Slim Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 It's because they're illegal, Slim. If they were legal, we would have more people getting high, fewer people dying because purity would be better, fewer people dying because they can't afford food as well as drugs, much less petty crime to fuel the habit, and no drug-related gangsterism. I'm for legalisation. I was responding to "it's not the drugs fault". It is the drugs fault. Legalize all drugs? you've have masses of the population requiring huge amounts of support because they'd be addicted to freely available addictive substances. Have you had any experience of a heroin addict Sebrof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 It's because they're illegal, Slim. If they were legal, we would have more people getting high, fewer people dying because purity would be better, fewer people dying because they can't afford food as well as drugs, much less petty crime to fuel the habit, and no drug-related gangsterism. I'm for legalisation. I was responding to "it's not the drugs fault". It is the drugs fault. Legalize all drugs? you've have masses of the population requiring huge amounts of support because they'd be addicted to freely available addictive substances. Have you had any experience of a heroin addict Sebrof? Loads. Give 'em unadulterated stuff, and feed 'em properly. Much of the problem disappears. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman2 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 It's because they're illegal, Slim. If they were legal, we would have more people getting high, fewer people dying because purity would be better, fewer people dying because they can't afford food as well as drugs, much less petty crime to fuel the habit, and no drug-related gangsterism. I'm for legalisation. I was responding to "it's not the drugs fault". It is the drugs fault. Legalize all drugs? you've have masses of the population requiring huge amounts of support because they'd be addicted to freely available addictive substances. Have you had any experience of a heroin addict Sebrof? freely ava;iable my arse .. they would be sold in chemists not tescos dickhead.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 It's because they're illegal, Slim. If they were legal, we would have more people getting high, fewer people dying because purity would be better, fewer people dying because they can't afford food as well as drugs, much less petty crime to fuel the habit, and no drug-related gangsterism. I'm for legalisation. I was responding to "it's not the drugs fault". It is the drugs fault. Legalize all drugs? you've have masses of the population requiring huge amounts of support because they'd be addicted to freely available addictive substances. Have you had any experience of a heroin addict Sebrof? Why do you think masses of the population would require support? Legalisation doesn't necessarily mean that people will decide to take addictive drugs like heroin and amphetamines. It would make sense if there was a much greater level of education rather than a "No, you can't have them or you will be punished" stigma surrounding them. I can't help but be cynical in regards to educational campaign made at the moment. There is clearly a message to get across about their potential dangers and it betrays a need for education, nevertheless, regardless of whether you have received that education or not you WILL be punished for doing them. Though even if you disagree about legalisation of heroin, certainly ecstasy should be legalised or at the very least downgraded to 'c'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Why do you think masses of the population would require support? Because of the nature of addictive had drugs. Look at that other legal highly addictive substances, tobacco and alcohol, which are healthy hobbies compared to crack. Look at how much that costs in welfare. £2bn a year on the NHS alone for smokers. Look at the harmful effects on society from those substances, look at what cheap and freely available booze has done for the UK. You want to add to that? Are you mad? Manxman, if it remained controlled, which I think is what you're suggesting, you'd lose the benefits the advocates here are proposing. It'd stay underground and there'd be illegal supply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sausage Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Does anyone honestly think there is one single person out there who thinks 'well I didnt mind smoking a joint when it was class C but there is no way I am touching it again now its a class B drug' Stupid pointless waste of time, just like the stupid pointless laws in this area, when will the spineless politicians finally stand up and say 'right this approach clearly doesnt work, lets stop making people buy contaminated dangerous crap from gangsters and lets look to control this ourselves properly' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman2 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 because that would entail enlightened thinking.. and our new 40 mill prison would only be at a third capacity. now if it was something a prominant local lodge member could make a killing on it would be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Don't worry one of these days an MHK will be arrested for possession of a minute amount of grass which can barely get a cat high and then the law will change. But now that pot is class C again I'll be steering well clear because it must suddenly have got more dangerous. Do they really think people are that thick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Don't worry one of these days an MHK will be arrested for possession of a minute amount of grass I doubt that the Police still waste their time and money arresting people for dope. I hope that they don't given that Allan Bell has said that money is so tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Don't worry one of these days an MHK will be arrested for possession of a minute amount of grass which can barely get a cat high and then the law will change. But now that pot is class C again I'll be steering well clear because it must suddenly have got more dangerous. Do they really think people are that thick? Well, it has got more dangerous. If caught, you'll get a longer sentence. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Yes, sure it has. Considering it is illegal and that there is no consistency in the quantities and purity of what people buy, how do they know? Plus the smellier the weed is the stronger it is generally and therefore the more likely one is to get nicked. Those smoking more shitty varieties are harder to find (i.e. neighbours grassing on them and so on). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 How confusing is this? Just after the uk govt upgrades cannabis, the US government effectively decriminalizes medical cannabis: http://gawker.com/5162010/obama-pretty-muc...lizes-marijuana Obama: "My attitude is if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the way to relieve pain and suffering is medical marijuana, then that's something I'm open to," Obama said in November 2007 at a campaign stop in Audubon, Iowa. "There's no difference between that and morphine when it comes to just giving people relief from pain." Could be interesting this in the face of recession? Create a new industry around pot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 3, 2009 Author Share Posted March 3, 2009 Obama: "My attitude is if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the way to relieve pain and suffering is medical marijuana, then that's something I'm open to," Obama said in November 2007 at a campaign stop in Audubon, Iowa. "There's no difference between that and morphine when it comes to just giving people relief from pain." Could be interesting this in the face of recession? Create a new industry around pot! And much need relief from the pain of job loss or lost savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman2 Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 the island is potless anyway.. nil non zilch. apart from the grow their own merchants who understandably say nowt to no-one.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 are you having a laugh? there is tons of the stuff about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.