Time to legalise some drugs?

Terry

Too tired to quote the whole post, but:

rubadub wrote:

If tobacco was made illegal would you still use it? i.e. buy from drug dealers?

No. I would get down on my knees and give head to the minister who had the guts to implement the ban, even if it was Harney.

Sam Vimes

Tha Gopher wrote: »

They have wanted to smoke it for 12,000 years in Ireland?!!?

Though I cant be arsed checking, and tbh in terms of landmass movement 12,000 years is probably a very short time, I dont deny that we may have once had a climate in which weed growed wild. It does in parts of Poland and Russia during the summer after all, so it isnt impossible.

But if you reckon anyone bar the well educated and well travelled sailors had even heard of grass before the 50s, you are having a laugh. The first commoner Irish to experience it were probably emigrants to the US in the 60s, or migrants in England who associated with Jamaicans. It arrived on the college and hippy scene here by the late 60s but was still very much an elitist drug until the mid 70s, and even then was largely unheard of outside the main cities.

see what you did there was add two words to my post which i didn't say, "in ireland" and then rebutted that point instead of the one i made*. Fail tbh. I was talking about the human desire for cannabis and what i said had nothing to do with ireland.

*i did mention ireland but not in the point that you rebutted. I just pointed out that it grows here

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Demand will certainly be there. People born pre 1996 or thereabouts will reminisce about warm summer evenings in fields with a few cans getting completely toasted.

These same people, unless they have an absoloute addiction, will not be paying god knows how much for small quantities of Afghan hash that slip through. They will not be paying massive amounts for bags of weak weed nowhere else in Europe wanted. They will not be going to Amsterdam as the Dutch will eventually ban the stuff. Additionally, as the developing world gains more wealth and law and order less people will grow drugs on a large scale. It is already happening in Morocco.

you have yet to give any evidence that any of the above will happen. You just asserted that morocco will solve their drug problem in ten years and that ireland can't get drugs anywhere else. You're just wrong. Apparently it's cheaper to import sheep from NZ than to buy in ireland. You're vastly over estimating how much it costs to ship stuff

also, i want your crystal ball that tells you so much about the future policy and financial circumstances of so many countries

Tha Gopher wrote: »

While California grown weed is certainly available it is not at the level of the likes of Morocco where, until recently, the law largely turned a blind eye to cannabis growing.

so people in california just stopped did they? Or did they just buy it somewhere else where it was less hassle? People will do only what is necessary. The government in california cracked down and hash was easily available in thousands of over places so they just didn't bother. if it couldn't have been gotten so easily elsewhere it wouldn't have gone down so easily. And of course, even with the crackdown they didn't eliminate it

Tha Gopher wrote: »

And finally, the vast majority of our smoke does come from Morocco. Nigerian, South African and British home grown also comes in. Again, it is mashed to pieces, making alot of it less strong than evem common soap.

that situation isn't set in stone. If that situation becomes more difficult or the quality drops, the market will react and a new source will be found. It's how capitalism works

Tha Gopher wrote: »

The decline in the popularity of cocaine in Dublin didnt make them up their quality. Greed always wins.

so rather than upping the quality they just voluntarily lost out on a massive customer base? How did greed win there?

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Teenagers born in this century who by 2020 may have smoked it a handful of times are not going to be hooked enough to demand it.

seriously, where can i get one of these crystal balls that says that teenagers will stop wanting to do drugs in ten years

and you're misunderstanding the desire for hash. People don't do it because they're addicted or hooked, they do it because they want to.

Tha Gopher wrote: »

The thread died after I rebuked all arguements. Go check if you want.

i'm afraid you've rebuked nothing mate. You go back and check. All you have is predictions that human nature will change, policy that has never worked will start working, capitalism will stop working, teenagers will lose their desire for drugs, the third world will become too rich to bother growing cannabis and the dutch government will enact new policy banning hash all in the next ten years. None of this is going to happen


your prediction is dependent on changes in the world not seen since the industrial revolution. If you gave a figure of 100 years it might just start to come into the realms of plausibility but the world just doesn't change that fast unless there's some kind of massive cataclysmic event to cause it like a world war

Davidius

gogglebok wrote: »

No-one here is talking about whether they do drugs. I haven't said I fund criminals, and neither has anyone else. I'm not trying to "spin" anything, and I believe everyone else is also arguing honestly. And nobody is suggesting that all the crime is the government's fault.

Wouldn't it achieve more to argue your case instead of caricaturing the people you disagree with?

Why do you think drugs should be banned?

I do not care about the legalisation of drugs personally but these threads always bring people who use that argument far too often. It's my way of saying to them "You don't need these drugs and yes, it actually is your fault".

rubadub

Tha Gopher wrote: »

And where could they drink the moonshine? People go to a pub or nightclub to socialise, meet people, watch sport. People are paying for a night out as much as the drink. ffs, you can get as drunk in your home on under 20 euro of Bavaria as you would in a pub. Difference is, it isnt as much fun

My point was people have no trouble paying over the odds for recreational drugs, so I do think the likes of cannabis will always be available. High grade cannabis is out there, most can afford it, they just consider it expensive next to the crap they usually get. I see far more people smoking cannabis when out these days, the smoking ban has made it FAR easier to do so in a discrete manner. Most people I know would have less pints when smoking too, so a night out can become cheaper. Since they are smoking in the pub beer garden the price is more comparable to the pints. I have heard of ounces going for €400+ here, in dutch coffeeshops it can be €20-30 per gram for the best of weed, over €60 for real hash.

I am shocked E is not more popular amongst teenagers who may not have much cash. 15 years back you would get maybe 3-5 pints for the price of an E, now it is 1-2Es for the price of a pint!

The comment about illegal alcohol was not really aimed at you, more to the point of people saying if cannabis was illegal dealers would still thrive, but people will pay for quality, many consider drink expensive yet still go to the offie and load up on €100 worth at a time. On a per hit basis cannabis is quite cheap, people tend to buy a lot at once for various reasons, especially if they can afford to do so. I found the older I get the better quality I come across, proper importers can charge a premium for good stuff, they do not want to deal to kids, if a kid is caught they are hit hard, an older customer who is not off their nut in the pub or smokes at home and has the cash to pay for it is a more attractive customer. Many are growing it themselves and selling, others get it from other sources and pay a premium, the initials BM spring to mind. I am surprised there are not more house raids in Ireland. A lot of countries are becoming far more tolerant of personal home growers.

JC 2K3

rubadub wrote: »

I am shocked E is not more popular amongst teenagers who may not have much cash. 15 years back you would get maybe 3-5 pints for the price of an E, now it is 1-2Es for the price of a pint!

Might just be the people I know/the places I go, but it seems to be pretty popular amongst 18-25 year olds.

wordcount

No.

psilocybe

Have any you read the argruments of Casey Hardison who is curently languising at Her Majestys Pleasure for producion of LSD, 2c-b and DMT.

Listen

Shulgin

MDMA, LSD (and other psychedelics), and cannabis are three substances that should be freely available legally.. Its a shame there has been such scaremongering from governments and vested interests.

MDMA and Psychedelics are beautiful and amazing when used correctly.
People need to be educated properly on this stuff, not just told "drugs are bad" etc.

Cocaine and heroin on the other hand are a different story altogether.

Shulgin

Shulgin wrote: »

MDMA, LSD (and other psychedelics), and cannabis are three substances that should be freely available legally.. Its a shame there has been such scaremongering from governments and vested interests.

MDMA and Psychedelics are beautiful and amazing when used correctly.
People need to be educated properly on this stuff, not just told "drugs are bad" etc.

Cocaine and heroin on the other hand are a different story altogether.

No, you're wrong. MDMA is a killer drug! It kills people! Srsly. I can prove it. Leah Betts was murdered by ecstasy because it forced her to kill herself through water intoxication! See? It's evil!

And if you take LSD three times, you're legally insane dontcha know?

Do people here actually believe prohibition is working? Lollers. Anyone in Dublin can source illegal drugs from within walking distance of their own home. No matter how many people are arrested or "quantities" seized, there will be even more to take their place.

Drugs should be legalised and reputable, independent growers/manufacturers should be able to sell them from head shops to people over the age of 18. Pure and safe is the way to go. Of course, so many people here would rather just leave the selling of drugs in the hands of scumbags, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

mise_me_fein

People like my Dad and my grandmother would not want drugs to be legalized. Also I think that most of the people from this generation would have the same opinion and a lot of people from my generation.

I am democratic and liberal.

For all it's problems most people don't mind alcohol being legal, but they do have a problem with a lot of the other drugs such as cocaine and even hash.

That's the way it is here. If you don't like it, move to Holland

JC 2K3

mise_me_fein wrote: »

People like my Dad and my grandmother would not want drugs to be legalized. Also I think that most of the people from this generation would have the same opinion and a lot of people from my generation.

I am democratic and liberal.

For all it's problems most people don't mind alcohol being legal, but they do have a problem with a lot of the other drugs such as cocaine and even hash.

That's the way it is here. If you don't like it, move to Holland

How defeatist is that??

Do you not think that the holders of these ignorant, uninformed opinions should have to answer to them?

Piste

Legalising drugs will only go giving people the notion that it's "ok" to do them "Ah sure it's legal now, it can't be THAT dangerous/addictive".

Sure you could get taxes from drugs and regulate them and cut down drug smuggling etc. But that Junkie's still gonna need his fix, whether it's legal or not and it wont mind the blindest bit of difference who's supplying him with drugs when he mugs you/breaks into your house.

meditraitor

JC 2K3 wrote: »

How defeatist is that??

Do you not think that the holders of these ignorant, uninformed opinions should have to answer to them?

Let me get this straight.

Are you implying that people who thinks drugs should not be legalised are ignorant and uninformed?

ScumLord

mise_me_fein wrote: »

People like my Dad and my grandmother would not want drugs to be legalized. Also I think that most of the people from this generation would have the same opinion and a lot of people from my generation.

That doesn't make it right. They grew up hearing out and out lies about cannabis and drugs in general yet that opinion wins out. It's a bit of a disgrace that the most ill informed people get to decide what's best for everyone else. It would be like getting some hick from Offaly to run the country or worse the economy.

Piste wrote: »

Legalising drugs will only go giving people the notion that it's "ok" to do them "Ah sure it's legal now, it can't be THAT dangerous/addictive".

And they'd be right, it's not that addictive or dangerous. We only hear about the worst case scenario with hard drugs. The vast majority of drug users don't become addicted or turn to crime. The vast majority of drug users are not homeless, have jobs and don't need to steal to support their indulgences.

meditraitor

As JC 2kp and Scumlord are maintaining that most people are ignorant and ill informed regarding Illegal drugs and their beneficial/negative qualities I thought I would start by pointing out the effects of the so called safe drug.
Cannabis

This is for the benefit of the ill informed so they can make an informed decision on whether Cannabis should be legalised!

Acute health effects of cannabis use
The acute effects of cannabis use has been recognized for many years, and recent studies have confirmed and extended earlier findings. These may be summarized as follows:

Cannabis impairs cognitive development (capabilities of learning), including associative processes; free recall of previously learned items is often impaired when cannabi is used both during learning and recall periods;
Cannabis impairs psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as motor coordination, divided attention, and operative tasks of many types; human performance on complex machinery can be impaired for as long as 24 hours after smoking as little as 20 mg of THC in cannabis; there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among persons who drive when intoxicated by cannabis.
Chronic health effects of cannabis use
selective impairment of cognitive functioning which include the organization and integration of complex information involving various mechanisms of attention and memory processes;
prolonged use may lead to greater impairment, which may not recover with cessation of use, and which could affect daily life functions;
development of a cannabis dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use is likely in chronic users;
cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals;
epithetial injury of the trachea and major bronchi is caused by long-term cannabis smoking;
airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired pulmonary defence against infection from persistent cannabis consumption over prolonged periods;
heavy cannabis consumption is associated with a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and a higher incidence of acute bronchitis than in the non-smoking cohort;
cannabis used during pregnancy is associated with impairment in fetal development leading to a reduction in birth weight;
cannabis use during pregnancy may lead to postnatal risk of rare forms of cancer although more research is needed in this area.
The health consequences of cannabis use in developing countries are largely unknown beacuse of limited and non-systematic research, but there is no reason a priori to expect that biological effects on individuals in these populations would be substantially different to what has been observed in developed countries. However, other consequences might be different given the cultural and social differences between countries.

World Health Organisation

Dragan

Everything on that list can be attributed to other things that are currently available in shops for public purchase.

I have yet to find a convincing study that shows me a real link between cannabis use and multiple personality disorder except in already existing cases of the illness.

meditraitor

Dragan wrote: »

Everything on that list can be attributed to other things that are currently available in shops for public purchase.

I have yet to find a convincing study that shows me a real link between cannabis use and multiple personality disorder except in already existing cases of the illness.

But there is nothing available in the shops that can be attributed to them all!!!

People like you will never be convinced. Until you get bitten.
And as luck would have it you are in the minority.

Terry

meditraitor wrote: »

As JC 2kp and Scumlord are maintaining that most people are ignorant and ill informed regarding Illegal drugs and their beneficial/negative qualities I thought I would start by pointing out the effects of the so called safe drug.
Cannabis

This is for the benefit of the ill informed so they can make an informed decision on whether Cannabis should be legalised!

Acute health effects of cannabis use
The acute effects of cannabis use has been recognized for many years, and recent studies have confirmed and extended earlier findings. These may be summarized as follows:

Cannabis impairs cognitive development (capabilities of learning), including associative processes; free recall of previously learned items is often impaired when cannabi is used both during learning and recall periods;
Cannabis impairs psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as motor coordination, divided attention, and operative tasks of many types; human performance on complex machinery can be impaired for as long as 24 hours after smoking as little as 20 mg of THC in cannabis; there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among persons who drive when intoxicated by cannabis.
Chronic health effects of cannabis use
selective impairment of cognitive functioning which include the organization and integration of complex information involving various mechanisms of attention and memory processes;
prolonged use may lead to greater impairment, which may not recover with cessation of use, and which could affect daily life functions;
development of a cannabis dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use is likely in chronic users;
cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals;
epithetial injury of the trachea and major bronchi is caused by long-term cannabis smoking;
airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired pulmonary defence against infection from persistent cannabis consumption over prolonged periods;
heavy cannabis consumption is associated with a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and a higher incidence of acute bronchitis than in the non-smoking cohort;
cannabis used during pregnancy is associated with impairment in fetal development leading to a reduction in birth weight;
cannabis use during pregnancy may lead to postnatal risk of rare forms of cancer although more research is needed in this area.
The health consequences of cannabis use in developing countries are largely unknown beacuse of limited and non-systematic research, but there is no reason a priori to expect that biological effects on individuals in these populations would be substantially different to what has been observed in developed countries. However, other consequences might be different given the cultural and social differences between countries.

World Health Organisation

That's a lie.
If it's not on erowid, then it's not true.


/stir

ScumLord

meditraitor wrote: »

As JC 2kp and Scumlord are maintaining that most people are ignorant and ill informed regarding Illegal drugs and their beneficial/negative qualities I thought I would start by pointing out the effects of the so called safe drug.
Cannabis

This is for the benefit of the ill informed so they can make an informed decision on whether Cannabis should be legalised!

Acute health effects of cannabis use
The acute effects of cannabis use has been recognized for many years, and recent studies have confirmed and extended earlier findings. These may be summarized as follows:

Cannabis impairs cognitive development (capabilities of learning), including associative processes; free recall of previously learned items is often impaired when cannabi is used both during learning and recall periods;
Cannabis impairs psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as motor coordination, divided attention, and operative tasks of many types; human performance on complex machinery can be impaired for as long as 24 hours after smoking as little as 20 mg of THC in cannabis; there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among persons who drive when intoxicated by cannabis.
Chronic health effects of cannabis use
selective impairment of cognitive functioning which include the organization and integration of complex information involving various mechanisms of attention and memory processes;
prolonged use may lead to greater impairment, which may not recover with cessation of use, and which could affect daily life functions;
development of a cannabis dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use is likely in chronic users;
cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals;
epithetial injury of the trachea and major bronchi is caused by long-term cannabis smoking;
airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired pulmonary defence against infection from persistent cannabis consumption over prolonged periods;
heavy cannabis consumption is associated with a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and a higher incidence of acute bronchitis than in the non-smoking cohort;
cannabis used during pregnancy is associated with impairment in fetal development leading to a reduction in birth weight;
cannabis use during pregnancy may lead to postnatal risk of rare forms of cancer although more research is needed in this area.
The health consequences of cannabis use in developing countries are largely unknown beacuse of limited and non-systematic research, but there is no reason a priori to expect that biological effects on individuals in these populations would be substantially different to what has been observed in developed countries. However, other consequences might be different given the cultural and social differences between countries.

World Health Organisation

Most of those side effects only affect you when your under the influence of the drug. There is also a misconception that cannabis stays in your system for up to a month after use which isn't exactly true. The active ingredient does not stay in your system so your not permanently stoned for a month.

Most of the ill effects of cannabis use come from smoking it. Smoking anything is bad for you. If you want to avoid all these problems eat it.

I'm not trying to say cannabis is completely safe, nothing is completely safe but I'd say eating 3 meals in McDonald's everyday would be more likely to eventually kill you than injesting 3 grams of cannabis everyday. Unless your one of the unlucky few that has an underlining condition. I'm sure if you asked the WHO to give a list on the dangers of real butter they'd come up with a list just as long.

Cannabis abuse is not good for you. Recreational use of cannabis will not cause any serious problems for the user, allot of the very harmful affects are only seen with life long chronic abuse. It makes no sense to create the huge problem of organised crime to protect the public from a drug that isn't really that dangerous.

meditraitor

meditraitor wrote: »

Cannabis impairs cognitive development (capabilities of learning), including associative processes; free recall of previously learned items is often impaired when cannabis is used both during learning and recall periods;

So you won't learn much when you're stoned and you won't remember much when you're stoned. How blindingly obvious. It's a drug! It's taken specifically to impair cognitive function.

meditraitor wrote:

Cannabis impairs psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as motor coordination, divided attention, and operative tasks of many types; human performance on complex machinery can be impaired for as long as 24 hours after smoking as little as 20 mg of THC in cannabis; there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among persons who drive when intoxicated by cannabis.

Again, when intoxicated. It's obvious that nobody should ever drive while intoxicated on anything.

The effects of cannabis intoxication mostly wear off after four hours, with some lingering but barely noticeable effects for a while longer. In my opinion, simply being tired will make operating complex machinery more difficult than the minute after effects of being stoned.

meditraitor wrote:

selective impairment of cognitive functioning which include the organization and integration of complex information involving various mechanisms of attention and memory processes;
prolonged use may lead to greater impairment, which may not recover with cessation of use, and which could affect daily life functions;

It's possible that long-term use can impair these cognitive functions, yes, (although I have never, in my life, come across anyone suffering from it as a result of chronic cannabis use) but isn't it true that other drugs such as alcohol, tobacco, paracetamol, caffeine and so on have worse chronic side-effects?

meditraitor wrote:

development of a cannabis dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use is likely in chronic users;

Because they like being stoned, maybe? Cannabis can be psychologically addictive, but so are a lot of things.

meditraitor wrote:

cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals;

Exacerbate in affected individuals... nobody who is schizophrenic should touch cannabis. This is basic common sense.

meditraitor wrote:

epithetial injury of the trachea and major bronchi is caused by long-term cannabis smoking;

Just like smoking anything else, which is why there are alternatives such as vapourisation and eating it.

meditraitor wrote:

airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired pulmonary defence against infection from persistent cannabis consumption over prolonged periods;
heavy cannabis consumption is associated with a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and a higher incidence of acute bronchitis than in the non-smoking cohort;

"Consumption" should read "smoking". You're not making any kind of solid argument here as you'll find all of these effects from chronically smoking anything. Nothing specific to smoking cannabis.

Of course, if you would like to take the time to read the following...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729_pf.html

meditraitor wrote:

cannabis used during pregnancy is associated with impairment in fetal development leading to a reduction in birth weight;
cannabis use during pregnancy may lead to postnatal risk of rare forms of cancer although more research is needed in this area.

Nobody should smoke or consume any kind of psychoactive while pregnant. This is, again, common sense.

Can I ask why all of this matters? This is not a list of reasons to keep cannabis illegal, it's a list of things people should know before smoking it. Something should not be banned just because it may harm whoever uses it. Ever hear of free will? Cannabis is relatively safe when compared to other substances such as alcohol. It has some dangers, of course, but nowhere near enough to justify prohibition.

meditraitor

meditraitor wrote: »

But there is nothing available in the shops that can be attributed to them all!!!

People like you will never be convinced. Until you get bitten.
And as luck would have it you are in the minority.

Calm down. This seems to be more of an emotional than logical issue for prohibitionists.

What about solvents? Paint? Glue? Deodorant? They're all available freely in shops, except they have a much worse side-effect: sudden death.

Let cannabis users get bitten. They're only potentially harming themselves, nobody else. Please stop trying to "protect" others by restricting their liberty.

AARRRGH

[Generalisation]
It's normally the younger folk in society who support the legalisation of drugs.
[/Generalisation]

Does anyone want to have a guess why?

MIN2511

dublindude wrote: »

[Generalisation]
It's normally the younger folk in society who support the legalisation of drugs.
[/Generalisation]

Does anyone want to have a guess why?

Cause we are young, dumb and full of cum!:p

Also we have less responsibilities, economy is rife, drugs are affordable and available, peer pressure....

Sm0ke

chickenhawk wrote: »

If someone wants to take cocaine they deserve the rat poison imo.

The same people will complain about crime on the streets and yet they are funding it.

no they dont lol, most coke heads are the ones causing the crime on the streets!

leagalise all drugs, we all have our own minds, sure some will become addicts but we know thats the risk. anyone falls by the wayside let them.

people want to get high and will continue to do so. why let them feed crime lords when our economy could have a massive injection of money.

sure i suppose then petty crime wud rise.....

AARRRGH

I take it a lot of you don't have kids.

People become more conservative when they have children.

Would you be happy leaving your kids alone to play in the park knowing there are junkies everywhere due to the legalisation of drugs?

Dragan

meditraitor wrote: »

But there is nothing available in the shops that can be attributed to them all!!!

People like you will never be convinced. Until you get bitten.
And as luck would have it you are in the minority.

People like me?

Please, expand.

dublindude wrote: »

Would you be happy leaving your kids alone to play in the park knowing there are junkies everywhere due to the legalisation of drugs?

Because junkies don't currently occupy our parks?

Also, how many parents leave young kids who would be unable to spot such danger and move away in parks alone?

I would be more worried about the parenting in such circumstances.

Sorry, just writing a ridiculous answer to your ridiculous point.

Once again i see a drugs thread going nowhere. Who would have thunk it.

The reasons offered for legalisation are blinded and unrealistic, the reasons against could have been churned out by any ****ty media outlet.

meditraitor

Dragan wrote: »

People like me?

Please, expand.
.

Sofist (pro dope)

ScumLord

Dragan wrote: »

The reasons offered for legalisation are blinded and unrealistic,

What's blind and unrealistic? (I'm completely focused on Cannabis by the way) Cannabis is not a dangerous drug. Having it illegal encourages and funds organised crime. The solution (prohibition) is worse than the problem it was brought into fix (which didn't exist in the first place).

AARRRGH

Dragan wrote: »

Because junkies don't currently occupy our parks?

Exactly.

If we legalise heroin etc. there will be a lot more junkies.

Dragan wrote: »

Also, how many parents leave young kids who would be unable to spot such danger and move away in parks alone?

Currently parents can keep their kids away from the inner city/deprived areas.

If hard drugs are legalised the problems restricted to certain poor areas will become common throughout every part of Ireland.

Parenting would become a nightmare.

Dragan wrote: »

Sorry, just writing a ridiculous answer to your ridiculous point.

Nope, you are simply unable to visualise the consequences of legalising drugs. That's not my fault.

meditraitor

Sm0ke wrote: »

no they dont lol, most coke heads are the ones causing the crime on the streets!

leagalise all drugs, we all have our own minds, sure some will become addicts but we know thats the risk. anyone falls by the wayside let them.

people want to get high and will continue to do so. why let them feed crime lords when our economy could have a massive injection of money.

sure i suppose then petty crime wud rise.....

Did you read this before you posted?

If you mean it you are heartless indeed. I hope nobody in your family ever has a drug related illness/ all the people in this thread as well.

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

I take it a lot of you don't have kids.

People become more conservative when they have children.

Would you be happy leaving your kids alone to play in the park knowing there are junkies everywhere due to the legalisation of drugs?

as opposed to now where there are no junkies because they're illegal?

anyone who wants to do drugs can get them with absolutely no bother in minutes. heroin is an extremely dangerous drug and if it was legalised tomorrow people wouldn't somehow forget that.

when someone is deciding whether or not to do heroin they don't say to themselves "oh it's illegal so i won't do it", they say "it's a life destroying drug so i won't do it". if it was legalised tomorrow it would still be a life destroying drug. what makes you think that so many more people will forget all those junkies they saw on the side of the road with track marks on their arms if heroin was legal?

would you or anyone you know take up heroin tomorrow if it was made legal?

AARRRGH

Btw I would rather alcohol was illegal and marijuana was legal.

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

when someone is deciding whether or not to do heroin they don't say to themselves "oh it's illegal so i won't do it", they say "it's a life destroying drug so i won't do it". if it was legalised tomorrow it would still be a life destroying drug. what makes you think that so many more people will forget all those junkies they saw on the side of the road with track marks on their arms if heroin was legal?

I think you are seriously underestimating the amount of 'tards who live in this country.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

would you or anyone you know take up heroin tomorrow if it was made legal?

Absolutely.

An ex-girlfriend of mine used to smoke herion.

It is by far the best (most satisfying) drug you can take.

Sm0ke

meditraitor wrote: »

Did you read this before you posted?

If you mean it you are heartless indeed. I hope nobody in your family ever has a drug related illness/ all the people in this thread as well.

considering I myself have spent 2 months in a rehab unit at only 23 years of age i give myself a free reign to joke about the monkey, because if i dont joke about it might look for more bananas.

I do apologise tough it was insensitive but in the light of what this thread is actually saying its complete crap! it is not feasible or realistic that all or any drugs will be leagalised in the near future, more will be made illegal sure. anyway drugs are readily available all over the country so leagalising them is just plain ridiculous

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

I think you are seriously underestimating the amount of 'tards who live in this country.

if these people are so retarded, what makes you think the fact that the drug is illegal is enough for them not to do it?

dublindude wrote: »

Absolutely.

An ex-girlfriend of mine used to smoke herion.

It is by far the best (most satisfying) drug you can take.

so you're saying she smoked it even though it was illegal. my question was would more people do it if it was legal, or as i believe, would the people who are smart enough not to do it now still be smart enough not to do it?

Sam Vimes

Sm0ke wrote: »

anyway drugs are readily available all over the country so leagalising them is just plain ridiculous

that makes no sense. the point is that they're available everywhere, so making them illegal has failed miserably. people will always do drugs but if they're legal, they can be taxed and money can be made off them to help the addicts rather than pissing it all down the drain in a futile attempt to keep the drugs out

if prohibition worked i'd be all for it but it's plain for everyone to see that it doesn't

Sm0ke

Sam Vimes wrote: »

that makes no sense. the point is that they're available everywhere, so making them illegal has failed miserably. people will always do drugs but if they're legal, they can be taxed and money can be made off them to help the addicts rather than pissing it all down the drain in a futile attempt to keep the drugs out

and what, u think for a secound that will happen? lol

never and i repeat NEVER will we readily be able to buy heroin or cocaine in a shop and under no circumstances should we try. the worst thing you could do ispump the governments money to buy drugs wtf do you mean giving money back to the addicts? we wud create more addicts more people who will rob and steal to get their fix. people are always going to become addicted to drugs, i knew what heroin wud do if i went near and stupidly it didnt stop me as it hasnt for the huge number of people that are queing to take methadone on a daily basis. leagalising weed wudnt make a huge diffrence tough as the ratio of smokers or people that have smoked is high.

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

if these people are so retarded, what makes you think the fact that the drug is illegal is enough for them not to do it?

It's hard to get.

I know you'll say "no it's not" but the average dope doesn't want to hang around Christ Churh looking for heroin.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

so you're saying she smoked it even though it was illegal. my question was would more people do it if it was legal, or as i believe, would the people who are smart enough not to do it now still be smart enough not to do it?

If a group of people were drinking at a house party, and someone showed up with a load of legal, Government approved drugs, two things would happen:

1. He wouldn't be afraid to tell people he has the drugs. After all, they're legal and Government approved.
2. People who would normally not take these drugs would give them a try.

Sam Vimes

Sm0ke wrote: »

and what, u think for a secound that will happen? lol

never and i repeat NEVER will we readily be able to buy heroin or cocaine in a shop and under no circumstances should we try. the worst thing you could do ispump the governments money to buy drugs wtf do you mean giving money back to the addicts? we wud create more addicts more people who will rob and steal to get their fix. people are always going to become addicted to drugs, i knew what heroin wud do if i went near and stupidly it didnt stop me as it hasnt for the huge number of people that are queing to take methadone on a daily basis. leagalising weed wudnt make a huge diffrence tough as the ratio of smokers or people that have smoked is high.

this thread isn't about whether it will ever happen, it's about whether it should happen.

you say that you did heroin and so did a huge number of other people despite it being illegal. what difference would legalising it make?

dublindude wrote: »

It's hard to get.

I know you'll say "no it's not" but the average dope doesn't want to hang around Christ Churh looking for heroin.

you guessed my response:no it's not. you don't have to hang around street corners to get it, it's a lot easier than that

dublindude wrote: »

If a group of people were drinking at a house party, and someone showed up with a load of legal, Government approved drugs, two things would happen:

1. He wouldn't be afraid to tell people he has the drugs. After all, they're legal and Government approved.
2. People who would normally not take these drugs would give them a try.

you're vastly over estimating the power that "legalising" has. there's something that's far more important in the real world that determines whether that would happen or not: "social acceptability".

imagine this as an ad campaign from the government:

gang violence is out of control
addicts are destroying their families lives
our jails are clogged up with young people

to combat this, we will be supplying addicts with the substances needed to satisfy their cravings.

we are not condoning drug use. this is a new measure solely designed to combat gang violence and the negative impacts caused by drugs, introduced because prohibition has failed

this would not suddenly make it ok to whip out a load of heroin and a few syringes at your average household get together.

even if it was fully legalised, people aren't thick enough to destroy their lives just because brian cowen says it's ok. there are some people who are thick enough to detroy their lives but they're already doing it. either way, what brian cowen says has little or no impact on someone's propensity to do drugs

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you guessed my response:no it's not. you don't have to hang around street corners to get it, it's a lot easier than that

You can get good quality heroin from nice people easy enough?

Fair play to you.

Ask the average person if they can do the same.

I don't think they'll agree with you!

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you're vastly over estimating the power that "legalising" has. there's something that's far more important in the real world that determines whether that would happen or not: "social acceptability".

OK, here's another example for you:

A couple of teenagers get their hands on legal, Government endorsed cocaine or heroin. (This will happen all the time if drugs are legalised.)

You don't think there will be peer pressure to take it?

Before you say "sure that could happen now" I think it is absolutely reasonable to say the average teenager does not feel any peer pressure to take illegal, possibly dodgy, difficult to get, cocaine and heroin.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

even if it was fully legalised, people aren't thick enough to destroy their lives just because brian cowen says it's ok. there are some people who are thick enough to detroy their lives but they're already doing it. either way, what brian cowen says has little or no impact on someone's propensity to do drugs

Look how many people have destroyed their own lives and the lives around them due to alcohol.

At least one in four people are sexually abused. Alcohol has played a large part in that.

Many people are not mature enough to handle alcohol. The same would go for other drugs if they were legalised.

Dragan

dublindude wrote: »

Nope, you are simply unable to visualise the consequences of legalising drugs. That's not my fault.

LoL, and you have Michael Bay visualising yours.

Me, i'm sitting happy in the middle ground will to accept that there are good and bad points to the legalisation of cannabis, marijuana and thats it.

I firmly agree with you that harder drugs need to stay illegal. I think i have only said that about 10 times in this thread by now.

So sorry, i really do find it hard to believe that the legalising of cannabis will lead to Ireland being overran by junkies.

dublindude wrote: »

Look how many people have destroyed their own lives and the lives around them due to alcohol.

At least one in four people are sexually abused. Alcohol has played a large part in that.

Many people are not mature enough to handle alcohol. The same would go for other drugs if they were legalised.

So why not make alchohol illegal?

AARRRGH

Dragan wrote: »

So why not make alchohol illegal?

I'm sure the Government would love to make alcohol illegal.

There would be hell if they tried though.

Sam Vimes

all of that would be a good point if it was difficult to get these drugs.

dublindude wrote: »

You can get good quality heroin from nice people easy enough?

Fair play to you.

Ask the average person if they can do the same.

I don't think they'll agree with you!

most people couldn't do it straight away because they don't want to take heroin and so never investigated it. anyone who has a desire to do heroin has already done the hour or so of research it would take

dublindude wrote: »

A couple of teenagers get their hands on legal, Government endorsed cocaine or heroin.

the government wouldn't be endorsing it, they'd be reluctantly supplying it to take the money out of the hands of criminals

dublindude wrote: »

(This will happen all the time if drugs are legalised.)

this altready always happens, they're easy to get if you want them

dublindude wrote: »

You don't think there will be peer pressure to take it?

there already is

dublindude wrote: »

Before you say "sure that could happen now" I think it is absolutely reasonable to say the average teenager does not feel any peer pressure to take illegal, possibly dodgy, difficult to get, cocaine and heroin.

then why are there so many people on it?

dublindude wrote: »

Look how many people have destroyed their own lives and the lives around them due to alcohol.

At least one in four people are sexually abused. Alcohol has played a large part in that.

Many people are not mature enough to handle alcohol. The same would go for other drugs if they were legalised.

the same already goes. heroin is a life destroying drug. if it is made legal it will still be a life detroying drug. anyone who is not inclined to take it now won't suddenly forget that it's a life destroying drug if brian cowen announces a measure to cut gang violence

the situation you're describing is the one that we're currently in. legalising it will have little or no affect on this

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

all of that would be a good point if it was difficult to get these drugs.

The average person cannot easily get their hands on hard drugs.

Sure half my druggie friends can't even get grass.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

most people couldn't do it straight away because they don't want to take heroin and so never investigated it. anyone who has a desire to do heroin has already done the hour or so of research it would take

You're really not grasping the fact that if these drugs were legalised they'd be way more common.

No one shows up to parties and openly smokes heroin.

If heroin was made legal, this would happen, and some people would give it a try.

Legalising things removes the stigma attached to it.

It may not happen overnight, but with time it would definitely happen.

Look how socially acceptable it is to get drunk. No one bats an eyelid.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

then why are there so many people on it?

You're living in fantasy land if you think there are loads of teenagers on heroin and cocaine.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

the situation you're describing is the one that we're currently in. legalising it will have little or no affect on this

Eh, no it isn't.

Again, it's fantasy land if you think legalising drugs won't make any difference.

I can't understand how or why you refuse to accept this.

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

The average person cannot easily get their hands on hard drugs.

Sure half my druggie friends can't even get grass.

i can't really comment your particular group of friends. the people i know have no problem. i could give you the addresses of two people who could help your friends out if you want?

dublindude wrote: »

You're really not grasping the fact that if these drugs were legalised they'd be way more common.

No one shows up to parties and openly smokes heroin.

If heroin was made legal, this would happen, and some people would give it a try.

Legalising things removes the stigma attached to it.

one does not necessarily follow on from the other. there's a difference between a government endorsed free for all and a measure to reduce gang violence. there are certain circles where heroin use is ok and there are circles where it isn't. if it was made legal with heavy restrictions as part of a gang violence reducing measure, these circles would stay the same

dublindude wrote: »

Look how socially acceptable it is to get drunk. No one bats an eyelid.

alcohol has never had a stigma attached to it. lot's of things have stopped being socially acceptable in history and lots of things have become socially accpetable and the law had very little to do with them

dublindude wrote: »

You're living in fantasy land if you think there are loads of teenagers on heroin and cocaine.

and you're living in a fantasy land if you think that's because they're illegal. teenagers are MORE inclined to do something if it's illegal. it's part of the whole teen rebellion thing.

dublindude wrote: »

Eh, no it isn't.

Again, it's fantasy land if you think legalising drugs won't make any difference.

I can't understand how or why you refuse to accept this.

and i can't understand why you refuse to accept what i'm saying. what you're suggesting is a far off notion in the future that assumes that people will forget that heroin destroys lives. to see my point all you have to do is walk around dublin for a few minutes and watch the news every now and then

Dragan

dublindude wrote: »

I'm sure the Government would love to make alcohol illegal.

There would be hell if they tried though.

I doubt it, given how much the tax on sales help our budget each year, the same as any other economy!

Anything on my other points or am i suddenly know fun because i mostly agree with you on the keeping stuff banned thing?:)

AARRRGH

OK, this will be my last post.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

i can't really comment your particulat group of friends. the people i know have no problem. i could give you the addresses of two people who could help your friends out if you want?

Do you honestly think if a random survey was done on 10,000 people most would say they know who they can get hard drugs from?

Really?

They know a nice enough person who will sell them quality hard drugs?

I don't think so.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

one does not necessarily follow on from the other. there's a difference between a government endorsed free for all and a measure to reduce gang violence. there are certain circles where heroin use is ok and there are circles where it isn't. if it was made legal with heavy restrictions as part of a gang violence reducing measure, these circles would stay the same

I agree gang violence would reduce if we legalised drugs.

It's a small bonus though, especially since gangs seem most interested in killing other gangs.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

alcohol has never had a stigma attached to it. lot's of things have stopped being socially acceptable in history and lots of things have become socially accpetable and the law had very little to do with them

I think you'll find it's not socially acceptable to do illegal things.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

and you're living in a fantasy land if you think that's because they're illegal. teenagers are MORE inclined to do something if it's illegal. it's part of the whole teen rebellion thing.

There's a big difference between getting drunk/stoned and doing heroin/cocaine.

If cocaine and heroin become legalised and accessible they'll become the new bad thing to do.

...

Most of my friends would do heroin if it was legalised.

Luckily heroin will never be legalised.

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

Do you honestly think if a random survey was done on 10,000 people most would say they know who they can get hard drugs from?

Really?

no, of course not because most people don't want to do heroin. but if they did want to do it, everyone knows someone who knows someone.

dublindude wrote: »

I agree gang violence would reduce if we legalised drugs.

It's a small bonus though, especially since gangs seem most interested in killing other gangs.

gang violence will go down AND the addicts would have access to clean, pure product and instructions from a doctor, resulting in a dramatic drop in deaths AND they could be given the drugs with huge subsidies to prevent them breaking the law instead of having their legs broken for not being able to pay AND they would no longer be criminalised and put somewhere where there's nothing to do but do drugs

dublindude wrote: »

I think you'll find it's not socially acceptable to do illegal things.

it's also not socially acceptable to do many, many legal things and you'll find that a lot of illegal things are quite socially acceptable. it just depends on your circle

dublindude wrote: »

There's a big difference between getting drunk/stoned and doing heroin/cocaine.

i know that, and if they were legal that wouldn't change

dublindude wrote: »

If cocaine and heroin become legalised and accessible they'll become the new bad thing to do.

who says? and they already are the bad thing to do. in fact, by your logic they wouldn't be bad if they were legal. it'd suddenly be ok to whip out syringes at a house party

dublindude wrote: »

Most of my friends would do heroin if it was legalised.

i don't mean to be insulting but if brian cowen is the only thing preventing your friends from flushing their lives down the toilet then they're fucking retards. are you honestly saying that the legal status is the only thing stopping your friends doing heroin even though they see what it does to people every day of the week?

in germany there are no speed limits on the auto bahns. do you see every person on those roads driving everywhere at 200kmph? or is it that people are generally sensible and can make decisions for their own well being without big brother forcing them to?

Boggle

Stayed out of this till now but... why not:

Might I suggest banning the drugs which are highly addictive? For the rest, allow people their freedom but, if your earning revenue from it(tax), at least use it to inform the public on safe use. At least this way, someone who smokes some (e.g.) joints can, if they ever feel the ill effects of the drug or decide that they no longer want it are not physically addicted to it and so are free to quit at any time.
(My opinion is that anything which is highly addictive should be banned and, objectively speaking, I'd expand this to include cigarrettes (what do you roll the joints with?!) to be honest)

My main concern with current policy is the following...
Credibility:You tell a teenager that all drugs are bad and then he or his friends go and try some hash only to discover that its considerably softer than even alcohol(milder after effects, less loss of control, etc). Do they then begin to question the credibility of the entire anti-drugs movement? Do they possibly begin to question whether harder (much more dangeroud drugs) are really so bad?!
Supply Chain:Perfect for dealer and its direct selling at its best. There are now guys who specialise in bringing drugs to parties and offering them to teenagers (often younger siblings of other dealers). No rules, no regulations, no legal alternative source. Once these guys become regulars at parties its easy to offer the next best thing in their pockets.
Ethical: Do you really want a police state whereby your actions, your interests and your hobbies are dictated to you by the government? Imagine the day when they decide rugby is no longer permissibe: Too many injuries and besides you already have the choice of playing soccer or football if you want an athletic outlet! At the minute the accepted outlet is drink or nothing. Personally I know of several people who barely drink any more and instead prefer to socialise with friends over a few joints. Not everyones cup of tea but each to his own surely.

If a group of people were drinking at a house party, and someone showed up with a load of legal, Government approved drugs, two things would happen:

1. He wouldn't be afraid to tell people he has the drugs. After all, they're legal and Government approved.
2. People who would normally not take these drugs would give them a try.

1. If someone is old enough to buy drugs from a reputable source then he'll do so. No one is going to smoke bootleg drugs if they have a choice.
2. If you are saying that more people will try it then its hard to argue but then as long as it not addicitve then so what?? Let them try it and make up their own minds.

(You'll not that my responses are geared towards hash but that only because I don't know enough about the other drugs to consider myself capable of advising)

Boggle

One more thing. Heroine is and (to my mind) should be highly illegal as I believe its way too addictive.

However, taking away those harmless drugs from dealers would at least reduce the flow of people who are exposed to dealers. This, to my mind would help reduce the amount of people who would ever even try heroine.

(actually, even if you legalised it and if its as bad as people say then the damage it does will become blindingly obviouse pretty quickly to even the most hardened of sceptics. Anyone who would still try it, really would deserve to be locked in a sweatbox to sink or swim - policy shouldn't be geared towards protecting self destructive little retards anyway)