World War II veteran dies after being attacked on his doorstep
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
agreed...
believe it or not, these sort of behaviour spreads to other people like desease.. the quicker we get rid of them, the sooner we'll get a better society.
You need to make sure there aren't any rotten tomato in a sack of tomatoes, otherwise, they'll very quickly all go bad.
More than likely this is drug related - an addict finding money to support a habit they cannot control.
Reason says that to eliminate the link between addiction and crime you need to remove the criminal aspect of the distribution and use of drugs.
Simple prohibition does not work. But show me a politician who will speak out for removing the criminal element in the supply of drugs to addicts...
Every country on earth has a drug problem; not because of the criminals who sell them, but because people will always want to get loaded - even in countries where possession of drugs is punishable by death.
Separating casual use from true addiction - an addict will steal and rob to get money for their drugs if they have no other choice and criminals will use these people to make money. Take away the criminal supply and you give the addict a slim chance for something better, even if it means only that they do not have to steal to pay for their habit. Surely that is better for communities and the people living in them than to perpetuate the status quo which means people who ought to deserve universal dignity and respect end up dead because the right thing that needs to be done is viewed as too controversial for someone's political career; to actually embrace a solution, that while it might not be perfect, is at least better than what currently exists?
Failing that we could always get the daily mail to kill them all/send them back etc etc.
along with anyone else who doesn't conform 
I'm not in favour of capital punishment as it is only as reliable as the people who use and design the justice system are fallible, and that's too great a margin for error imo.
Reason says that to eliminate the link between addiction and crime you need to remove the criminal aspect of the distribution and use of drugs.
Simple prohibition does not work. But show me a politician who will speak out for removing the criminal element in the supply of drugs to addicts...
Every country on earth has a drug problem; not because of the criminals who sell them, but because people will always want to get loaded - even in countries where possession of drugs is punishable by death.
Separating casual use from true addiction - an addict will steal and rob to get money for their drugs if they have no other choice and criminals will use these people to make money. Take away the criminal supply and you give the addict a slim chance for something better, even if it means only that they do not have to steal to pay for their habit. Surely that is better for communities and the people living in them than to perpetuate the status quo which means people who ought to deserve universal dignity and respect end up dead because the right thing that needs to be done is viewed as too controversial for someone's political career; to actually embrace a solution, that while it might not be perfect, is at least better than what currently exists?
Failing that we could always get the daily mail to kill them all/send them back etc etc.
along with anyone else who doesn't conform I'm not in favour of capital punishment as it is only as reliable as the people who use and design the justice system are fallible, and that's too great a margin for error imo.
Because it doesn't work. There will always be some one left wanting redemption. That's what the whole saying "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" is about.
Crime has always happened, will always happen.
Doesn't make it acceptable, it happens.
It's sad. It's a sad state of the country we live in.
Don't be ridiculous. How dare you blame it on the drugs. Drugs don't murder people, criminals do. You can't just say "oh the weed made me do it" we all know that's BS.
A person with a murderous state of mind will kill you whether he's high or not.
Last edited:
Don't be ridiculous. How dare you blame it on the drugs. Drugs don't murder people, criminals do. You can't just say "oh the weed made me do it" we all know that's BS.
A person with a murderous state of mind will kill you whether he's high or not.
You do realise there's a vast amount of violent crimes committed by drug users desperate to fund their habits right?
...Just...LOL...
(There is no 'Shaking head in complete disbelief' Smiley)@asim18
tooting some weed and/or being a delinquent yobbo is not the same as being addicted to heroin or crack-cocaine, now is it? Have you seen what that reduces people to? That's the difference between a true addict and merely someone who has no respect for others.
I'm assuming there's some sarcasm in your post ?
While what you say about a 'murderous state of mind' is correct to an extent, an addict does what his need for his habit dictates, any other intent is subservient to acquiring more drugs... why else would they debase themselves so badly with crime and prostitution? Because the need to feed their addiction knows no social boundary or moral code.
tooting some weed and/or being a delinquent yobbo is not the same as being addicted to heroin or crack-cocaine, now is it? Have you seen what that reduces people to? That's the difference between a true addict and merely someone who has no respect for others.
I'm assuming there's some sarcasm in your post ?
While what you say about a 'murderous state of mind' is correct to an extent, an addict does what his need for his habit dictates, any other intent is subservient to acquiring more drugs... why else would they debase themselves so badly with crime and prostitution? Because the need to feed their addiction knows no social boundary or moral code.
Last edited:
I have a cannabis habit, but I don't go round mugging people. I've never harmed anyone. I fund it legitimately and so do many other people.
Drug use is victimless....Just...LOL...
I don't know if Crack/Heroin turns you into a murder, so I can't comment on that.
Anyway I don't want to pollute this thread with a drugs debate, my apologies for starting it. There's an excellent thread at the top of Speaker's Corner for that.
Last edited:
I think the distinction you make is based upon the difference between recreational drug use and a serious addiction. Not all drug use is victimless when you compare that well known disparity.
EDIT:
asim18, I think I know where you're coming from though
Besides, it's not pollution when it's relevant to the speculation regarding the motive for the crime in the article.
EDIT:
asim18, I think I know where you're coming from though
Besides, it's not pollution when it's relevant to the speculation regarding the motive for the crime in the article.
Last edited:
You do realise there's a vast amount of violent crimes committed by drug users desperate to fund their habits right?
...Just...LOL...
@asim18
tooting some weed and/or being a delinquent yobbo is not the same as being addicted to heroin or crack-cocaine, now is it? Have you seen what that reduces people to? That's the difference between a true addict and merely someone who has no respect for others.
I'm assuming there's some sarcasm in your post ?
While what you say about a 'murderous state of mind' is correct to an extent, an addict does what his need for his habit dictates, any other intent is subservient to acquiring more drugs... why else would they debase themselves so badly with crime and prostitution? Because the need to feed their addiction knows no social boundary or moral code.
I think his point was that it's not because of the drugs that they do such things, as in the drugs themselves, the effect the drugs have on the person through the usage of them, doesn't make them want to kill.
People who have an additiction to something can often go to drastic lengths to ensure they get their fix. It's not really about drugs, people can act the same over alcohol for example.
I don't think it helped that it was very clear that Asim had an additction to weed and it came out in his post a defence for smoking weed.
I think you see this issue with drugs so much though because drugs are a very expensive addiction, especially considering their legal status, they're in high demand and so the dealers can demand a high sum of money for them, which means it's more likely some one would comit to burgalry over drugs, than they would over alchohol, which is readily available for not much money.
Last edited:
I see both sides of the drugs argument - recreational habit vs sustaining a dangerous addiction. The subtle difference between the two is often overlooked by those who have no experience of either one (or will not publicly admit to such experience).
The mistake is to bunch everyone in the same boat: drug user = dangerous criminal... WRONG!
There's a big difference between a weekend drinker, and a committed alcoholic (to use the accepted 'drugs are bad, but licensed drugs are all fine and dandy' example).
It wasn't my intent to have an argument, but to clarify the reasoning here and to bring in to focus the huge scale of the problem that some forms of drug use cause in communities all over brittain.
In this case, my money's on the person who attacked that old boy being most likely motivated by his drive to feed a hard drugs addiction.
The mistake is to bunch everyone in the same boat: drug user = dangerous criminal... WRONG!
There's a big difference between a weekend drinker, and a committed alcoholic (to use the accepted 'drugs are bad, but licensed drugs are all fine and dandy' example).
It wasn't my intent to have an argument, but to clarify the reasoning here and to bring in to focus the huge scale of the problem that some forms of drug use cause in communities all over brittain.
In this case, my money's on the person who attacked that old boy being most likely motivated by his drive to feed a hard drugs addiction.
They wouldnt be able to, these people are cowards and bullys. They pick on the weak and defenceless. Im sure our soldiers wouldnt want to fight besides them also.