James Anderton Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Deemster Doyle told the pair: "It is people like you who are responsible for a lot of misery on the Island" eh? wha? In all reality, probably the only 'misery' is the other drug dealers who have had a little bit of their business taken away. People don't take cannabis and cocaine because it makes them miserable, do they? your assuming that the demsters solely means the users What about the family and friends of addicts who have to 'occaisionally' watch the slow decline of a loved one who invariably insists 'i'm okay' i'm in control of it' . What about the victims of burglary where some addict has broken in, taken items of sentimental value etc etc, to sell on to feed their habit. What about the misery of neighbours who have to put up with a nearby 'drug users' address become a shit hole attracting drug users to the area with occaisionally needles left nearby in the streets. But the people selling drugs on the IOM aren't directly accountable for what happens in Colombia, or anywhere inbetween there and the IOM, they're only accountable for what they do here. If we're going to punish people on that basis then we should start arresting shop owners who sell Nike trainers 'cause somewhere in the Far East ten year old children are being beaten into working faster to make more profit for Nike, and while we're at it let's fine anyone who buys a pair of Nike trainers for contributing to the child workers' suffering. I personally would say they are accountable. If you look at the law on handling stolen goods you will find the punishments are actually higher than those for stealing the goods in the first place. Simply put without the handlers there would be no thefts. Me, i view drugs the very same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Because not all ‘drugs’ are the same and not all ‘drugs’ cause the same effect on the human brain let alone the human body. Fore that reason alone the impression that the effects that ‘drugs’ have is dependent on the person and not the drug is terribly misleading. To then assert that for MOST people there will be no problem with taking ‘drugs’ is simply stupid. Some ‘drugs’ result in the creation of a habit based on liking the effect that the drug causes, other ‘drugs’ actually create a physical need and physical dependency on the drug as a result of the body changing its metabolism to cope with the presence of the drug. This is genuine addiction and when the drug is withheld it matters not in the least about the person the body takes over and reacts to the absence of what it had adopted to withstand. There are a very few cigarette smokers who seem never to develop cancer or smoking related illnesses so many cigarette smokers use that to excuse their addictive habit yet fail to grasp that the percentage of smokers who do not suffer heart disease or cancer is very small to the point of being negligible and that for the vast majority of people if you smoke cigarettes then they will given time kill you. Fact. So it is with most of the dangerous drugs. The odd individual is able to cope with a weekly ‘rock’ or couple of lines or chasing the dragon a few times over a weekend but MOST people at best have a horrible time stopping, need medical help, or even die. Ever seen a heroin addict ‘kicking the habit’? I have. It was my wife’s young cousin. She was only 22 at the time and her thing was to smoke heroin. Not even injecting the stuff.. You at once realise where the term ‘kicking;’ comes from, not some slang term referring to getting rid of something – instead the convulsions twisting and writhing as the body goes through the agonies of withdrawal of what it had become adapted to. Then of course there is the incontinence. And the vomiting. And the hallucinations. And what they say. Better never to remind them of any of it. They will remember quite enough as it is. To pay for her drugs she stole from anyone and anywhere, she dealt in drugs, she was anybodies for the price of a ‘bit of gear’. Another effect of drugs. The crime that is done to get the cash to pay. Now she’s ‘clean’ but freely admits that she would go back to her addiction like a shot were it not for her two kids. She says even now that she isn’t sure that when they leave home she won’t start again. THAT is what drugs do to a person. But I still say that they should be legalised. It will reduce the prices and so reduce overall crime, and it will make them less attractive to potential new users and that alone would be well worth while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catchy Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 the sheer number of people taking drugs refute this! hundreds of thousands of uk citizens have taken drugs this weekend, show me the casualties most people move on or manage their drug use, a very very small minority ruin their lives because of them There is a very big difference bewteen heroin and any other drug, But even heroin can be managed and is by many users: those who can afford it For some users they will become addikted yet for most they'll be ok. NO! NOT SO! WRONG IN THE WORST POSSIBLE WAY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 the sheer number of people taking drugs refute this! hundreds of thousands of uk citizens have taken drugs this weekend, show me the casualties You may not get many immediate casualties (although I am sure a good few A&Es up and down the country have treated some over the weekend), but what about long term damage? Come back in ten years or so, and you will see the results of frequent use - change in personality, your memory getting worse, etc.. Only in the last few years have more comprehensive long term studies for drugs like Ecstasy come out, and - maybe not surprisingly - the outlook isn't good. I am tempted to jump on the "Let them do it, clean the Genpool, survival of the fittest" bandwaggon, but somehow, such attitude appears wrong in this day and age. What I still fail to understand is simply, why some people are loudly calling for their right to seriously damage their body in the name of "recreation" - are we so recreation-desperate in this day and age? Are two legal ways to shorten your life not enough yet? Is there nothing else to do? And just for anyone who's interested, some figures from the Chief Constable's Annual Report 2004/05: SEIZURES/VALUES OF CONTROLLED DRUGS ON-ISLAND SEIZURES Heroin: 11.395g, Street Value: 1,139.50 Cocaine: 264g, Street Value: 21,120.00 Crack Cocaine: 1.0g, Street Value: 75.00 LSD: 0/0 Amphetamine: 0/0 Ecstasy: 6,569, Street Value: 39,414.00 Cannabis Resin: 2,276.64, Street Value: 6,420.00 Cannabis Bush: 156.60g, Street Value: 607.00 Cannabis Plant: 16, Street Value: 3,476.48 OFF-ISLAND SEIZURES Cocaine: 113.4g, Street Value: 9,072.00 All others: n/a Good/Bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 But people ARE allowed to damage or risk their health in any number of ways. The state does not intervene to stop people eating greasy food, smoking cigarettes (apart from an age limit on buying them), drinking alcohol (ditto), riding pushbikes on roads where there are cars and lorries, boarding aircraft, having children etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 But people ARE allowed to damage or risk their health in any number of ways. The state does not intervene to stop people eating greasy food, smoking cigarettes (apart from an age limit on buying them), drinking alcohol (ditto), riding pushbikes on roads where there are cars and lorries, boarding aircraft, having children etc etc. I know that they are allowed to - I just don't get it why you would deliberately take substances that will harm you more than boarding an aircraft - which is a weak example anyway IMO. And there is no such thing as a safe drug, so why fight for your right to take them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 From today's Independent: Deemster Doyle told the pair: "It is people like you who are responsible for a lot of misery on the Island" eh? what were Donald Gelling and Alan Bell doing there, anyway? Sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theintelligentthug Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 But people ARE allowed to damage or risk their health in any number of ways. The state does not intervene to stop people eating greasy food, smoking cigarettes (apart from an age limit on buying them), drinking alcohol (ditto), riding pushbikes on roads where there are cars and lorries, boarding aircraft, having children etc etc. this is a complete moot point. safety measure are in place on each of the things you mentioned. they arent on illegal drugs. which is why i think that drugs should be legalised, monitored monitored and taxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Harry Hill said The thing about heroin is... it's very morish, apparently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideways Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 What I still fail to understand is simply, why some people are loudly calling for their right to seriously damage their body in the name of "recreation" - are we so recreation-desperate in this day and age? Are two legal ways to shorten your life not enough yet? Is there nothing else to do? Never heard of the TT or most forms of motorsport , in fact forget the motor bit . people take a chance just for the thrill it's human nature i'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Never heard of the TT or most forms of motorsport , in fact forget the motor bit . people take a chance just for the thrill it's human nature i'm afraid. I see your point about about taking chances, thrill, and the human tendency towards self destruction, but there's still a difference between, say, motorsport and drugs (legal or illegal) Motorsport may affect your body in a negative way Drugs will affect your body in a negative way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideways Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Drugs will affect your body in a negative way The point is that drugs will affect allot of people in a negative way but like sport and life in general "it will never happen to me" people feel indestructible until something breaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catchy Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Never heard of the TT or most forms of motorsport , in fact forget the motor bit . people take a chance just for the thrill it's human nature i'm afraid. I see your point about about taking chances, thrill, and the human tendency towards self destruction, but there's still a difference between, say, motorsport and drugs (legal or illegal) Motorsport may affect your body in a negative way Drugs will affect your body in a negative way WRONG drugs are not negative, they are very positive for most, why else would anyone use them? they give you a good time and you don't get a hangover the next day. most people don't have any problems with them. get some facts before you comment otherwise you look like a dickhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haX0red_Account Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 you can't ignore the world's biggest industry! the people have spoken, even if the authorities don't like it- think what's needed is pharmas to develop safe recreationals and create better blockers for those who get hooked and need to come off it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Never heard of the TT or most forms of motorsport , in fact forget the motor bit . people take a chance just for the thrill it's human nature i'm afraid. I see your point about about taking chances, thrill, and the human tendency towards self destruction, but there's still a difference between, say, motorsport and drugs (legal or illegal) Motorsport may affect your body in a negative way Drugs will affect your body in a negative way WRONG drugs are not negative, they are very positive for most, why else would anyone use them? they give you a good time and you don't get a hangover the next day. most people don't have any problems with them. get some facts before you comment otherwise you look like a dickhead The affect is negative, When people take drugs they don't notice the affect on their bodies, They only take notice of say the hallucinations, which they find exciting and fun but are actually damaging and affecting you normal bodily reactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.