cookie_monster
Well-Known Forumite
an interesting take and i have to admit....also quite true!
x
Admin edit: Move post and responses to their own thread.
x
Admin edit: Move post and responses to their own thread.
-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Drug laws - Do Nice People Take Drugs?
- Thread starter cookie_monster
- Start date
shoes
Well-Known Forumite
I use recreational drugs all the time, as i have said before on this forum, and frankly I am sick of the current view on drugs. I manage to support myself, with a good job, which i am good at, I have a good social life, i am not a bastard to people when i don't have drugs (just all the time :p), I don't have an dependencies except tobacco which is hardly a taboo. I also know lots of people who achieve the same, many forum members in fact although not mentioning any names of course.
We need to spend just as much money on the 'drug problem' however ALL resources which are used for 'fighting' cannabis, mdma, acid, shrooms, ketamine and cocaine, IMO, need to be shifted towards education and fighting heroin / GHB etc. Of course this is personal opinion however drugs such as MDMA are less dangerous than salt, fact. You have to be pretty dumb to hurt youself with mdma (ecstacy), or cannabis. And again you all know my opinion of stupid people, and they should be allowed to get on with hurting themselves.
As it happens the law has made absolutely no difference whatsoever to my drug use, if it were legal I wouldn't take more drugs, although I'd probably pay more for them.
We need to spend just as much money on the 'drug problem' however ALL resources which are used for 'fighting' cannabis, mdma, acid, shrooms, ketamine and cocaine, IMO, need to be shifted towards education and fighting heroin / GHB etc. Of course this is personal opinion however drugs such as MDMA are less dangerous than salt, fact. You have to be pretty dumb to hurt youself with mdma (ecstacy), or cannabis. And again you all know my opinion of stupid people, and they should be allowed to get on with hurting themselves.
As it happens the law has made absolutely no difference whatsoever to my drug use, if it were legal I wouldn't take more drugs, although I'd probably pay more for them.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Actually, I doubt you'd pay any more. Remember that the hash growers often get sod all, a quid a kilo in some places! Its the supply chain that adds the costs, because of the associated risks. If a government controlled the supply chain, they wouldn't have the risks. All drugs would be regulated, quality ensured and, most importantly, dangerous additives avoided. You'd get clean drugs, with a much lower health risk, so therefore less strain on the NHS.shoes said:
Of course, if the supply was decriminalised then we'd still be flooded with the cheap stuff. Therefore they should keep all associated penalties for importing/selling as they are now, but then also supply the drugs themselves. Huge profits all round, everybody is happy. Except the drug dealers, who have lost their billions of pounds that they usually make each year. So maybe they'll go abroad and bother some other country?
shoes
Well-Known Forumite
Fair point, although I have little faith in the government not taxing the hell out of it, like alcohol and tobacco.tek-monkey said:
Or offer them jobs in the new legitimate supply chain, granted there will be more dealers than jobs but it will at least reduce the problem somewhat.tek-monkey said:
Wookie
Official Forum Linker
Might I recommend at this point that those interested obtain and read a book called High Society by Ben Elton?
If the library can't furnish a copy, Amazon or a charity shop probably can.An Amazon.co.uk reviewer said:
db
#chaplife
yeah, but you're basing this on your opinion of drugs and their different levels of harm.. you say that people should leave "good" drugs along, and shift more resources into combating "bad" drugs.. but there are millions of people out there who probably smoke plenty of cannabis but consider cocaine a very "bad" drug.. likewise, i'm sure there are millions who take ecstasy but consider cannabis a "bad" drug.. all drugs are bad in some way (in the same way that most things in life are bad in some way), so who's to decide which ones are fit for human consumption and which ones aren't? it's for this reason that many people suggest the only way to stem drug usage is to decriminalise use of all drugs, and allow strict controls to be placed on their production and supply..shoes said:
also, i find it strange that someone who is so obviously clued up on drug culture would lump GHB and heroin together in the same sentence.. they are completely different drugs, with completely different usage cultures and risk factors..
not a bad book, but it's more about the main protagonist's love life and subsequent controversy than it is actually about drug issues.. still, it's a decent read (definitely easy to chomp through on holiday, by the pool or something) and makes you think about what the UK might be like with a decriminalised drug culture!Wookie said:
John Marwood
I ♥ cryptic crosswords
You only have to go back just over a century or so, to the time when Opium was the drug of the night ( and Gin the drug of the day ) Both legal and tax free
Both started out as medicines
I am told Stafford town centre had many shops selling both
"Drunk for a penny, dead drunk for tuppence, straw for nothing" was the saying of the day
( sounds like a Dire Straits record now tho )
Both started out as medicines
I am told Stafford town centre had many shops selling both
"Drunk for a penny, dead drunk for tuppence, straw for nothing" was the saying of the day
( sounds like a Dire Straits record now tho )
shoes
Well-Known Forumite
Agreed it is in my opinion, however I have at least got reasons for most of my views, having taken a pretty diverse selection of narcotics over my time. When i refer to a good or bad drug its not just the immediate effect it has on you which I am taking into consideration, ghb (amongst others) is primarily used for 'date rape'. IMO rape is a crime which is comparable to murder in as much as it adversely affects the victims and their families for life. By the same token of life ruining or at least having a very negative long term effect I consider heroin just as bad. Whilst I agree they are totally different drugs the end result is the same.dirtybobby said:
There is also the question of vunerability. People who usually get sucked into heroin are not usually doing so just because they're stupid, they are usually at a vunerable point in their lives where they are seen as an easy target to get severely hooked on a terrible drug. This never happens with say cannabis or ecstacy, primarily because they are not addictive, particularly after one dose. Frankly neither is cocaine IMO, but i'm sure than differs from person to person depending on reaction / how they feel on the drug / will power etc.
Other drugs, ecstacy and cocaine, for example also have the ability to do this but its a lot more difficult to let it happen, particularly with ecstacy and I firmly believe that the majority of people who use cocaine and ecstacy are people who have lives, jobs, friends, are self sufficient and enjoy recreational use of these drugs because they want to and can afford to, whereas I would bet the number of people like that who use heroin recreationally is significantly less, although of course it does happen.
Another huge problem is europe and it's nanny state antics. Thanks to europe cannabis will never be legal in this country (brussells ordered the reclassification to class b based on the fact that they are all chain smoking alcoholics and cannot stand the dirty filthy 'junkie potheads'. Like me. Who has a job, a girl, a place to live, i feed myself, i contribute to society and so on, however in the eyes of the law makers I'm no better than a smackhead.
Considering how many drugs I have taken and the quantities, and knowing my body is weak and I am allergic to pretty much everything, I'd say you would have to be pretty damned unlucky to have an allergic reaction to a drug, and if you die taking amphetamine based drugs or cannabis, you probably dererved it. If anyone has lost close people through OD's I'm sorry I'm not trying to offend, but its almost impossible to OD on most drugs if you use your brain and don't take them ALL AT ONCE!
What I am eluding to is that whilst yes, those opinions of mine above are only opinions, they are at least founded on something more than an article posted in the daily mail by a journalist who paid a scientist to say drugs are bad, mmmmmm'kay, which is pretty much what the law makers have as their extensive 'evidence'.
Anyway I'm off for a bong (at a mates house, i don't have any cannabis myself of course
)
Andreas Rex
Banned for smiling
I think you may have smoked a few commas there dood....lucky for you I have some spares,,,,,,,,,
Must be all those sports cigarettes...
Must be all those sports cigarettes...
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Drugs are bad, mmkay. TBH though, regardless of personal views, reclassification HAS to be all or nothing. You can't just legalise the nice ones, as they differ between people.
Take acid for example, amazing thing that really gives you an interesting and mind altering experience. Downside, it takes weeks/months to really get over it and some people never do.
What about crack? Its highly addictive, but not to all. I've tried it, couldn't see what the fuss was, yet the guy who gave it me got proper hooked. Ruined his life, did nowt to me, should I be allowed it but him not? Not that I would, it was crap!
Coke? Some people love it, some turn into agressive tits that just want to fight everyone. Its like nasal stella, not a good thing. Allow those who play nice only?
Weed, most have no issues but some it ruins. Not physically, but they just sit at home all day smoking, can't hold downa job, make nothing of their lives, become a burden on society. Allow just those who are employed?
Heroin. Yeah, heroin. Only had bad experiences with users of this, so find it hard to comment. Regardless, I know an ex user that now works for Cambridge Uni. Never knew him when he was a user though, so hard to say anything.
The fact is drugs are subjective, some may get a worse effect from caffeine than others do from smack. It HAS to be all or nothing, otherwise the same inconsistencies we see with alcohol and tobacco will still be evident. Also, out of all my distant past, cocaine was the only thing my doctor was worried about. Not like there was even that much coke use, but from his point of view that was by far the worst of my past. You know me shoes, you know what I used to be like, I told him EVERYTHING. If his view of coke was that strong, would it be the same with other doctors? In which case, thats a BAD drug surely? People like him would (hopefully) be those choosing the classifications after all.
Take acid for example, amazing thing that really gives you an interesting and mind altering experience. Downside, it takes weeks/months to really get over it and some people never do.
What about crack? Its highly addictive, but not to all. I've tried it, couldn't see what the fuss was, yet the guy who gave it me got proper hooked. Ruined his life, did nowt to me, should I be allowed it but him not? Not that I would, it was crap!
Coke? Some people love it, some turn into agressive tits that just want to fight everyone. Its like nasal stella, not a good thing. Allow those who play nice only?
Weed, most have no issues but some it ruins. Not physically, but they just sit at home all day smoking, can't hold downa job, make nothing of their lives, become a burden on society. Allow just those who are employed?
Heroin. Yeah, heroin. Only had bad experiences with users of this, so find it hard to comment. Regardless, I know an ex user that now works for Cambridge Uni. Never knew him when he was a user though, so hard to say anything.
The fact is drugs are subjective, some may get a worse effect from caffeine than others do from smack. It HAS to be all or nothing, otherwise the same inconsistencies we see with alcohol and tobacco will still be evident. Also, out of all my distant past, cocaine was the only thing my doctor was worried about. Not like there was even that much coke use, but from his point of view that was by far the worst of my past. You know me shoes, you know what I used to be like, I told him EVERYTHING. If his view of coke was that strong, would it be the same with other doctors? In which case, thats a BAD drug surely? People like him would (hopefully) be those choosing the classifications after all.
db
#chaplife
fair enough.. have you taken heroin? pcp? meth? if the answer is no, perhaps that is why you demonise them and put them in the "bad drugs" category.. i'm not about to air my dirty laundry in public, but there is a reason my lot used to nickname me "the pharmacist" so i would imagine we are at least comparable in knowledge of drugs and their effects..shoes said:
no, it's not.. i haven't got time to look it up right now, but see if you can, google some stat's about how many cases of date rape actually involved GHB.. it's miniscule.. you are far, far, far more likely to be date raped with a benzo (e.g. clonazepam, or the tabloid favourite rohypnol).. the irony here is, i suspect you have formed your opinion purely on the sensationalist "daily mail" headlines which you so deride! GHB is a naturally occuring chemical which is present in all of us, right now.. it has a remarkably high LD50, much higher than other recreational drugs, and you have to be an idiot to harm yourself with it (e.g. by mixing it with alcohol, or other downers)..shoes said:
come on, surely you can see how ridiculous this is? i can think of loads of people who i have known who have shit their life away with weed.. i lived with a guy who is now committed to a mental asylum because of it.. he smashed my door in with an axe and claimed i had stolen his soul, for crying out loud (andreas can verify this, i think).. i am not saying the weed caused this, but it was definitely the catalyst that pushed him over the edge.. even discounting extreme cases like that, as tek-monkey says plenty of people become apathetic and are generally worse off because of weed.. to say people "never get hooked on cannabis" is very naïve and i'm sure you don't actually believe that..shoes said:
no drug is addictive after one dose.. heroin, and all other opiates, will almost certainly make you sick after one dose.. even prescription opioids, like tramadol, will doubtless make you nauseous when you first take them.. it is only after continued, habitual usage that you will start to become addicted.. and even then, as tek-monkey says, plenty of people exhibit no addictive behaviour.. generally speaking, you have to have other problems in your life to become an addict, as you have to be of the mindset that you will let this thing absorb your whole life.. and if that's the case, if it's not one drug, it will be another..shoes said:
come on, are you saying you don't believe cocaine can totally take over the lives of otherwise normal people, and drive them to compulsions they would otherwise find obscene? shoes, you're an intelligient bloke, surely you're not saying that absolutely everyone's reactions and experiences with a given substance/scenario will be the same as yours?? just because you have done (A) and it resulted in (B) doesn't mean the same for everyone..shoes said:
well, i (along with other members of the forum) do know people who have died from drugs.. unfortunately for some, in front of their very eyes.. it happens.. just because you have had lovely experiences hugging your mates and telling them about how much you love them does not mean bad things do not happen.. i can't believe you would be naïve enough to keep suggesting that because you have taken something a couple of hundred times, that automatically means it's 100% safe and all the mountains of data suggesting otherwise is wrong..shoes said:
yes, they are opinions.. you have to remember that.. i am not arguing against drugs, as i have previously implied for me to do so would be ignorant and hypocritical.. but you seem to think that your opinion is fact, which clearly isn't the case! you've been lucky so far.. i hope you, and all others, continue to be soshoes said:
thank you! that's basically what i'm saying lol..tek-monkey said:
lol brilliant.. i think i might start using that onetek-monkey said:
A-ruddy-men..tek-monkey said:
i read an article the other day that was saying, judging by the current surveys of street coke, on average it is only 9% pure.. so if you buy a gram of charlie, you are only actually getting 90mg of product.. the other 910mg of stuff going up your nose could be anything.. if you're lucky, bicarb or novocaine.. if you're unlucky, whatever white powder the dealer(s) had lying around.. baby formula, talc, salt, etc.. it used to be the worry of coke was tachycardia.. now the main problem is just getting ripped off whilst turning yourself into a disgusting, dripping, sniffing moron who smells of baby powder lol..tek-monkey said:
drugs - they're not the same as they were in my day!
db
#chaplife
i agree, too many is better than too few (within reason, natch).. i generally read back what i have written, and simply ensure there is a comma wherever i would naturally pause in my head.. i think andreas was saying that you had too few on this occasion, not too manyshoes said:
Hmm personally i'd rather read something which is broken up too much then too little, at risk of derailing the thread here whats your preference? I know you do a lot of proof reading so it would be interesting to hear your POV.
such a minor faux pas can defo be forgiven when you're in the throes of passionate debate, though!
shoes
Well-Known Forumite
Indeed, I think we agree and have arrived at similar conclusions via a different route. Unfortunately, as with far too many things in life, we all have to suffer these legislations because a minority of the population cannot keep control of themselves.
FWIW i also know two people who have died from drug related incidents, one from overheating which is frankly stupid, its not hard to regulate your temperature and the other died as a result of the driver of the car he was in being very coked up, which frankly is stupid on two counts, driving in thats state is an uber fail and getting into the car is also a pretty big fail, well it proved to be anyway. The point is if you are actually sensible and don't eat a whole eighth of mdma or fire a gram of ketamine up your nose in one go then you;re pretty much certain to be alright.
As for the drug taking, heroin/pcp/meth... no, however, if the opportunity arose for the latter two I would be more than tempted to have a dabble. I disagree with tek on crack, i found it most delightful, so delightful that i used my brain and haven't touched it again since as I can genuinely see why an addiction may develop. Used my brain.... if only this ethos was employed by more of the population eh?
FWIW i also know two people who have died from drug related incidents, one from overheating which is frankly stupid, its not hard to regulate your temperature and the other died as a result of the driver of the car he was in being very coked up, which frankly is stupid on two counts, driving in thats state is an uber fail and getting into the car is also a pretty big fail, well it proved to be anyway. The point is if you are actually sensible and don't eat a whole eighth of mdma or fire a gram of ketamine up your nose in one go then you;re pretty much certain to be alright.
As for the drug taking, heroin/pcp/meth... no, however, if the opportunity arose for the latter two I would be more than tempted to have a dabble. I disagree with tek on crack, i found it most delightful, so delightful that i used my brain and haven't touched it again since as I can genuinely see why an addiction may develop. Used my brain.... if only this ethos was employed by more of the population eh?
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Smoking costs the NHS £5bn a year, attributed to 18% of deaths in the UK
So yes, nice people take drugs.
So yes, nice people take drugs.
Wookie
Official Forum Linker
Remind me how much tax smokers pay again?tek-monkey said:
Anyway, Radio 1's Newsbeat this week are doing a series of stories and reports about illegal drugs. Full details probably available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/the_p_word/newsid_8084000/8084968.stm
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
That hasn't factored in second hand smoke. If one non-smoker becomes ill from that, they don't pay enough. This also only covers direct medical costs, you still have the millions of fag buts thrown on the floor every year to clean up (why don't smokers think litter laws apply to them?). Then you have the horrible smell that comes from smokers clothes.....
I'm an ex-smoker, tcan't you tell!
I'm an ex-smoker, tcan't you tell!
