that argument well, and I symapthize with it, however, it won't solve the misery that is involved in being dependent on any mind altering substance. What it will do is take away some of the economic power of criminal gangs, but it won't stop people making a personal descison to regularly take drugs, far from it. I agree with you absolutely. I do think, though, that the War on Drugs is an immensely negative movement. It empowers criminals - huge numbers of criminals and immense empowerment, none of which exists in (for example) the tobacco or alcohol industries which distribute their profits to legal shareholders and government tax duties. These are criminal profits on the scale of national GDPs, the cartels involved are bigger than some multinationals as far as their annual profit goes. I agree that legalizing the drugs has no effect whatever on people's personal decision to take them or not, but I suggest that's a matter more easily handled once the criminalization of their source is removed and the underground nature of their addiction.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
When Cannibis was reduced to Grade C here, the kids thought that it was legal, acceptable and so did their idiot parents.
I was asked to get involved a battle that a councillor has locally where very sadly, a car travelling at speed, crossed the road and plunged into a wall, very close to my home.
Inside were three local very popular young youths who were all killed. One was 18 the other two 17.
The driver was found to have cocaine and twice the drink limit in his system.
One had canninbis, the other lad was clear.
On their graves in a local cemetary, inlaid into black granite, on one them, is a cannibis leaf insignia, at the request of his parents.
Councillors want this removed. The public who visit relatives in there want it removed. I personally find it abhorant. Police are wary as to not upset the parents.
They went to their early deaths due to the excesses of alcohol, drugs under age, and one of them drove the car killing his two friends at an est 95 mph
I have had to rely on sedatives and sleeping pills for some months. When i wanted to stop them, i couldn't. I was shocked to learn that i'd have withdrawal symtoms which i did when i cut the dose right back.
I believe doctors are set upon by these giant drug manufacturers to "Sell" this kind of drug. Docs are turning people into legal drug addicts. They know they are doing it but continue.
I find all of this disturbing,
I was asked to get involved a battle that a councillor has locally where very sadly, a car travelling at speed, crossed the road and plunged into a wall, very close to my home.
Inside were three local very popular young youths who were all killed. One was 18 the other two 17.
The driver was found to have cocaine and twice the drink limit in his system.
One had canninbis, the other lad was clear.
On their graves in a local cemetary, inlaid into black granite, on one them, is a cannibis leaf insignia, at the request of his parents.
Councillors want this removed. The public who visit relatives in there want it removed. I personally find it abhorant. Police are wary as to not upset the parents.
They went to their early deaths due to the excesses of alcohol, drugs under age, and one of them drove the car killing his two friends at an est 95 mph
I have had to rely on sedatives and sleeping pills for some months. When i wanted to stop them, i couldn't. I was shocked to learn that i'd have withdrawal symtoms which i did when i cut the dose right back.
I believe doctors are set upon by these giant drug manufacturers to "Sell" this kind of drug. Docs are turning people into legal drug addicts. They know they are doing it but continue.
I find all of this disturbing,
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
It never crossed my mind to suggest it as an educational movie but is Lock Stock And Two Smoking Barrels relevant?
You know that people die and kill at the wheel from alcohol abuse. Driving under the influence includes lots of other things besides alcohol. I don't see that getting their supply from a street trader on the Fishponds Road is healthier than getting it from Tescos.
You know that people die and kill at the wheel from alcohol abuse. Driving under the influence includes lots of other things besides alcohol. I don't see that getting their supply from a street trader on the Fishponds Road is healthier than getting it from Tescos.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Grizzled_Bear
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:30 pm
The War on Drugs
I don't think that prohibition is the answer to the drug problem. Aside from creating a dangerous black market , it asserts that adults aren't responsible enough to make their own decisions on what they want to put in their bodies.
-
Grizzled_Bear
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:30 pm
The War on Drugs
I mean, if you want to smoke heroin out of a pipe made of crack, by all means do it. Just don't steal my tv to support your habit or plow into me while driving 90 in a 35.
The War on Drugs
I don't imagine it makes a person more or less likely to drive badly on heroin whether he bought it from a street dealer or from a corner store. The corner store would at least sell a certified purity and strength and he'd not take twice what he expected to. The corner store price might be lower too, he'd need to steal fewer TVs.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
The War on Drugs
In my opinion, they should just legalize drugs. They should use the drug enforcement money to create drug treatment programs for those who fall over the edge.
People who want to use drugs will do so regardless of whether it is legal or not. Most who do use them, do it recreationally and it causes no real problem for them.
And then there are others who sink in the quicksand of drug addiction....and they put them in jail???? This makes no sense to me. They are jailing ill people.
They need to use the money for drug treatment and counseling to find the root cause of a person's addiction and solve it. Then the money is well spent and the person can be free of addiction and lead a productive life.
Jailing drug addicts will never solve the problem. And if it is legalized then you also take the sales end out of the hands of thugs.
People who want to use drugs will do so regardless of whether it is legal or not. Most who do use them, do it recreationally and it causes no real problem for them.
And then there are others who sink in the quicksand of drug addiction....and they put them in jail???? This makes no sense to me. They are jailing ill people.
They need to use the money for drug treatment and counseling to find the root cause of a person's addiction and solve it. Then the money is well spent and the person can be free of addiction and lead a productive life.
Jailing drug addicts will never solve the problem. And if it is legalized then you also take the sales end out of the hands of thugs.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
wildhorses;1018154 wrote: In my opinion, they should just legalize drugs.
Oh that's brilliant.
Yes, in effect, put the drug lords out of business.
In return, give young kids an endless supply of what ever they want.
Governments won't have to invest in therepy, because they will all be dead.
Babie's will be born addicted, deformed and in pain.
Kids can then drive a car while under the influence of drugs inbetween this therepy and crash into your family's car and wipe them out.
Have you ever been anywhere and seen 14 year old girls on heroin?
Spot will agree that Hartcliffe is not a nice place.
I'll stick with the laws we have got here thanks.
Oh that's brilliant.
Yes, in effect, put the drug lords out of business.
In return, give young kids an endless supply of what ever they want.
Governments won't have to invest in therepy, because they will all be dead.
Babie's will be born addicted, deformed and in pain.
Kids can then drive a car while under the influence of drugs inbetween this therepy and crash into your family's car and wipe them out.
Have you ever been anywhere and seen 14 year old girls on heroin?
Spot will agree that Hartcliffe is not a nice place.
I'll stick with the laws we have got here thanks.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
oscar;1018198 wrote: In return, give young kids an endless supply of what ever they want.Do off-licenses give young kids an endless supply of alcohol? It depends on what you call young and how you define give, I suppose.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
oscar;1010820 wrote: When Cannibis was reduced to Grade C here, the kids thought that it was legal, acceptable and so did their idiot parents.
I was asked to get involved a battle that a councillor has locally where very sadly, a car travelling at speed, crossed the road and plunged into a wall, very close to my home.
Inside were three local very popular young youths who were all killed. One was 18 the other two 17.
The driver was found to have cocaine and twice the drink limit in his system.
One had canninbis, the other lad was clear.
Does my earlier post ring any bells Spot??
Badmington Road, just over a year ago.
Thank god there was not a car coming the other way with a family in it, when this one flew across the other side of the road at 90 mph.
I was asked to get involved a battle that a councillor has locally where very sadly, a car travelling at speed, crossed the road and plunged into a wall, very close to my home.
Inside were three local very popular young youths who were all killed. One was 18 the other two 17.
The driver was found to have cocaine and twice the drink limit in his system.
One had canninbis, the other lad was clear.
Does my earlier post ring any bells Spot??
Badmington Road, just over a year ago.
Thank god there was not a car coming the other way with a family in it, when this one flew across the other side of the road at 90 mph.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
You never answered my response to that either, you can't just re-present it. I gave my reaction already. By all means comment on my reaction, I'd like that, we could then make progress.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018199 wrote: Do off-licenses give young kids an endless supply of alcohol? It depends on what you call young and how you define give, I suppose.
Well yes, your right. I class anyone under 21 as young. I see 18 yr olds coming out of off Licenses and the supermarkets are as bad with their cut price booze.
Mr Oscar has a real hang up about alcohol. He thinks it's the root cause of most violent related crimes.
I don't know what the answers are here but to tell kids that it's o.k. to do crack cocaine and legalise it, sounds just like murder to me.
Well yes, your right. I class anyone under 21 as young. I see 18 yr olds coming out of off Licenses and the supermarkets are as bad with their cut price booze.
Mr Oscar has a real hang up about alcohol. He thinks it's the root cause of most violent related crimes.
I don't know what the answers are here but to tell kids that it's o.k. to do crack cocaine and legalise it, sounds just like murder to me.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
I was totally against the 24 hour drinking laws here.
At least before they were introduced, you had a rough idea of what time you where likely to be mown down by a drunk driver or stabbed in the street when the pub kicked out.
Teenagers had no-where to go until they were 18.
The introduction of cut price booze as well has done as much damage.
On my thread about fireworks, i said about seeing kids coming out of the corner shop with booze. I have reported them over and over. but plod doesn't want the hassle.
I told the owner of this shop one day that he was in effect "poisoning" the local kids. He only spoke Urdi so didn't understand.
I think the blonde bufoon has made a small step by banning alcohol on London transport.
If all citie's did this, it might help, but then, the kids would just drink it elsewhere i suppose.
I don't have any answers on this one.
At least before they were introduced, you had a rough idea of what time you where likely to be mown down by a drunk driver or stabbed in the street when the pub kicked out.
Teenagers had no-where to go until they were 18.
The introduction of cut price booze as well has done as much damage.
On my thread about fireworks, i said about seeing kids coming out of the corner shop with booze. I have reported them over and over. but plod doesn't want the hassle.
I told the owner of this shop one day that he was in effect "poisoning" the local kids. He only spoke Urdi so didn't understand.
I think the blonde bufoon has made a small step by banning alcohol on London transport.
If all citie's did this, it might help, but then, the kids would just drink it elsewhere i suppose.
I don't have any answers on this one.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
oscar;1018203 wrote: I don't know what the answers are here but to tell kids that it's o.k. to do crack cocaine and legalise it, sounds just like murder to me.Does having legal alcohol tell kids it's okay to do alcohol?
And why does everyone have to focus on crack? Nobody would buy crack, ever, if cleaner drugs were there on the shelf next to it. Crack's a disgusting fallback which DEALERS push because DEALERS are the only source of supply, so whenever they're the only ones out dealing they can cut what they're offering to crack or nothing and idiots take it. NOBODY would choose crack in an open market.
And why does everyone have to focus on crack? Nobody would buy crack, ever, if cleaner drugs were there on the shelf next to it. Crack's a disgusting fallback which DEALERS push because DEALERS are the only source of supply, so whenever they're the only ones out dealing they can cut what they're offering to crack or nothing and idiots take it. NOBODY would choose crack in an open market.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018207 wrote: Does having legal alcohol tell kids it's okay to do alcohol?
And why does everyone have to focus on crack? Nobody would buy crack, ever, if cleaner drugs were there on the shelf next to it. Crack's a disgusting fallback which DEALERS push because DEALERS are the only source of supply, so whenever they're the only ones out dealing they can cut what they're offering to crack or nothing and idiots take it. NOBODY would choose crack in an open market.
I agree about the crack but i've always believed that it's a very small percentage that hit's the crack first time. (Pimps getting young girls hooked to get them on the streets).
I am against even legalising cannibis. I think it's the pathway to say, Amphetimine, then on to cocaine etc.
I find the likes of "Amy Winehouse" totally abhorant however talented she is.
I blame the gutter press with much of her exposure in magazines etc, but she is a rotton example to the young as is the likes of Kate Moss. They make drugs look glamourous to the gullible youngsters.
If one of my family's teenagers came home with an Amy Winehouse c.d or Pete Doherty's, i'd be wanging it up the nearest river.
I'm not sure about the alcohol issue with kids.
I know that my parents were not drinkers so none of us ever looked at it, same with Mr Oscar.
The plods have a crackdown here every few months. They send the cso's into the parks and gathering area's. It makes me fume that all they do is confiscate the drink or tip it away infront of them. It's so readilly available, the kids think, so what?, i'll go and get some more.
And why does everyone have to focus on crack? Nobody would buy crack, ever, if cleaner drugs were there on the shelf next to it. Crack's a disgusting fallback which DEALERS push because DEALERS are the only source of supply, so whenever they're the only ones out dealing they can cut what they're offering to crack or nothing and idiots take it. NOBODY would choose crack in an open market.
I agree about the crack but i've always believed that it's a very small percentage that hit's the crack first time. (Pimps getting young girls hooked to get them on the streets).
I am against even legalising cannibis. I think it's the pathway to say, Amphetimine, then on to cocaine etc.
I find the likes of "Amy Winehouse" totally abhorant however talented she is.
I blame the gutter press with much of her exposure in magazines etc, but she is a rotton example to the young as is the likes of Kate Moss. They make drugs look glamourous to the gullible youngsters.
If one of my family's teenagers came home with an Amy Winehouse c.d or Pete Doherty's, i'd be wanging it up the nearest river.
I'm not sure about the alcohol issue with kids.
I know that my parents were not drinkers so none of us ever looked at it, same with Mr Oscar.
The plods have a crackdown here every few months. They send the cso's into the parks and gathering area's. It makes me fume that all they do is confiscate the drink or tip it away infront of them. It's so readilly available, the kids think, so what?, i'll go and get some more.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
Now that you've got that out of your system, would you like to discuss what the thread's about?
It's about keeping all drugs, just like we currently keep alcohol, illegal for under-18s.
The emotive use of "kids" just disguises the real issues. It's not helping.
Insofar as kids buy drugs already, just as they buy alcohol already, both are currently illegal, both would stay illegal, neither are tolerable.
Now, if you focus on the real issue which is actually legalizing drugs to the same extent that alcohol's legal, what objection do you have to it? What are the benefits, what's the downside? Which is bigger?
It's about keeping all drugs, just like we currently keep alcohol, illegal for under-18s.
The emotive use of "kids" just disguises the real issues. It's not helping.
Insofar as kids buy drugs already, just as they buy alcohol already, both are currently illegal, both would stay illegal, neither are tolerable.
Now, if you focus on the real issue which is actually legalizing drugs to the same extent that alcohol's legal, what objection do you have to it? What are the benefits, what's the downside? Which is bigger?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018245 wrote: Now that you've got that out of your system, would you like to discuss what the thread's about?
It's about keeping all drugs, just like we currently keep alcohol, illegal for under-18s.
The emotive use of "kids" just disguises the real issues. It's not helping.
Insofar as kids buy drugs already, just as they buy alcohol already, both are currently illegal, both would stay illegal, neither are tolerable.
Now, if you focus on the real issue which is actually legalizing drugs to the same extent that alcohol's legal, what objection do you have to it? What are the benefits, what's the downside? Which is bigger?
Yes, i did go off on a tangent there.
The benifits for legalisation is drug lords, pimps even the Taliban would have nothing to sell.
The prisons would not be full of drug addicts sent down for possession.
There would be no trafficking and there-fore no blood spilt.
Crime figures must be reduced leaving the police to actually deal with other issue's.
The downside, imho, is yet another substance that is too readilly available.
Surely there has to be a percentage of users who do go onto methadone programmes etc to avoid prison? If there was no threat to them with a custodial sentance, over-doses would rise.
There would be more in therepy in the long run (those who wanted to stop) costing government and council more money.
I suppose that could be outweighed by money spent by police and courts dealing with drug users.
Too readily available, we would see an increase in deaths on the road for instance by drug drivers as well as drink drivers.
It's about keeping all drugs, just like we currently keep alcohol, illegal for under-18s.
The emotive use of "kids" just disguises the real issues. It's not helping.
Insofar as kids buy drugs already, just as they buy alcohol already, both are currently illegal, both would stay illegal, neither are tolerable.
Now, if you focus on the real issue which is actually legalizing drugs to the same extent that alcohol's legal, what objection do you have to it? What are the benefits, what's the downside? Which is bigger?
Yes, i did go off on a tangent there.
The benifits for legalisation is drug lords, pimps even the Taliban would have nothing to sell.
The prisons would not be full of drug addicts sent down for possession.
There would be no trafficking and there-fore no blood spilt.
Crime figures must be reduced leaving the police to actually deal with other issue's.
The downside, imho, is yet another substance that is too readilly available.
Surely there has to be a percentage of users who do go onto methadone programmes etc to avoid prison? If there was no threat to them with a custodial sentance, over-doses would rise.
There would be more in therepy in the long run (those who wanted to stop) costing government and council more money.
I suppose that could be outweighed by money spent by police and courts dealing with drug users.
Too readily available, we would see an increase in deaths on the road for instance by drug drivers as well as drink drivers.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
There you are then, you've loaded the scales left and right. Which of your argument weighs more?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018267 wrote: There you are then, you've loaded the scales left and right. Which of your argument weighs more?
I forgot to add the huge burden on emergency services and the NHS dealing with drug related illnesses as they are burdened with drink related illnesses now if drugs become too readilly available.
I think i have just tipped my scales against legalisation of drugs.
I forgot to add the huge burden on emergency services and the NHS dealing with drug related illnesses as they are burdened with drink related illnesses now if drugs become too readilly available.
I think i have just tipped my scales against legalisation of drugs.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
oscar;1018295 wrote: I forgot to add the huge burden on emergency services and the NHS dealing with drug related illnesses as they are burdened with drink related illnesses now if drugs become too readilly available.
I think i have just tipped my scales against legalisation of drugs.
I suggest there'd be less of a burden, not more. All the products would be a fixed quality instead of the variable stuff, nobody would overdose the way they do now with unexpected pure material randomly turning up. You may find it hard to believe but there are far more temperate drug users than there are drug abusers, just as there are far more temperate alcohol users than there are alcohol abusers.
Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
I think i have just tipped my scales against legalisation of drugs.
I suggest there'd be less of a burden, not more. All the products would be a fixed quality instead of the variable stuff, nobody would overdose the way they do now with unexpected pure material randomly turning up. You may find it hard to believe but there are far more temperate drug users than there are drug abusers, just as there are far more temperate alcohol users than there are alcohol abusers.
Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018300 wrote: I suggest there'd be less of a burden, not more. All the products would be a fixed quality instead of the variable stuff, nobody would overdose the way they do now with unexpected pure material randomly turning up. You may find it hard to believe but there are far more temperate drug users than there are drug abusers, just as there are far more temperate alcohol users than there are alcohol abusers.
Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
Even with products of a fixed quality, you would have users upping the quantity, still leading to over-doses.
Hard core addicts would very soon be cutting the fixed quality with another substance to increase their hit.
Even if drugs were legalised and sold in fixed doses, they would still be driving under the influence of drugs.
Too many accidents happen already with prescribed medication. I certainly would never have risked taking the car out when i was on tranqillisers, but people do.
Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
Even with products of a fixed quality, you would have users upping the quantity, still leading to over-doses.
Hard core addicts would very soon be cutting the fixed quality with another substance to increase their hit.
Even if drugs were legalised and sold in fixed doses, they would still be driving under the influence of drugs.
Too many accidents happen already with prescribed medication. I certainly would never have risked taking the car out when i was on tranqillisers, but people do.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018315 wrote: Given which way you came down on the scales, why would you not favour banning alcohol?
On my scales, alcohol would tip them over further.
If i had my way, i would ban it tomorrow.
Yes, there are temperate users as there are in drugs but is it not fact that a large percentage of violent crimes are drink related?
Just look at our city centres late at night? The A & E departments mop up the mess keeping genuine casulties waiting longer. The amount of staff being abused is on the increase as well.
Anything that interferes with the normal function of the brain should be banned.
On my scales, alcohol would tip them over further.
If i had my way, i would ban it tomorrow.
Yes, there are temperate users as there are in drugs but is it not fact that a large percentage of violent crimes are drink related?
Just look at our city centres late at night? The A & E departments mop up the mess keeping genuine casulties waiting longer. The amount of staff being abused is on the increase as well.
Anything that interferes with the normal function of the brain should be banned.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
You've the example of American Prohibition to show you what would happen to public order and criminality if you banned Alcohol. Do you not think that could happen in the UK if you did the same thing?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
The War on Drugs
oscar;1018198 wrote: Oh that's brilliant.
Yes, in effect, put the drug lords out of business.
In return, give young kids an endless supply of what ever they want.
Governments won't have to invest in therepy, because they will all be dead.
Babie's will be born addicted, deformed and in pain.
Kids can then drive a car while under the influence of drugs inbetween this therepy and crash into your family's car and wipe them out.
Have you ever been anywhere and seen 14 year old girls on heroin?
Spot will agree that Hartcliffe is not a nice place.
I'll stick with the laws we have got here thanks.
Where did I say that drugs should be legalized for kids? It is easier for kids to get their hands on drugs if it is illegal, than if it is legal. Right now they can buy it anywhere.....ANYWHERE. If it were legal.....well they can still manage to get it, but not on any street corner. And if it is legal at least it wont be cut with rat poison or a host of other ingredients.
And yes I have seen 14 year old girls on heroin. And babes are already born every single day....addicted. Kids already drive while under the influence of drugs. Making laws against illness does not work. Drug addiction is an illness. Even drug use is an illness to some extent. Money should be put into solving the problem instead of law enforcement and jail.
Yes, in effect, put the drug lords out of business.
In return, give young kids an endless supply of what ever they want.
Governments won't have to invest in therepy, because they will all be dead.
Babie's will be born addicted, deformed and in pain.
Kids can then drive a car while under the influence of drugs inbetween this therepy and crash into your family's car and wipe them out.
Have you ever been anywhere and seen 14 year old girls on heroin?
Spot will agree that Hartcliffe is not a nice place.
I'll stick with the laws we have got here thanks.
Where did I say that drugs should be legalized for kids? It is easier for kids to get their hands on drugs if it is illegal, than if it is legal. Right now they can buy it anywhere.....ANYWHERE. If it were legal.....well they can still manage to get it, but not on any street corner. And if it is legal at least it wont be cut with rat poison or a host of other ingredients.
And yes I have seen 14 year old girls on heroin. And babes are already born every single day....addicted. Kids already drive while under the influence of drugs. Making laws against illness does not work. Drug addiction is an illness. Even drug use is an illness to some extent. Money should be put into solving the problem instead of law enforcement and jail.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018352 wrote: You've the example of American Prohibition to show you what would happen to public order and criminality if you banned Alcohol. Do you not think that could happen in the UK if you did the same thing?
The abuse of American prohibition was ultimatly led by gangsters who resorted to blood shed.
Yes, if we did the same here, we would have our own gangsters in the same vein.
However, i can not see the difference in the waste of police and hospital resources dealing with alcohol abuse and dealing with the criminals who would break the prohibition.
I can only see it saving lives. I won't bang on about kids especially but prohibition could and would stop alot of youngsters starting on alcohol where as at the moment, i feel they do use it, due to being readilly available.
The abuse of American prohibition was ultimatly led by gangsters who resorted to blood shed.
Yes, if we did the same here, we would have our own gangsters in the same vein.
However, i can not see the difference in the waste of police and hospital resources dealing with alcohol abuse and dealing with the criminals who would break the prohibition.
I can only see it saving lives. I won't bang on about kids especially but prohibition could and would stop alot of youngsters starting on alcohol where as at the moment, i feel they do use it, due to being readilly available.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
wildhorses;1018361 wrote: Where did I say that drugs should be legalized for kids? It is easier for kids to get their hands on drugs if it is illegal, than if it is legal. Right now they can buy it anywhere.....ANYWHERE. If it were legal.....well they can still manage to get it, but not on any street corner. And if it is legal at least it wont be cut with rat poison or a host of other ingredients.
And yes I have seen 14 year old girls on heroin. And babes are already born every single day....addicted. Kids already drive while under the influence of drugs. Making laws against illness does not work. Drug addiction is an illness. Even drug use is an illness to some extent. Money should be put into solving the problem instead of law enforcement and jail.
I suggest you read all of the posts made in your absence.
And yes I have seen 14 year old girls on heroin. And babes are already born every single day....addicted. Kids already drive while under the influence of drugs. Making laws against illness does not work. Drug addiction is an illness. Even drug use is an illness to some extent. Money should be put into solving the problem instead of law enforcement and jail.
I suggest you read all of the posts made in your absence.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
There aren't many people who would ban alcohol consumption throughout the UK and put up with the criminal trade it would create.
Alcohol is the worst of the drugs in terms of physical damage abuse can cause. Yes one can overdose on heroin. One can die from a one-night binge on alcohol too, and lots of people have. Far more, I suggest, than have ever died from a heroin overdose.
Deaths from, for example, ecstasy, run at something under ten a year nationally compared to the thousands who die of alcohol abuse. Yet ecstasy is a Class A illegal substance.
The damage of drugs lies in the criminality they bring when they're prohibited by law. Any medical damage is marginal by comparison. The damage to the social fabric of the country is far greater from the criminality than from the use or abuse of the drugs themselves.
Alcohol is the worst of the drugs in terms of physical damage abuse can cause. Yes one can overdose on heroin. One can die from a one-night binge on alcohol too, and lots of people have. Far more, I suggest, than have ever died from a heroin overdose.
Deaths from, for example, ecstasy, run at something under ten a year nationally compared to the thousands who die of alcohol abuse. Yet ecstasy is a Class A illegal substance.
The damage of drugs lies in the criminality they bring when they're prohibited by law. Any medical damage is marginal by comparison. The damage to the social fabric of the country is far greater from the criminality than from the use or abuse of the drugs themselves.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018385 wrote: There aren't many people who would ban alcohol consumption throughout the UK and put up with the criminal trade it would create.
Alcohol is the worst of the drugs in terms of physical damage abuse can cause. Yes one can overdose on heroin. One can die from a one-night binge on alcohol too, and lots of people have. Far more, I suggest, than have ever died from a heroin overdose.
Deaths from, for example, ecstasy, run at something under ten a year nationally compared to the thousands who die of alcohol abuse. Yet ecstasy is a Class A illegal substance.
The damage of drugs lies in the criminality they bring when they're prohibited by law. Any medical damage is marginal by comparison. The damage to the social fabric of the country is far greater from the criminality than from the use or abuse of the drugs themselves.
I understand the effect prohibition would have. I just can't help but think of a country with no alcohol in shops -- no kids tempted -- no long term abuse -- cutting down on the scale of future alcholics.
I would not venture down the City Centre most nights especially the weekend. Surely there could be partial prohibition, where laws gave licensed drinking dens governed by strict regulation. i.e. Over 21's. Proper licensing hours reduced to say, four hours a day. this could stop the 24 binge drinking system we seem to be in the grip of here.
I think the US is alot tougher than we are here. Youths drinking in the street for e.g. would just not be tolerated.
Alcohol is the worst of the drugs in terms of physical damage abuse can cause. Yes one can overdose on heroin. One can die from a one-night binge on alcohol too, and lots of people have. Far more, I suggest, than have ever died from a heroin overdose.
Deaths from, for example, ecstasy, run at something under ten a year nationally compared to the thousands who die of alcohol abuse. Yet ecstasy is a Class A illegal substance.
The damage of drugs lies in the criminality they bring when they're prohibited by law. Any medical damage is marginal by comparison. The damage to the social fabric of the country is far greater from the criminality than from the use or abuse of the drugs themselves.
I understand the effect prohibition would have. I just can't help but think of a country with no alcohol in shops -- no kids tempted -- no long term abuse -- cutting down on the scale of future alcholics.
I would not venture down the City Centre most nights especially the weekend. Surely there could be partial prohibition, where laws gave licensed drinking dens governed by strict regulation. i.e. Over 21's. Proper licensing hours reduced to say, four hours a day. this could stop the 24 binge drinking system we seem to be in the grip of here.
I think the US is alot tougher than we are here. Youths drinking in the street for e.g. would just not be tolerated.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
The War on Drugs
oscar;1018540 wrote: I understand the effect prohibition would have. I just can't help but think of a country with no alcohol in shops -- no kids tempted -- no long term abuse -- cutting down on the scale of future alcholics.The reason I chose the picture is because it was tried, we're not speculating on the result, we've seen it. The US is still trying to get to grips with the Mafia it created and it's eighty years ago that the mistake happened.
Exactly the same has resulted from the prohibition of drugs in general. The same massive crime families, the same huge profits resulting in corruption and a huge amount more criminalization of people who would otherwise not be criminals. I'm showing you the real world and you keep coming back with "wouldn't it be nicer if". The ifs aren't possible outcomes. That's why I brought evidence, to show they're not.
Exactly the same has resulted from the prohibition of drugs in general. The same massive crime families, the same huge profits resulting in corruption and a huge amount more criminalization of people who would otherwise not be criminals. I'm showing you the real world and you keep coming back with "wouldn't it be nicer if". The ifs aren't possible outcomes. That's why I brought evidence, to show they're not.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
The War on Drugs
spot;1018650 wrote: The reason I chose the picture is because it was tried, we're not speculating on the result, we've seen it. The US is still trying to get to grips with the Mafia it created and it's eighty years ago that the mistake happened.
Exactly the same has resulted from the prohibition of drugs in general. The same massive crime families, the same huge profits resulting in corruption and a huge amount more criminalization of people who would otherwise not be criminals. I'm showing you the real world and you keep coming back with "wouldn't it be nicer if". The ifs aren't possible outcomes. That's why I brought evidence, to show they're not.
Well Spot, i am coming around to your way of thinking on this one. The stubbon old girl might be backing down for once.
That and added to what i've been seeing of late about the huge problems they are having with long established mafia in Italy. The government there has one heck of a problem on it's hands, all drug fueled crime, power and money.
So, i can see the advantages here.
I think at times we all do a little of "Wouldn't it be nice".
What do you think are the chances of any British government actually legalising all Class A drugs??
Exactly the same has resulted from the prohibition of drugs in general. The same massive crime families, the same huge profits resulting in corruption and a huge amount more criminalization of people who would otherwise not be criminals. I'm showing you the real world and you keep coming back with "wouldn't it be nicer if". The ifs aren't possible outcomes. That's why I brought evidence, to show they're not.
Well Spot, i am coming around to your way of thinking on this one. The stubbon old girl might be backing down for once.
That and added to what i've been seeing of late about the huge problems they are having with long established mafia in Italy. The government there has one heck of a problem on it's hands, all drug fueled crime, power and money.
So, i can see the advantages here.
I think at times we all do a little of "Wouldn't it be nice".
What do you think are the chances of any British government actually legalising all Class A drugs??
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon