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.
Options
Drugs Propagander, is the true facts hidden.
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Do you think the real truth of drugs is over reacted, does anyone think the government used propaganda, the papers and magazines to make drugs look bad, and to give all the negative effects of them?
Because your always hearing about how people are dieing from drugs, take pills for example, think how many people do them…..think how many people die….big ratio ay….and why do those people die? How many situations is it because the person is careless and doesn’t drink enough liquids in a club?…..
Well the question is do you think the government hides the real facts about drugs, that only drug users know, and they feed the people over reacted information to keep people clean of drugs.
Because your always hearing about how people are dieing from drugs, take pills for example, think how many people do them…..think how many people die….big ratio ay….and why do those people die? How many situations is it because the person is careless and doesn’t drink enough liquids in a club?…..
Well the question is do you think the government hides the real facts about drugs, that only drug users know, and they feed the people over reacted information to keep people clean of drugs.
0
Comments
The fact is many people in the government dont even know the real facts about drugs. They are not (I believe) drugs users, so they dont really know, its not really the question of hiding or not.
So I think they are just ignorance about drugs. Even they are informed with the real facts, they wont believe it cos they never tried it and they dont want to know anyway.
Taking ecstasy as the best example.... the government will delight in telling us that last year 27 people died from taking ecstasy, therefore it is a drug which kills, and is very dangerous and god no we won't make it class B. As a minor point, which they won't be so loud about, thats 27 people who died from around about 26 million tablets dropped.
What they also won't be quite as quick to inform us about is that most of those 27 people died from either a lack of fluid or too much fluid. Now, a main reason that people drink too much/not enough is going to be a lack of education, because they real facts behind ecstasy are covered up, and the true information about how safe it can be is also not given out. People therefore don't drink enough, or they drink too much, and they die.
If the government were to adopt an honest approach, I don't think that nearly so many people would die. Leah Betts, the famous case of the girl who died from taking a pill on her 18th birthday. She drank too much water, because the only prpaganda she had heard said drink a lot. She, supposedly, drank 7 litres of it in a relatively short amount of time, that is why she died. From mis-information.
I won't even start on how safe they could make it if it was legalised, as that is not the issue. But they could.
The fact remains that drugs affect people in different ways, and it is impossible to predict who will have an adverse reaction. Leah Betts might well have been saved by education, but others wouldn't. The only thing we know for sure is that she would be alive today were it not for ecstacy...
The danger of drugs comes not only from the chemicals themselves, but the other gunk that dealers use to bulk them up. Education is not going to stop that.
So that leaves two options: full legalisation, or further attempts to get drugs off the streets completely.
If, as many people believe, the latter is impossible, then legalisation is the only option left...
Alcohol kills approximately 250,000 people per year; ecstasy 5.
At home alcohol is responsible for 1000's of cases a year of domestic violence/child abuse; I can't honestly think ecstasy's been responsible for 1 case ever.
On the street alcohol is the cause for thousands of fights, brawls, assaults and a few murders each year. Again, I've never heard of an ecstasy-induced fight.
Although there have been a few drug-driving car accidents, drink-driving is a far worse problem.
Even without any violence involved, alcohol wrecks the lives of those who abuse it and their families. Legions of people lose their jobs and families because of the stuff. See how many e users are in the same situation.
But never mind, your government knows best and they have every right to throw you in jail if you pop a few pills. Stick to the booze and kick a few heads in when you get pissed- that, you are allowed to do.
The fact remains that it would be impossible to attempt to ban alcohol now, so why use that argument?
My usual response to such arguments is to point out the logical futility of it:
You say alcohol is a terrible drug which should never have been invented because of the damage it causes to society...and your answer is to legalise every other drug you can think of because they couldn't possibly be as bad as alcohol is. Not really an adequate answer to the drug problem is it?
The 'kick a few heads in' was obviously a metaphorical expression. I thought that would have been obvious. The government doesn't condone this kind of action. But it definitively turns a blind eye, or doesn't act as tough as it should towards loutish behaviour: the "lads will be lads" culture lives on unchecked.
I do not want alcohol banned. I am of the opinion that all drugs should be legalised. But the government argument that drugs are illegal for our own good because they are harmful doesn't wash very well when alcohol is still sold legally. Double standards anyone?
Are you suggesting that legalising all drugs will suddenly reduce 'laddish' behaviour? I don't think you've understood my point. Of course it is a double standard.
But you too display double standards. Your argument for the legalisation of drugs is based on the fact that alcohol is a bad drug too. Surely you must realise the absurdity of that argument?
actually, I'm pro legalisation to an extent, with pot and ecstacy at least - but that's not the reason why. yes, it's a double standard - but removing it doesn't actually achieve anything. Alcohol's legal now and there's nothing you can do about it.
WRONG - do your saying because alcohol is legal (yes alcohol is a drug aswell) harder drugs such as heroin or crack should be legalised aswell. there are drugs that are more harmful than others.
most problems are due to prohibition.
Prove that.
Define 'problems' in this context. Because, you know, dying from OD-ing is a pretty huge problem, and snorting a tonne of Charlie will OD you whether it's legal or not.
But at the same time i would encourage caution on their part, drugs do kill and that is the bottom line, education would increase prevention granted, but i would be willing to forecast a massive increse in drug use would lead to more deaths, perhaps not a proportional amount, but an increase never the less.
But those negatives must be weighed up against the probable positives, i was reading somewhere (and i can't remember where, sorry) that the amount of tax that could be generated from the taxation of legal, governemnt produced cannabis would contribute billions to the public purse and would have a massive impact on the NHS, never mind the rest of banned substances. Then you've the massive amount of police time freed up, prison space and the positive effects on crime rates which would result. Jobs would be created, in production and retail, more than you'd imagine.
Although its difficult to forecast, its widely accepted health consequences would be reduced if people switched from booze to say ecstasy, certainly cannabis, especially in the short term, visit any accident and emergency department on a saturday night to see the actual menace alcohol is, then after that visit police cells and beaten wives. Kentish in answer to your question, yes legalisation of ecstasy for example would reduce laddish behaviour, its fuelled more often than not by alcohol, if 30% of those drinking switched to ecstasy i bet yoiu'd get a 25% reduction in laddish behaviour and incidence.
Although in some respects the alcohol versus drugs is a stupid argument, it also has merits, if people must go out on a weekend and get wrecked then surely its far better to be wrecked on something which is less harmful physically, mentally and socially ?
Its a complex debate, some people are far to quick to dismiss legalisation without thinking it through and thats what the governemnt must to very carefully and even then only when public opinion is on their side will they start making radical changes, but in my opion they will come, but not for a few decades yet