If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
So you admit then that government policy has an impact on the number of drug users?
Yes of course it does......
Has anyone worked out why use of some drugs has gone down in more liberal countries?
* Legalisation doesn't equate to an increase in usage or an increase in addiction. People become addicts because of personal problems, exactly the same as alcoholics; whether drugs are legal or illegal, their problems remain, and will continue to result in addiction absolutely regardless of legal status. Forcing such people into crime and the subsequently through the criminal justice system is OBVIOUSLY only going to perpetuate the cycle of addiction and crime. Whether you dislike Blagsta's style of arguing on here or not, he's the man to listen to on this considering his field of work.
* In Holland, cannabis use didn't rise significantly after effective decriminalisation. People didn't rush en masse down to the local coffee shop because use was permitted. What happened was cannabis smokers were finally allowed access to their drug of choice, and in doing so the market was rid of dangerously polluted hash - the very same stuff which is smoked in MASSIVE quantities over here. Decriminalisation/legalisation of cannabis is actually a massive boost to public health - this is UNDENIABLE.
* In the US, there is a higher % of cannabis smokers than Holland or the UK. Yet the US also has some of strictest and most punitive drugs laws in the Western world.
Arguing against liberalisation of cannabis is an absolute non-starter. The arguments just don't stand up, and anyone with a modicum of intelligence and rational thought can see this.
Yeah Kentish you irrational idiot!!!!
:rolleyes:
I am glad you have everything worked out Spliffie, well done!
YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER MORE PEOPLE WILL USE IT, no-one does.....
But not every person with personal problems is an addict, if you make the drug more available then it seems likely that more people with personal problems will be drug users and thus more addicts......
Yeah, drugs are fantastic - i've had plenty of experiences beyond words that you will never come close to comprehending or understanding. That doesn't mean there are potential dangers.
And no, legality doesn't equal legitimacy. Most people don't give a flying fuck about the drugs laws, and rightly so. You're argument that "drugs are bad coz they're illegal" is one the worst, most stupid arguments that can be forwarded. Anal sex (and sex toys) are illegal in some American states. Homosexuality was - and is - illegal in many countries. Does this make homosexuality, anal sex or sex toys morally wrong? Of course it doesn't!
The state has absolutely no right to tell people what they can and can't do unless it infringes upon others rights. Anything else is pure tyranny.
So people become addicts for the fun of it do they? How many addicts do you know?
Thanks.
So how do you respond the fact that cannabis use didn't rise dramatically in Holland, and the fact that liberalisation removes horribly polluted products from the market thus improving public health considerably?
I didn't deny the reason you give for addiction, I was stating that if there were increased drug use then we would also see increased addiction because more people with the problems that lead to addiction would be using drugs.....
A one off example, doesn't prove any wider trend.
I notice you add the get out clause 'dramatically' at the end, what does that mean exactly?
Do you understand why it didn't rise 'dramatically' are those reasons likely to be replicated in Britain?
People with personal problems get addicted to drugs legal or illegal regardless. That's the real world. Someone down on their luck and hating life doesn't think to themself, "oh this is illegal, i better not try it". Addicts largely don't give a fuck. Whether that's booze, smack, whatever - it doesn't matter. The need for escapism is still there, and people will seek that escape. Alcohol, as already pointed out, is in many ways FAR worse than becoming addicted to a clean supply of heroin.
Even a small increase in addiction doesn't negate the argument.
You're forgetting to US example i gave as well. That's 2 examples of Western societies which signal no correlation between the legal status of cannabis and use. What can you provide in contrast?
By saying it didn't rise drastically, i'm talking about a very small, insignificant increase. It's well-known to be the case.
And it's you who ignores the point.
So all people with personal problems are addicts?
Why doesn't a small increase negate the argument, why dopes it have to be large?
2 examples, shows nothing.
and don't seek to lecture me on ignoring points.
I'll ask you again, do you understand the reasons WHY the Dutch have not seen a large rise in drug use and will these same conditions hold in the UK?
Errr...no. But most addicts are people with personal problems.
Because of the greater good. Ok, so it's reasonable to believe that there may be a small increase. That doesn't mean that liberalisation and prescription of heroin to addicts isn't benefical for people generally. You reduce deaths and health problems dramatically, reduce crime massively, prevent people in need of help from perpetuating their problems through removing the need to commit crime, and also free up considerable police resources.
It's a sensible step with massive public benefits.
Maybe because the vast majority don't care what the law says either way?
So go on, answer my point - how can you support messing up millions of people's health by creating a market of foul products?
Also we seem to be getting the issues of legalisation and the provision of safe supply etc mixed up, they are pretty much seperate....
About what, exactly? And why?
i want the government to finaly get to grips with a problem that gets bigger every year by taking control of the supply and distribution of drugs ...which our country is awash with.
when are there going to be some controls put in place?
never as long as it's left to terrorists and gangsters.
heroin use has plummeted in holland since they allowed cannabis to be sold openly in coffee shops. also since they set up shooting galleries where heroin users can meet and use.
the result ...most heroin addicts in holland are on average over forty years old ...meaning virtualy no new addicts are being created or have been created for a number of years....exactly the opposite of what is happening here.
why has such an approach reduced heroin addiction?
i believe cos they have cut the scare stories ...cut the propaganda ...put in place health care for those who use the galleries ...and ...when things are out in the open ...most adults make reasonably sensible choices.
fact ...heroin addiction has plummeted in holland.
fact ...people can now grow cannabis in canada and the opportunity to do so has turned cannabis into the countries main export without a drug cartel in sight.
funny how things work out when you give people genuine informed choices.
Errrr...less harmful !=harmless. Please try and be honest Kentish.
No they're not.
Not whilst simple possession of a class A substance is worthy of seven years porridge.
the pubs could not open before 11 am and had to be closed by three pm.
the usual outcry was heard ...it will lead to huge ammounts of violence and disorder ...people will be to drunk to work etc etc.
of course none of it happened.
grown ups were given grown up choices.
now we hear the same ramblings about 24hr boozing ...
here we are hearing exactly the same ...against all available evidence.
most adults make resonably good choices.
you wish to purchase/try ...some weed of good quality ...you don't have to mix with a dealer who is also selling powders potions and pills.
Most people are addicts because they try it recreationally for one reason or another and the very addictive properties of the drug hook them in, alcohol is maybe more about life problems.
I believe heroin should be available on prescription in some cases, but only rare ones... you think a heroin addict will be content with what the doctor gives them a week (or in whatever time period). You think cos the doctor prescribes them with the stuff they will buckle down and get a job? You think they wont still rob ppl for money for food and whatever else?
The nature of addiction would reduce effectiveness of this unless they were REALLY willing to stop, and i think in the case of heroin addicts this is quite rare (Their rational mind may want to stop but part of their brain is telling them they need it, so they wont really WANT to stop, it obviously takes a strong will in a normal state of mind to decide to stop).
Also say coke and weed were available behind a bar like alcohol, I would be a lot more likely to do them, and i would guess that overdoing it with coke has much more dire effects than overdoing it a bit with alcohol (correct me if im wrong).
But if weed was legalised the things about smoking come up (passive etc), i think both should be banned tbh(both meaning smoking weed and normal cigs)... if ppl are taking cannabis in another way and not spoiling other ppls experience of whatever public place it was then i would have no probs with it being legal...
Unless the have say, a mysterious and spontaneous overwhelming phobia of needles, spoons and tinfoil.
Everyone is an addict. Everyone is a compulsive. Just the content changes.
the vast majority do pack it in any way.
most heroin addicts can and will work and live normal lives once they have a secure supply.
some heroin addicts do indeed have large appetites for the stuff but ...even the person with the biggest habbit can only use so much.
you can't just keep pumping the stuff in like burgers you know.
Errrr...no. The emotional/psychological processes underlying addictions are pretty much the same whether its heroin, cocaine, cannabis, alcohol, gambling, whatever.
I think its more likely than if they have to score off the street, yes.
Heroin addicts can have very long careers as addicts. 20 or 30 years isn't uncommon, but often with periods of abstinence that may last a few months or even a couple of years and then relapse. However, most addicts really want to stop after a number of years. What makes it difficult is not addressing the underlying emotional reasons that led them to addiction in the first place.
You're wrong. Both can kill if overdone. Alcohol has worse (possibly fatal) withdrawals if a physical dependency develops. Cocaine doesn't.
Absolute nonsense. Sheer and utter.
If the doctor gives them enough then yes, they'll be content! All addicts want is enough for a fix to get them through the day. Give them that, and state allowances will largely covers their other basic needs.
Eh? If they don't want to stop then they don't want to stop - better to keep them supplied until they're ready to sort themselves out.
More likely than if offered you a joint or a line? No-one here has actually suggested legalising coke - although decriminalising it and removing penalties for use, i would most definitely support that. No-one has the right to punish me for having a sniff.
So people shouldn't be allowed to smoke a drug, which hasn't even been proved to cause phsyical health damage (in fact, evidence suggests the contrary!) in the privacy of their own homes or in a licensed premises for cannabis use?
I'm sitting smoking a joint in my flat right now. What's wrong with that? Am i harming anyone? NO!
Personally, i think there is an argument for prohibiting normal fags...nicotine is a boring drug which offers nothing but addiction.