drug crime

Former Member

First thing to note is that to "legalise" falsely sounds like you are doing something. It's a verb, but actually is an inaction, not an action. Everything starts off as legal, because that's just how the real world is. Laws can only attempt to prevent, and maybe sweep up the bits aftwerwards.

Yep we do ... I know im much more likely to break the law if im in a state of innebriation :P

Being more likely to break the law isn't breaking the law. Or do you want to start arresting people who have been recently emotional because they are "more likely" to be in a state where the hurt others?

All you have done is prove the point that drug users (if harmful to others) will be found out by the law rapidly in the absence of legislation against drugs in particular.

im thinking more of the ppl that get hurt by the 'law breakers' before they get prosecuted (if they do).

And I am thinking of those who get hurt by the "law makers" before they ever do anything wrong. And there are many, many more of them.

Former Member

Kentish wrote:

I wouldn't try methadone because it isn't a pleasurable drug to take. Maybe I'd try diamorph I don't know. But I think if you make it socially acceptable, use would increase.

No idea. Do you have any info on it?

I just have serious trouble imagining any country where use of heroin is 'socially acceptable'. And of course this view of supply does depend on GP's just handing it out all over the shop.

I've posted a few good reports about MDMA safety in the drugs board, I'll dig them up. Just a comparison between the amount used and the death rate does show it is relatively safe in the short term.

Skive

Kentish wrote:

I wouldn't try methadone because it isn't a pleasurable drug to take. Maybe I'd try diamorph I don't know.

So you'd try heroin if it was clean and legal?

Former Member

Toadborg wrote:

Well you don't know that for a fact do you?

Yes it may be a good idea for the point of view of health and safety etc but the problem is that most people don't give a shit about how cleans some junkies smack is.......

No, I dont, of course I dont know it for fact. But it seems strange to suggest that all Britains are just waiting for legal supply so they can go totally off the rails, never work and die in the gutter.

People should give a shit though, because they pay for it.

Former Member

Walkindude wrote:

Because cannibis is illegal and for a reaosn. Its againts the law. Laws are bedrocks of society and maitin a sensible order. Yes they are broken and people gt punished when break them and yes I know plenty get away with it as well.

I mean if you say you want to use cannivbs why should you be stopped then why should any one be stopped doing what they want? I want dvds and clothes form shops, they can afford to lose making millions a year, I earn a lowish wage why not just walk in and take it? And similar for other crimes.

real criminals are linked to drugs, the dealers that push their wares on kids and teens, the drug lords, the enforcers etc etc. Thats real crime and criminals.

Are you being serious? Smoking cannabis is the same as any other crime? Its just as serious as robbery?

Where is the harm?

Governments should justify restrictions on our liberty, there is no good reason why cannabis is illegal.

Former Member

Maybe they should care but getting them to is a major issue. It is all well and good saying "the govt should do this and that etc" but they are not going to if the public remains opposed to it, and I don't see that changing very much........

Your first point seems somewhat self defeating, you have already suggested along with Skive, that drug prohibition isn't working because more and more people take drugs at the moment, despite the fact that it is known to be of dubious quality, that is illegal and expensive.

Legalisation/regulation would create a cleaner, cheaper, more reliable supply, that is what you wnat isn't it?

Thus I fali to see how this could possibly not lead to higher drug use, possible far higher......

Former Member

1) Cannabis has been proven to have harmful health effects and 2) its is a softer drug that can lead onto harder drugs that cause even more problems.

thats the harm. I'm not saying which cirm is more serious then the other. It is a crime though and breaking the law is punishable. I accept that.

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

I just have serious trouble imagining any country where use of heroin is 'socially acceptable'. And of course this view of supply does depend on GP's just handing it out all over the shop.

Some argue for supply of drugs through licensed shops. If I was a GP I would decline the option to prescribe any drug for purely recreational purposes and I don't think that's unreasonable. That isn't what doctors are for. Diamorphine specifically for rehab is another matter, and one for the experts.

I've posted a few good reports about MDMA safety in the drugs board, I'll dig them up. Just a comparison between the amount used and the death rate does show it is relatively safe in the short term.

We all know the death rate is low, but death isn't the only harmful effect nor is it necessarily the most devastating.

Former Member

Skive wrote:

So you'd try heroin if it was clean and legal?

Maybe, I don't want to incriminate myself. Diamorphine misuse does occasionally crop up among healthcare professionals, but I don't think it would be acceptable to turn up to work high.

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

Are you being serious? Smoking cannabis is the same as any other crime? Its just as serious as robbery?

Where is the harm?

Governments should justify restrictions on our liberty, there is no good reason why cannabis is illegal.

I don't see why people are persisitng with the attempted legalisation of cannabis. Most people smoke cannabis yes?

I am sure everyone has noticed that we are moving towards a situation where smoking will be illegal and there is no reason why gear won't be included so there is no chance of cannabis being legal accept in some other, far less popular form.......

Skive

Walkindude wrote:

2) its is a softer drug that can lead onto harder drugs that cause even more problems.

Can you proove that?

Former Member

Kentish wrote:

Some argue for supply of drugs through licensed shops. If I was a GP I would decline the option to prescribe any drug for purely recreational purposes and I don't think that's unreasonable. That isn't what doctors are for. Diamorphine specifically for rehab is another matter, and one for the experts.

We all know the death rate is low, but death isn't the only harmful effect nor is it necessarily the most devastating.

I wouldn't possibly ask GP's to prescribe things like MDMA (though it could be useful in theraputic situations), but heroin substitution would help and would work as methadone does now.

Of course, MDMA can be dangerous, again I ask, would it be more or less dangerous if it was made under quality control and sold with proper information?

Former Member

aye, there is even more change now. I have no doubt in maybe less then 10 years smoking in anywhere but your home will be illegal so it shows they are cracking down on on-healthy and drug linked products and as it was said, its not like they'd make an exception for weed.

Former Member

Toadborg wrote:

I don't see why people are persisitng with the attempted legalisation of cannabis. Most people smoke cannabis yes?

I am sure everyone has noticed that we are moving towards a situation where smoking will be illegal and there is no reason why gear won't be included so there is no chance of cannabis being legal accept in some other, far less popular form.......

I dont think we are moving towards a total ban on tobacco.

I persist because its a stupid, costly and dangerous law which serves no purpose.

Former Member

Skive wrote:

Can you proove that?

well once again I aint gonna eb digging up links and so forth which is bad of me I guess but that has been a long established fact that they lea donto harder drugs in a lot of cases though not all. I have heard from a number of adicts and ex addicts that started on cannabis and then moved to the harder drugs, been oopned upt to drugs and seeking the new high. Its gateway.

Skive

But if I were to grow a plant and smoke it, or to go out in my garden and pick some mushrooms to take who would I be hurting?

Former Member

I think we are, in fact I am totally certain that tobacco will one day be completely illegal, and thus that cannabis cannot be legal......

Former Member

Walkindude wrote:

well once again I aint gonna eb digging up links and so forth which is bad of me I guess but that has been a long established fact that they lea donto harder drugs in a lot of cases though not all. I have heard from a number of adicts and ex addicts that started on cannabis and then moved to the harder drugs, been oopned upt to drugs and seeking the new high. Its gateway.

And if you asked them I'm sure all of them had used alcohol and caffiene before that, whats your point?

Whatever slight 'gateway' there is, is because of the law, because dealers sell more than one product.

Skive

Walkindude wrote:

that has been a long established fact that they lea donto harder drugs

:rolleyes:

Skive

Toadborg wrote:

I think we are, in fact I am totally certain that tobacco will one day be completely illegal, and thus that cannabis cannot be legal......

Why?

Two completely different drugs.

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

I wouldn't possibly ask GP's to prescribe things like MDMA (though it could be useful in theraputic situations), but heroin substitution would help and would work as methadone does now.

But that would just be a straight swap - diamorphine for methadone. That's not the legalisation of drugs, that's the extension of diamorphine's licence. Hardly a great step forward.

Of course, MDMA can be dangerous, again I ask, would it be more or less dangerous if it was made under quality control and sold with proper information?

Who knows? Worth the risk?

Former Member

Skive wrote:

But if I were to grow a plant and smoke it, or to go out in my garden and pick some mushrooms to take who would I be hurting?

Yourself?

Skive

Kentish wrote:

Yourself?

Well that should be MY choice, yes?

Former Member

Kentish wrote:

But that would just be a straight swap - diamorphine for methadone. That's not the legalisation of drugs, that's the extension of diamorphine's licence. Hardly a great step forward.

Who knows? Worth the risk?

It would be a great step forward because it would remove a large chunk of the black market in heroin, which causes serious health and crime problems.

I thought you might want to take a guess, legal controlled product or black market supply, which would you think less dangerous?

Former Member

Skive wrote:

Why?

Two completely different drugs.

Because it is smoking.

Currently when we talk about a 'ban on smoking' we are talking about tobacco because that is the only legal thing we can smoke anyway.

But for example when smoking in public spaces is banned then if gear were leagal also then this would also apply to smoking gear as well as tobacco, wouldn't it?

Thus of smoking tobacco were illegal then there would be no justification for smoking gear to be legal would there?

Former Member

Well if you get addicted you could hurt plenty...

Skive

Toadborg wrote:

Because it is smoking.

It doesn't have to be.

Former Member

Skive wrote:

Well that should be MY choice, yes?

Do you agree or disagree?

Skive

Walkindude wrote:

Well if you get addicted you could hurt plenty...

How?

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

It would be a great step forward because it would remove a large chunk of the black market in heroin, which causes serious health and crime problems.

You think the "large chunk" of heroin users attend their GP surgery for methadone?

I thought you might want to take a guess, legal controlled product or black market supply, which would you think less dangerous?

I have no idea because the death rate is too low to tell. Of course a clean supply is better but if use goes up then that could easily be cancelled by the normal adverse effects of any drug, however clean the supply.