Yeah like that's going to stop visitors getting it
So making it no different from the current state of things.
Taxation on the legislated drugs. Tax on cigs is way more than they cost the NHS.
Should prohibition end?
- Thread starter StonedPenguin
- Start date
So making it no different from the current state of things.
Taxation on the legislated drugs. Tax on cigs is way more than they cost the NHS.
the illegality of drugs does not prevent drug use. it only encourages organised crime. IMO all drugs should be legalised so people with a drug problem can get help, drugs could be regulated, a lot of big money crime stopped and drugs can be taxed. The law stops no one from taking drugs as if drugs were legalised tomorrow I wouldn't start taking coke smack etc... and cannabis being illegal does not stop me using it
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 276
a gram of herion costs 80p to the nhs, 80pound to the user on the street a user would have to rob 300-500 pounds worth of stuff if they are desperate to get a gram
get the insurance companys to pay for it ...it would save them millions
get the insurance companys to pay for it ...it would save them millions
How many people go to A&E and admit they were using drugs?
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but a lass I know is a nurse at the Belfast City Hospital (quite close to the local club/student district), and she has suggested that actually. Quite a large number of people admitted over the weekend are there as a result of drugs- not solely alcohol.
Also, a friend of mine is a drugs counsellor, who smokes pot. He works at large festivals to help talk people down from being high, and having bad experiences. He is under no allusions that pot is a problem for a large number of people.
A lot of people here have mentioned lack of side-effects. However that is simply not true. There are quite a large number of health issues, largely psychological that come as a result of cannabis. The truth is, the effects of alcohol and tobacco are more widely known because we have had years to study and discover them. The same is simply not true of cannabis. We know there are problems. We simply don't know how far reaching and extensive they are.
I am an ex-pot smoker. I smoked for over 10 years, daily. Legalisation is not something that should be advocated. Not without at least 10 years of hard, in-depth study, with plans in place to help drug users.
Of my friends who still smoke, I can count a good number of them who are unable to hold down a job (constantly sleeping in), demonstrate a definite lack of confidence, social awkwardness, and in a few cases. Some individuals who are too paranoid to leave their house.
One friend is a Doctor, a research Chemist- one of the most intelligent people I know, and a long time smoker. It's not so much recreational but habitual daily use. To him, it's not a problem- however when he is unable to source any. The agitation is very noticeable
Before people cite that as being a-typical. How many have had a "whitey", or cases of paranoia? Contrary to what shows like "The Union" state. Marijuana does not help people discuss problems. Quite the contrary. People who are high, generally spout drivel- they presume to be profound.
I have also noticed first-hand, several aggressive fist fights erupt amongst people who when sober are quite peaceful.
One point I have often thought, was how do you tell if you have a psychological predisposition to certain conditions?(Which is an argument I find totally fallacious btw) Do you think anyone who wants to try drugs/marijuana should go through a screening process to determine whether or not they'll see negative side-effects of marijuana?
As I said though, most of my evidence is anecdotal, and drawn from personal experience. There is a wealth of information out there, unfortunately not as much as there should be imo.
One point I will make; I was incredibly impressed with how much my mental faculties improves when I stopped smoking- pity my memory still hasn't caught up.
Why not, people can have undesirable reaction to many things, from peanuts to being in high places.
Just because something can be harmful to certain people doesn't mean it should be made illegal.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
El Commi, it's interesting to hear an personal experience from the "other side of the fence".
I don't want any more drugs legalised - it is the wrong direction. I'd be happy if tobacco was made illegal or at least even more restrictions on where it can be smoked.
If they make any more drugs legal then they become acceptable by default without the decades of accepted drinking behaviour that governs alcohol usage (most people drink later in the day, don't get wrecked until evening). I don't want to have to wander around and see doped up idiots swimming around in a drug induced stupor. All it would do is serve to degrade our society even further.
Also there is quite a nice Darwinism about illegal drugs and the dodgy chemicals they are cut with.
If they make any more drugs legal then they become acceptable by default without the decades of accepted drinking behaviour that governs alcohol usage (most people drink later in the day, don't get wrecked until evening). I don't want to have to wander around and see doped up idiots swimming around in a drug induced stupor. All it would do is serve to degrade our society even further.
Also there is quite a nice Darwinism about illegal drugs and the dodgy chemicals they are cut with.
So people who want to indulge in something that, in moderation and with pure ingredients, causes little to no harm to them or other people, deserve to die?
How do you test for a psychological/genetic predisposition to marijuana?
Ie- you'll be prone to panic attacks. How do you test for that?
Is it cost effective with how many people will take up the tests?
Then, surely having to take a test to determine if its safe for you to take a drug (and thereby having it on a government registrar) impinges on your freedom as a private citizen?
Should you prove to be susceptible to this condition, but decide to take drugs anyway- should you be exempt from healthcare?
If not, why have the test anyway?
As I said, I find the argument that you have a condition hiding in your genetics, waiting to pounce a bit of a stupid one. One, that I think is used to detract from the many studies showing the health hazards.
I believe it's not a genetically predetermined thing, but rather something which is sparked by psychological triggers, which are predominately external.
(IE: smoke lots of drugs + friends joking and making fun of you = paranoia), despite the often joking nature attributed to paranoia, it is imo a rather severe side-effect. Particularly, as it can linger far longer than the initial "high", (days/weeks).
*edit*
I'd also like to point out- the key issue is education. In order to legalise drug use, they would need to be a massive increase in spending for "propaganda" or educational materiel- much like they do with alcohol, as much of the UK population are ignorant to effects of drug use.
There is also a great deal of idealism on the pro side. Not everyone who smokes/takes drugs are sensible. In fact, I'd even suggest quite a great deal of them are not.
I do agree though, that there should be an open and honest debate about it- but not without the proper studies being done first.
Also, np's burns. Glad to be of service
Last edited:
No, we should just cull those reliant on them
Where do you start/stop with this logic?
Kill someone who enjoys a pint a week? No.
Kill someone who enjoys a pill or joint a week? Yes?
Where do you start/stop with this logic?
Kill someone who enjoys a pint a week? No.
Kill someone who enjoys a pill or joint a week? Yes?
That sounds pretty fair to me.
Ignoring the fact they are degrading our society and I don't care whether a drug user lives or dies. Then your post makes no sense, surely if they are pure ingredients there is no risk?
Last edited:
You care that much about what other people want to do with their own bodies?
That in itself is worth of pity. As I said, it is beneficial to me as it the only thing that calms me down. I have, as I have mentioned before in this thread, asbergers syndrome. I used to get really, really angry over menial things. But since I started smoking, maybe once or twice a week, I have not had any of these episodes. It has helped me out a lot. Would you kill me for that?
And you paint me out as the criminal...
Why is it fair robbo?
Are you going to start posting serious replies to things yet?
Would you kill someone reliant upon drink merely for that alone?
Are you going to start posting serious replies to things yet?
I often do!
This is just a silly debate to have so didn't really warrant a good reply.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 11,925
- Location
- London, McLaren or Radical
Lovely just spoke to my ten year old nephew, some little ****e hawk just offered him cannabis up the the local park.
A good reason to regulate supply.
Sure it will still be possible for this to happen (like kids getting their hands on alcohol presently)... but less likely as current suppliers don't care about the recipient as long as they have the money!
