Home Politics & Debate
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.

drug crime

1161719212225

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    You think the "large chunk" of heroin users attend their GP surgery for methadone?

    You just said methadone wasnt a good drug, why do you think they dont want it?

    The reports are on this thread;

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=78825&highlight=interesting
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Skive wrote:
    It doesn't have to be.

    Yes I know I already said that, but the most common method of consumption is smoking.....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    Nonsense. Drug use should be limited because they are potentially harmful.

    What about eating McDonalds then? Rock climbing? Cycling? Motor racing? Do we "limit" these as well?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    You just said methadone wasnt a good drug, why do you think they dont want it?
    The people with the most troublesome drug use don't [have] access the available health services.

    But why should they stop if they are getting a nice clean regular supply off the doctor?
    Ta. You can give me a precis if you want. I'm a busy man and should be reading about induction of labour not MDMA. :p
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    Toadborg wrote:
    Yes I know I already said that, but the most common method of consumption is smoking.....

    Do you think tobacco should be illegal, even if only smoked in private?
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    What about eating McDonalds then? Rock climbing? Cycling? Motor racing? Do we "limit" these as well?
    We've been through this same argument before. We, as a society, actively try to improve the safety of all of the above. The argument for legalising drugs is the same of course, but that doesn't mean we should judge them to the same standard.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Walkindude wrote:
    I already have tried it bong.

    It adds weight to legitimacy. Why aren't people using the drugs now? Yes a lot are but alot are not as well. Making i legal opens up the gates and accaptance.

    Its legal to drink alcohol first thing in the morning. Most people don't. Why do you think that is?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    They are illegal because most people want them to be and any governemtn that proposed legalisation of all drugs or even most, that are currently illegal would lose the next election.......

    Yes, but most people believe the lies and disinformation in the media, as this thread shows.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yeah many people do blagsta.

    taking something that was banned then legalise it makes it lehgitmate and opens it up to acceptance.

    There are lawas in other countries that dictate things are legal there, while here they are illegal. They follow those laws and do the acts so why is that? Coz the law legitimises it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    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.

    Oh god.

    *bangs screen*
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    We've been through this same argument before. We, as a society, actively try to improve the safety of all of the above. The argument for legalising drugs is the same of course, but that doesn't mean we should judge them to the same standard.

    Yes, we should make activities like this as safe as possible. Which is what legalisation will do. Why are drugs different? Why shouldn't we use the same standards?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    The people with the most troublesome drug use don't [have] access the available health services.

    But why should they stop if they are getting a nice clean regular supply off the doctor?

    Ta. You can give me a precis if you want. I'm a busy man and should be reading about induction of labour not MDMA. :p

    Fair enough, then there should be better out reach services.

    If you cant be bothered to put the work in thats your fault.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    But why should they stop if they are getting a nice clean regular supply off the doctor?

    Most people will want to quit their habit eventually. So why not make it safer in the meantime?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Walkindude wrote:
    yeah many people do blagsta.

    taking something that was banned then legalise it makes it lehgitmate and opens it up to acceptance.

    But cannabis use hasnt grown since the down grading of it in law.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Walkindude wrote:
    yeah many people do blagsta.

    Glad you admit it.
    Walkindude wrote:
    taking something that was banned then legalise it makes it lehgitmate and opens it up to acceptance.

    However, they used to be legal, so that's a bollocks argument. You also ignored my question about alcohol I see.
    Walkindude wrote:
    There are lawas in other countries that dictate things are legal there, while here they are illegal. They follow those laws and do the acts so why is that? Coz the law legitimises it.

    I can't make head nor tail of this. :confused: Anyone?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Yes, we should make activities like this as safe as possible. Which is what legalisation will do. Why are drugs different? Why shouldn't we use the same standards?
    Drugs affect people in ways that the other activities you list do not. A workforce on drugs is not a productive workforce. And the benefit of taking drugs is entirely selfish.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Walkindude wrote:
    They follow those laws and do the acts so why is that? Coz the law legitimises it.

    Did you fuck dead bodies up until 2003 then?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Most people will want to quit their habit eventually. So why not make it safer in the meantime?
    Is the doctor prescribing it for recreational use or specifically to wean the person off? Would you want doctors to be prescribing recreational drugs on the NHS?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    Drugs affect people in ways that the other activities you list do not. A workforce on drugs is not a productive workforce.

    Aaaahh, so its political then? And what makes you think that legalisation would lead to "A workforce on drugs"?
    Kentish wrote:
    And the benefit of taking drugs is entirely selfish.

    So is the benefit of all the other things I mentioned.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    Is the doctor prescribing it for recreational use or specifically to wean the person off? Would you want doctors to be prescribing recreational drugs on the NHS?

    Someone using heroin because they have a habit is not recreational.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Skive wrote:
    Do you think tobacco should be illegal, even if only smoked in private?

    I am not sure, but the point is that I am certain it will be........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Fair enough, then there should be better out reach services.
    But the problems are mostly social. I think you are just medicalising drug addiction to the extent that everyone on drugs needs a doctor to provide the supply. So the GP becomes a state sponsored dealer. Not a situation I'd be happy with.
    If you cant be bothered to put the work in thats your fault.
    pdfs crash my computer. What does it say?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Drugs affect people in ways that the other activities you list do not. A workforce on drugs is not a productive workforce.

    I don't know if you'd noticed, but the workforce IS on drugs.

    It's an absolute disgrace that you can give people drugs like prozac to make them feel "okay" but you can't let them have drugs that wuld actually make them feel "good."

    It's an even bigger disgrace that we live such shit lives that a large minority have to pop pills just to get by at all.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No I didn't kermit. Though I'm sure some did and were protected by the law because of it.

    You really have to be naive to see the leglity/legitimacy argument, unless you are deliberatly trying not see it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Aaaahh, so its political then? And what makes you think that legalisation would lead to "A workforce on drugs"?
    Of course it's political. I'd argue that use would increase. "A workforce on drugs" is just hyperbole, a tool of argument that I believe you are familiar with.
    So is the benefit of all the other things I mentioned.
    No not really. Everyone has to eat (McDonalds), the rest are entertainment.
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    Toadborg wrote:
    I am not sure, but the point is that I am certain it will be........

    The point is do you think that's right?
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Someone using heroin because they have a habit is not recreational.
    The other option is therapeutic. Is it therapeutic?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    Of course it's political. I'd argue that use would increase. "A workforce on drugs" is just hyperbole, a tool of argument that I believe you are familiar with.

    No not really. Everyone has to eat (McDonalds), the rest are entertainment.

    Everyone has to eat McDonalds? Who are you Ronald? Everyone has to go rock climbing? Motor racing? Clutching at straws geezah.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    The other option is therapeutic. Is it therapeutic?

    What do you mean by "therapeutic"?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Everyone has to eat McDonalds? Who are you Ronald? Everyone has to go rock climbing? Motor racing? Clutching at straws geezah.
    McDonalds provides food, which is essential for life. Generically, McDonalds presumably refers to any food retailer.

    If the government gave everyone a rope and told them that rock climbing was a good and harmless thing to do, do you think this would result in more people taking it up, and more people coming to harm through it?

    I don't need to clutch at straws because I stand by my argument.
Sign In or Register to comment.