Drugs

frag420

Prop Joe wrote: »

Some drugs are illegal and shouldn't be used as it is illegal.You can't justify breaking the law....I think

So are you against drugs or breaking the law?? Your sober judgement confuses me!!

And you have yet to answer my question Re Magic Mushrooms. Unless of course youn have no answer and that the criminalisation of such plants/fungi is in itself morally wrong??

As a matter of interest Prop Joe do you drink??

frAg

paddyandy

Typical set-you-up / put-you-in-your-place questions always follow ;As a matter of interest or Out of curiosity ......

paddyandy

charlemont wrote: »

Why don't you worry about your own problems ?? Too busy spreading rubbish instead, This country and do-gooders...It must be the fluoride in the water or something !!

What's WRONG with doing good ?????

paddyandy

frag420 wrote: »

I would assume your are referring to the right honorable poster known as Ratsinparadise who posted above. Perhaps if you did some research instead of spouting hearsay and scaremongering you may be in a position to write a long text and attempt to confuse the rest of us.

None of you anti drug folks or as I like to refer to you as the fun police has attempted to reply to my post about mushrooms. Any particular reason or is purely because if we were to apply the same logic to alcohol and tobacco as we did magic mushrooms then you would have nowhere to go on a saturday night to drink shnapps and talk about GAA??

Now if your not too confused we await your reply..........

frAg

The Presence of one evil in society does neither excuse or validate the acceptance of a second evil .
Very very dangerous thinkin' a very bad road to go down .I no longer drink because behind all the craic in ireland there are some very sad stories . The Laughter in pubs hides a lot of sadness . Happy people don't need either . I did work as a barman once .I saw too much and i heard too much . Saw many leave this world long before their time and a few relatives too .But medicinally there should be exceptions and drugs should not be a political issue or 'football' it's much too serious for games and playful knockabout .

frag420

Then why is it you all seem to spend your time and energy trying to keep something that in your own words "evil" illegal when it already is illegal.

If alcohol brings so much hurt and sadness as you claim Would your time not be better spent trying to make alcohol and illegal or is that too big a fight.

It's very easy to jump on the anti drug bandwagon as your goal has already been achieved!!

frAg

paddyandy

The Present generations going back to the 50s have been seduced by popular culture and mesmerised by it's smooth flowing catchiness .We did'nt listen years ago and we're still not listening except to people who entertain us .That's The Mistake of the 20th Century .

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

The Present generations going back to the 50s have been seduced by popular culture and mesmerised by it's smooth flowing catchiness .We did'nt listen years ago and we're still not listening except to people who entertain us .That's The Mistake of the 20th Century .

Are you high..........or worse again are you drunk??

Or maybe Amish??

paddyandy

frag420 wrote: »

Are you high..........or worse again are you drunk??

Or maybe Amish??

Neither ....just good !

frag420

I'm sensing a pattern here with your talk of you being 'good' and drugs being 'evil'

Are you a religious person I wonder? Does this make you good?

I too am also good. I give to charity, I work hard, I don't litter, I help my neighbours and when I want it I get my weed from a guy that grows it himself. No gangsters, no guns, I didn't rob anyone to pay for it. And it's organic so I am also being environmentally conscious!!

frAg

hansvalentino

paddyandy wrote: »

Neither ....just good !

Look firstly, we all have friends and relatives who've died from addiction so I'm not sure that's really relevant. There will always be self-destructive people, and these people have people who love them, and this will always be heartbreaking.

Secondly, when you say what's wrong with doing good the answer is obviously 'nothing whatsoever'. But your idea of good and bad seem pretty fixed, It always gets my back up when people use terms like good and evil. I mean really, can a chemical be evil? a chemical is inanimate, outside morality.

I'm really not trying to be condescending but it seems like you could benefit from a bit of honest and objective questioning: what exactly is it about drugs that make you consider them evil? the fact that some people abuse them? and how does that relate to the people who don't abuse and just use recreationally? Or just that we've always been told drugs are wrong and bad?

When you get outside of a morally driven attitude to drugs the reality of the situation becomes a lot more important. Would we legalize MDMA/ecstasy because we've gone from thinking of it as 'evil' to thinking of it as 'good'?
No. We would legalize it because that way it could be regulated and none would have to die from taking pills cut with deadly toxins.

I'd go as far as saying that if someone is unfortunate enough to die in such circumstances that the blame lies squarely on the government, because it is their refusal to update their attitudes on the matter that lead to an easily avoidable death.

All I'm saying is that we need to think in terms of science. Not in terms of the biblical immovable concepts of good and evil. Life just isn't that simple, no matter how much any of us might wish it to be.

Prop Joe

hansvalentino wrote: »

Would we legalize MDMA/ecstasy because we've gone from thinking of it as 'evil' to thinking of it as 'good'?
No. We would legalize it because that way it could be regulated and none would have to die from taking pills cut with deadly toxins.

I'd go as far as saying that if someone is unfortunate enough to die in such circumstances that the blame lies squarely on the government

The Government are to blame ????

frag420

Prop Joe wrote: »

hansvalentino wrote: »

Would we legalize MDMA/ecstasy because we've gone from thinking of it as 'evil' to thinking of it as 'good'?
No. We would legalize it because that way it could be regulated and none would have to die from taking pills cut with deadly toxins.

I'd go as far as saying that if someone is unfortunate enough to die in such circumstances that the blame lies squarely on the government

The Government are to blame ????

Not so much the government more so their outdated policies and laws.

For someone who opened a debate here your doing a poor job of defending your case.

Please be so kind as to answer my question a few posts ago regarding the banning of magic mushrooms here a few yes ago. I have asked several times but you and the rest of the joe Duffy brigade refuse to answer.

frAg

hansvalentino

frag420 wrote: »

Not so much the government more so their outdated policies and laws.


frAg

Right, and who bears responsibility for those laws and policies if not the members of government who are most in a position to do something about it?

frag420

Regardless of whom is in government at any time they still will do nothing about it. While similar countries in Europe like Switzerland, Sweden, POrtugal etc are taking a progressive approach we here in Ireland are still pandering to the blue rinse brigade, the tobacco, alcohol and pharma lobbies and the god botherers!!

As posted before it has more usses than just recreation. There is a hundred plus industries from clothing to plastics to housing etc that would benefit and prosper from its use.

It is not evil.......how do I know??


God said, "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth.…To you it will be for meat." … And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. (Genesis 1:29-31) The Bible predicts some herb's prohibition. "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, some shall … speak lies in hypocrisy … commanding to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. (Paul: 1 Timothy 4:1-3)
The Bible speaks of a special plant. "I will raise up for them a plant of renown, and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land, neither bear the shame of the heathen any more." (Ezekiel 34:29) A healing plant. On either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare 12 manner of fruits, and yielding her fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. (Revelations 22:1-2) A gift from God


And as there has not been the usual Bill Hicks quote usually associated with drug decriminilisation let me be the first with.....

"I think people need to be educated to the fact that marijuana is not a drug. Marijuana is an herb and a flower. God put it here. If He put it here and He wants it to grow, what gives the government the right to say that God is wrong?”

That is all......

paddyandy

frag ...For food not for smoking ....and i would never bring quotes to a place like this....they get spots on boards.ie from quotes...allergic to them .

hansvalentino

paddyandy wrote: »

frag ...For food not for smoking ....and i would never bring quotes to a place like this....they get spots on boards.ie from quotes...allergic to them .

I'm going to have to agree with you there paddyandy.

The last thing I want to say in favor of legalization is that prohibition is a cop-out on the part of the government. It forces drugs, their creation and distribution into the hands of often ill-experienced and unscrupulous people. This represents a bigger danger to public safety than the original drug ever would (I'm basically re-outlining my MDMA example here).

I think legalization of most drugs and STRICT regulation in line with more progressive governments (i.e. Portugal) is what will eventually happen as it is the only route based on facts rather than ideals. It seems pointless to me to stand in the way of such progress.

As well as anything else this policy undermines rebellious teenage desire to take drugs. Why else do you think Holland has the lowest rate of teenage cannabis use in Europe?

Prop Joe

Frag,your defense for marijuana and all the points you make shows your passionate about the debate..Fair play to you..Do you apply the same logic for all illegal drugs i.e Heroin,Ecstasy

frag420

Prop Joe wrote: »

Frag,your defense for marijuana and all the points you make shows your passionate about the debate..Fair play to you..Do you apply the same logic for all illegal drugs i.e Heroin,Ecstasy

Yes I do. Heroin in its natural form is non addictive. Ecstasy has only been responsible for a handful of deaths and in that it was mainly due to mixing with other drugs and/or alcohol.

The vast majority of deaths attributed to drugs have nothing to do with the drug and moreso to do with the distribution process, who is importing it, cutting it, selling it. They care not for age so your child can buy heroin if they have the cash. They care not for the purity as its all about profit. 100% untaxed profit.

So yes I think it better all drugs are legalised as demand will never go away.

Now that I have replied to you can you please address my question Re magic mushrooms and if you think the same logis used to ban them should be applied to alcohol and tobacco??

frAg

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

frag ...For food not for smoking ....and i would never bring quotes to a place like this....they get spots on boards.ie from quotes...allergic to them .

It's no different than using the same old tired rhetoric bandied about by the anti drug brigade with no real substance behind it!!

frAg

paddyandy

As a Nation Regulations are not our Hymns any day of the week .We sign up and virtually ignore when possible ....The mere idea of Regulating Mood altering drugs in ireland is ridiculous ...it would be impossible to control properly .
There are unlimited ways to import drugs .The problem with taking substances needs to be dealt with at the very first impulse .Why do we 'need' them in the first place ..Why in an age of unprecedented plenty do people 'need' dope ? ???
Why are people so unhappy...A century ago well off people had nothing compared to poor people to-day and still we are miserable ....Why ? That's a question nobody want's to discuss ...I'd be for regulating if i could believe . I don't but there are people who were closed down recently around Ireland looking to start up again....and the wellbeing of the Nation is not their first concern . We would have bad Tourism drive out Good Tourism and many other difficulties which i've already mentioned .Where is your Patriotism at all ? Your Humanity ?

Prop Joe

I Don't see this fascination with Magic Mushrooms...They are banned in many other country's USA,UK etc..& in NZ they class it as a class A drug same as Heroin...Ireland were slow with Legislation on it..Better late than never...

Prop Joe

frag420 wrote: »

"I think people need to be educated to the fact that marijuana is not a drug. Marijuana is an herb and a flower. God put it here. If He put it here and He wants it to grow, what gives the government the right to say that God is wrong?”

That is all......

Just like monkshood or water hemlock...?

frag420

Prop Joe wrote: »

I Don't see this fascination with Magic Mushrooms...They are banned in many other country's USA,UK etc..& in NZ they class it as a class A drug same as Heroin...Ireland were slow with Legislation on it..Better late than never...

And weed is decriminalised snd/or tolerated in many other countries such as Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, Netherlands, Chezch republic, Italy & many Anerican states so I fail to see your logic here??

On the list of most dangerous and addictive drugs the top five in order of most addictive are nicotine, heroin, cocaine, alcohol & tobacco.

As for most harmfull to the body the top five are heroin, cocaine, meth, alcohol, ketamine.
Tobacco comes in ninth, marijuana at eleventh and ecstasy at nineteen.

Would your energies not be put to better use trying to ban those dangerous drugs mentioned above that are legal such as alcohol, tobacco and caffeine in order to protect us and society from their ill effects or is that idea much like the so called war on drugs, a losing battle?? If you really cared about society and the harm done through addiction and consumption then that's what you would be doing.

But no it's easier to jump on the high( pun intended) horse and shout about the dangers of substances already illegal!!

frAg

Del2005

paddyandy wrote: »

As a Nation Regulations are not our Hymns any day of the week .We sign up and virtually ignore when possible ....The mere idea of Regulating Mood altering drugs in ireland is ridiculous ...it would be impossible to control properly .
There are unlimited ways to import drugs .The problem with taking substances needs to be dealt with at the very first impulse .Why do we 'need' them in the first place ..Why in an age of unprecedented plenty do people 'need' dope ? ???
Why are people so unhappy...A century ago well off people had nothing compared to poor people to-day and still we are miserable ....Why ? That's a question nobody want's to discuss ...I'd be for regulating if i could believe . I don't but there are people who were closed down recently around Ireland looking to start up again....and the wellbeing of the Nation is not their first concern . We would have bad Tourism drive out Good Tourism and many other difficulties which i've already mentioned .Where is your Patriotism at all ? Your Humanity ?

Mood altering drugs are regulated. We control, badly, the sale of alcohol and tobacco. We sell powerful mood altering drugs from pharmacies, some over the counter, with spurious reasons given to doctors who willing except 60 to feed people's addiction.

Not everyone wants to get drunk or spaced on valium. Yet according to your ideals this is perfectly alright while someone who wants a little bit of smoke deserves to have their life ruined and be introduced to criminal elements who have no regards for anything bar profit!

juan.kerr

Yes

mikom

Prop Joe wrote: »

Just like monkshood

Available to buy in most good garden centres....

ed2hands

Del2005 wrote: »

The problem with heroin isn't the heroin it's the sh!te they cut it with, which is where most of the problems with drugs arise.

ffs!
That's rubbish. The problem with heroin is the heroin. It's highly addictive and destroys lives and communities.

Del2005 wrote: »

Making them illegal only benefits scum

Making them illegal does not only benefit scum. Making them illegal acts as a deterrant and strong disinsentive for people especially young people, not to choose to put that awful **** into their bodies and potentially ruin their lives.

Del2005 wrote: »

and we have an example of how it creates problems and a precedent on why it should be legalised

Your link is to the Wiki page about the Prohibition era in the United States.
It's pointless to use with the Prohibition era and draw comparisons IMO.

It's one thing to attempt to ban a substance that has been in customary use for centuries by probably 90% of the adult population, and quite another to retain a ban on substances that are still not in customary use, in an attempt to ensure that they never do become customary.

Del2005 wrote: »

More people are killed by alcohol and nicotine in a day, which are highly controlled and taxed, than from Heroin in a year.

So? Is this supposed to be a reason to legalise heroin?

frag420 wrote: »

OP..Have you tried heroin which in its natural form is non addictive?

WTF!
This was peddled by Bayer 100 years ago but was soon found to be complete bollocks.
I suggest you do a bit of research before coming out with such statements..

frag420 wrote: »

I have tried plenty of different things both legal and illegal and not once did I mug anyone, beat anyone up, rob cash or get an addiction.

Good for you. Hope you're not expecting me to take it as a valid point though.

frag420 wrote: »

Its time this country grew up and got with the program!!

No. It's time you got your facts straight buddy.

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

The main reason this seems absurd is that somewhere deep in the recesses of the nanny statist's mind lies a revolutionary idea: maybe it's not my job or the government's job to make decisions for other people.

It's a governments job to formulate laws that protect it's citizens and benefit the community. That's why drug laws are in place, here and around the world. Label it nanny statism if you like. Doesn't wash with me personally.

Del2005 wrote: »

The head shops are also a good point. The only people who lost out when they where doing a roaring trade where dealers. These shops where providing employment, paying taxes and rent etc. They closed the shops and now the dealers are selling the stuff with no benefit to the country.

Wrong. The head shops popped up in every small town in Ireland, to the delight of many unsuspecting parents' naive teenage sons and daughters; who then either got fake id or got someone to buy the drugs, thereby introducing them at an early age and more or less saying: drugs are ok/safe/cool.
So many concerned parents also lost out.


Look forward to any replies.

frag420

That's rubbish. The problem with heroin is the heroin. It's highly addictive and destroys lives and communities.

Alcohol is also highly addicitve and destroys lives and families.



Making them illegal does not only benefit scum. Making them illegal acts as a deterrant and strong disinsentive for people especially young people, not to choose to put that awful **** into their bodies and potentially ruin their lives.

It has not worked as a deterent as the demand is still here and will not go away regardless of its legal status. How long have drugs been illegal in Ireland? You would think that by your logic we wold have no drug users by now or maybe, just maybe it just aint working??



Your link is to the Wiki page about the Prohibition era in the United States.
It's pointless to use with the Prohibition era and draw comparisons IMO.

Why? Addiction is not constrained by time nor place? Another poster used the ignorance of the past to justify todays ills through addiction so why cant we also use the past to illustrate how prohibition does simply not work!!

It's one thing to attempt to ban a substance that has been in customary use for centuries by probably 90% of the adult population, and quite another to retain a ban on substances that are still not in customary use, in an attempt to ensure that they never do become customary.

So just because it has been in customary use as you put it it is ok for people to consume regardless of the health implications, social implications etc? Is 90% the magic cut of point? As mentioned before people used magic mushrooms here in Ireland for centuries and recently they got banned because of one death?? Go figure?


Good for you. Hope you're not expecting me to take it as a valid point though.

Im not sure what you are expecting tbh? My point is that the majority of people can enjoy drugs and not let them affect their or others lives similar to the many that enjoy alcohol which is just as addicitve!!



No. It's time you got your facts straight buddy.

I aint your buddy



It's a governments job to formulate laws that protect it's citizens and benefit the community. That's why drug laws are in place, here and around the world. Label it nanny statism if you like. Doesn't wash with me personally.

So the fact that alcohol ruins lives, tobacco kills etc, does that wash with you? Why are the government not protecting its citizens from these addictions. I dont think the fact that they have been in customary use is a good reason if it harms our citizens eh??




Wrong. The head shops popped up in every small town in Ireland, to the delight of many unsuspecting parents' naive teenage sons and daughters; who then either got fake id or got someone to buy the drugs, thereby introducing them at an early age and more or less saying: drugs are ok/safe/cool.
So many concerned parents also lost out.

Oh so its the headshops fault eh. 99% of headshops were a lot stricter than the majority of pubs across the country when it came to underage users. I spoke with several cops(ralatives and friends) in several provinsional towns across the country and they all agreed that headshops were a good idea as it stopped the trade going to the criminals.
Anyways what ever happened to taking responsibility for your children. Bad parenting is at fault here. Did you look for your local newsagent to close down when it sold tobacco to underage school kids or when the local kids got drink from the off license?? I doubt it but its the same principle!!


Look forward to any replies

As am I

ed2hands

frag420 wrote: »

Alcohol is also highly addicitve and destroys lives and families.

?
How is that a reason for legalising other drugs?

Why legalise any more even more destructive and addictive substances?
Please don't give me any crapola that heroin, yokes, k, acid, even weed are not destructive/addictive.

For better or worse, alcohol consumption is ingrained into Western culture. I'm personally ok with that. What i do have a problem with is increasing the availability of any more dangerous substances to be potentially consumed by my children, all so that a few self-righteous tossers can exercise their apparent self-appointed privelege at the expense of society.

If you want to snort a line, smoke a j, or drop a tab, or stick a needle in your arm, that's your look-out.
I'm fully against draconian marajuana-related prison terms in the States.
However, if someone is advocating legalising/normalising and thereby encouraging it, then i have a big problem with that.

frag420 wrote: »

It has not worked as a deterent as the demand is still here and will not go away regardless of its legal status. How long have drugs been illegal in Ireland? You would think that by your logic we wold have no drug users by now or maybe, just maybe it just aint working??

It's not working... so legalise it?
You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think demand will drop in response to legalisation.

Someone here already referenced the fact that Dutch kids don't smoke any more weed than other countries. Probably due to the fact that they see a large part of their capital is a drug-infested ****hole populated by clueless dope tourists and seedy smack/coke/ecstacy dealers.
I lived there (and did plenty of all that ****). I should know.

frag420 wrote: »

Why? Addiction is not constrained by time nor place? Another poster used the ignorance of the past to justify todays ills through addiction so why cant we also use the past to illustrate how prohibition does simply not work!!

Sure. You can cite the Prohibition era, but it doesn't wash for me for the reason already explained.
Prohibition of drugs works just fine as far as i'm concerned. It discourages kids from thinking they're safe.

frag420 wrote: »

So just because it has been in customary use as you put it it is ok for people to consume regardless of the health implications, social implications etc?

I thought what i said was crystal.
What i said was that just because one potentially dangerous drug has become widely used/ingrained, it doesn't follow that all others should be allowed or encouraged.
Let's be clear here. Legalising something sends a message that it is ok does it not?

frag420 wrote: »

Im not sure what you are expecting tbh? My point is that the majority of people can enjoy drugs and not let them affect their or others lives similar to the many that enjoy alcohol which is just as addicitve!!

And it's a rubbish point.
Enjoyment? As i said, just because some get enjoyment doesn't justify legalising it so that my son thinks it's cool or harmless.

frag420 wrote: »

So the fact that alcohol ruins lives, tobacco kills etc, does that wash with you? Why are the government not protecting its citizens from these addictions. I dont think the fact that they have been in customary use is a good reason if it harms our citizens eh??

I'd love to shut down Big Tobacco. Would do it in the morning if i had the power.

frag420 wrote: »

Oh so its the headshops fault eh. 99% of headshops were a lot stricter than the majority of pubs across the country when it came to underage users.

Whatever. Bull****.

frag420 wrote: »

I spoke with several cops(ralatives and friends) in several provinsional towns across the country and they all agreed that headshops were a good idea as it stopped the trade going to the criminals.

...

frag420 wrote: »

Anyways what ever happened to taking responsibility for your children. Bad parenting is at fault here. Did you look for your local newsagent to close down when it sold tobacco to underage school kids or when the local kids got drink from the off license?? I doubt it but its the same principle!!

Same principal yes, but still a load of w**k.
Of course it's the parents responsibility, but i can assure you many parents including myself breathed a sigh of relief when they got shut down.

How about you stop bleating on about your selfish right to do as you please and think about the wider repurcussions of legalising poisonous substances?

paddyandy

ED 2 hands : thanks that was a good response ,you have more patience than i have with the nonsense on this thread .Some of the posters don't read like they're in full mens sano state . There are recently closed shops here wanting to reopen asap .I hav'nt seen one decent argument for legalising drugs and it's interesting just how irresponsible these people can be and surmising that some of these posters have children too .

ed2hands

paddyandy wrote: »

ED 2 hands : thanks that was a good response ,you have more patience than i have with the nonsense on this thread .Some of the posters don't read like they're in full mens sano state . There are recently closed shops here wanting to reopen asap .I hav'nt seen one decent argument for legalising drugs and it's interesting just how irresponsible these people can be and surmising that some of these posters have children too .

Having children changed my views, have to say.

nozzferrahhtoo

Prop Joe wrote: »

Is anyone else so sick and tired of the acceptance of drugs in society?

Given the majority of them are illegal, you and I appear to be operating under a different definition of "Acceptance". However generally the answer for me would be "no" either way. If people want to use drugs in such a fashion as to not impact negatively on the lives of anyone else.... then I simply do not care what they do.

While I do feel somewhat sorry for those who need drugs to get a thrill out of a world that in my eyes is filled with enough to thrill the mind, the senses and the emotions... I certainly do not extrapolate from my sympathy a claim that such people are doing anything morally wrong that I should be concerned with.

ed2hands wrote: »

It's one thing to attempt to ban a substance that has been in customary use for centuries by probably 90% of the adult population, and quite another to retain a ban on substances that are still not in customary use, in an attempt to ensure that they never do become customary.

I would not see this as relevant at all. We should be looking at each drug rationally on their own merits and demerits. How long each one has been legal or illegal should not be relevant at all. They are either good things or bad things, they do not become more or less so solely because of how long we have used or not used them legally.

Take the comparison between alcohol and marijuana for example. By most if not all rational measures of addictiveness, effects, side effects and more the latter is the "better" drug. That fact does not change solely because alcohol has been legally used by more people for longer periods.

ed2hands wrote: »

It's a governments job to formulate laws that protect it's citizens and benefit the community. That's why drug laws are in place, here and around the world.

It is why the laws were put in place for sure, but certainly not while they are still there when speaking about some of the drugs out there. Again to take marijuana... there is little or no benefit to maintaining laws against it at all... and that is before you even start considering the benefits of legalizing and regulating it.

Alas with many of the arguments for keeping some drugs illegal... the arguments against those drugs are arguments that are only created BY them being illegal. People go on about the money from drugs fueling crime, the drugs being dangerously below standard, and the effects of addiction etc etc. All of these things are created and/or adversely fueled BY the drugs being illegal. In effect, quite often, those against drugs are creating their own arguments against them. They are certainly not arguments helped by invective, calling people "buddy", or posting posts containing words that can not get around the swear filter.

frag420

How is that a reason for legalising other drugs?

Why legalise any more even more destructive and addictive substances?
Please don't give me any crapola that heroin, yokes, k, acid, even weed are not destructive/addictive.

For better or worse, alcohol consumption is ingrained into Western culture. I'm personally ok with that. What i do have a problem with is increasing the availability of any more dangerous substances to be potentially consumed by my children, all so that a few self-righteous tossers can exercise their apparent self-appointed privelege at the expense of society.

If you want to snort a line, smoke a j, or drop a tab, or stick a needle in your arm, that's your look-out.
I'm fully against draconian marajuana-related prison terms in the States.
However, if someone is advocating legalising/normalising and thereby encouraging it, then i have a big problem with that.

The anti drug brigade are all for keeping alrwady illegal drugs illegal and dont want to see them legalised because of the "harm" they cause society. My point is that alcohol cause much more harm and saying that it is already ingrained in society is no reason to keep it legal if it is causing society ills. As I mentioned before its easy to protest against legalising drugs due to the harm they cause but you wont call for other harmfull drugs to be made illlegal bacuase you like to consume them and well its about as winable as the wart on drugs!! In case you had noticed wars tend to have a begining and an end........there is no end to the war on drugs, simples. People are deluded if they think people are going to stop smoking a joint or taking an E just because it legally wrong. If thats the case it would have happened by now. Would you give up the pint if it was made illegal tomorrow? Of course not.


It's not working... so legalise it?
You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think demand will drop in response to legalisation.

Read what I posted, I did not say demand will drop. I said that demand will never go away regardless of its legal status. Do you not think it better to embrace this and use it productively in society. Clean needle exchanges, more tax revenue from sales, cleaner product etc or is this too far outside the box for you to consider? Maybe a different approach is required than all out illegality.

Someone here already referenced the fact that Dutch kids don't smoke any more weed than other countries. Probably due to the fact that they see a large part of their capital is a drug-infested ****hole populated by clueless dope tourists and seedy smack/coke/ecstacy dealers.
I lived there (and did plenty of all that ****). I should know.

Or maybe because its not seen as rebellious anymore as its decriminalised?? Just thinking outside the box here, try it sometime.



Sure. You can cite the Prohibition era, but it doesn't wash for me for the reason already explained.
Prohibition of drugs works just fine as far as i'm concerned. It discourages kids from thinking they're safe.

As far as your concerned??Who are you? Who said anything about saying they are safe. I never said they are safe. they are no more safe than the legal drugs we consume weekly in this country be it in pubs or over the pharmacy counter in some cases. Its about education and acceptable risk. When you consume a few pints at the weekend you know the risk of over consumption. It should be up to you the parent to educate your kids on the effects of alcohol, drugs etc.



I thought what i said was crystal.
What i said was that just because one potentially dangerous drug has become widely used/ingrained, it doesn't follow that all others should be allowed or encouraged.
Let's be clear here. Legalising something sends a message that it is ok does it not?

No it does not. We know that alcohol is legal and also that over consumtion is bad for society and health yet we still over consume weeky in this country. And be legalising something we are not encouraging people to try it. What you are doing is not turning people into criminals for enjoying a spliff at the weekend to relax. What business it of yours or anyones what I put into MY body so long as I dont harm anyone else while doing so.



And it's a rubbish point.
Enjoyment? As i said, just because some get enjoyment doesn't justify legalising it so that my son thinks it's cool or harmless.

Says you but again that is your personal opinion and again thats up to you as a parent to look after your kid and teach him what is good/bad for him and he then decides he wants to smoke a spliff or sit in the park doing vodka shots then maybe you will have to address your parenting skills or lack of them?? If you find your kid drunk some day are you going to demand the local pucs close because you cant do your job/duty as a parent??



I'd love to shut down Big Tobacco. Would do it in the morning if i had the power.

I dont disagree with you there.



Whatever. Bull****....

Yeah great reply there.

Same principal yes, but still a load of w**k.
Of course it's the parents responsibility, but i can assure you many parents including myself breathed a sigh of relief when they got shut down.

Load of [EMAIL="w@nk"]****[/EMAIL]?? How so? Are they relieved now that their kids are going to dodgy alleyways in dodgy estates to buy drugs from a dodgy guy that cares not for their age nor the quality of product nor the effect it will have on them? A non tax paying dodgy guy?? Must be a huge relief to you.

How about you stop bleating on about your selfish right to do as you please and think about the wider repurcussions of legalising poisonous substances?

Nothing selfish about it. I could say the same thing and tell you not to be so selfish ruining other peoples fun and enjoyment just because you can lok after and educate your own child and tell him whats right from wrong?? Kids were doing drugs long before headshops came about.

paddyandy

Long Tedious Posts are not necessary in a very simple debate when the relevant points are clearly presented .Make your points clear and concise and i'll read them .No leftie slang nonsense and drippings of pop songs and gunge from gutter media .

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

Long Tedious Posts are not necessary in a very simple debate when the relevant points are clearly presented .Make your points clear and concise and i'll read them .No leftie slang nonsense and drippings of pop songs and gunge from gutter media .

A simple debate? I hardly think so. My points are clear and you know where I stand on the topic. If youi are finding it hard to comprihend then maybe ask someone to help you with the big words or whatever it is that has you puzzled.

And as for long tedious posts eh? Like the one you read and thanked by your fellow anti legalization poster earlier in this thread? You will read it and thank it when it suits your agenda?? That figures......

Anyways if its too much bother for you then please feel free to leave the debate. If however you feel like contributing something then please do.

frAg

paddyandy

There's a Barricade of reports and ''wise saws and instances'' that people hide behind and throw brickbats of nonsense at those of us trying to prevent Ireland becoming a wilderness of feral gangs ...Parts of the world are currently well on the way there ...apathy might well take us there led by pop culture and other factors .We don't have to go that way...

nozzferrahhtoo

Yes, imagine people using reports, studies, facts and the like to back up their opinion. For shame, for shame! They should just use scaremongering and emotional arguments instead like suggesting that legalising drugs will "reduce Ireland into a wilderness of feral gangs"

Nah I will stick to the facts and the studies over the scaremongering any day. If people have facts and studies to cite then I will read them. Rhetoric like "hiding behind" facts and studies is not going to negate their content and using such rhetoric to gloss over facts and studies that are inconvenient to you is not likely to dissuade anyone. Nor am I likely to be put off by another user whining things like "Oh no you have written too many woooooords".

Valmont

Poisonous: of a plant or substance - Causing or capable of causing death or illness if taken into the body.

Ed2Hands, LSD is not poisonous or even addictive. So, would you propose to legalise that substance? Given that you seem to classify drugs as poisonous substances, would you support a move to legalise marijuana, magic mushrooms (not addictive), peyote (not addictive) and other non-poisonous drugs?

Also, what right do you have to prevent me from doing something in my own home? Would you reserve the right to knock my door down and arrest me if I was doing something that you personally disagreed with such as taking drugs?

How you can justify such a violent, coercive, and prescriptive position on the lives of other people is beyond me. And you say you want to protect young people from drugs:rolleyes:. Maybe learning to mind their own business would be more useful to them.

Ash.J.Williams

Prop Joe wrote: »

Is anyone else so sick and tired of the acceptance of drugs in society?
Pills,Weed and Coke just seem so acceptable these days for ingredients for a night out.There needs to be bigger penalties for Drug possession?
I travel alot with work and hard drugs are spreading like wildfire throughout small towns and villages,When ten or so years ago ya wouldnt see a guy smoking a J.
Your Thoughts?

It was worse 5 years ago...so you're wrong...

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

There's a Barricade of reports and ''wise saws and instances'' that people hide behind and throw brickbats of nonsense at those of us trying to prevent Ireland becoming a wilderness of feral gangs ...Parts of the world are currently well on the way there ...apathy might well take us there led by pop culture and other factors .We don't have to go that way...

Like I said if you have trouble understanding the points made then maybe ask an adult to help you?? I am not hiding behind anything here when I post. Your replies are based on emotion and not actual facts or experience.

Which parts of the world are you refering to that are becoming a wilderness of feral gangs? Have you a list you can furnish us with? Perhaps a study on why they are well on their way there??

We dont have to go your way either............

thirtythirty

Prop Joe wrote: »

If Weed,Coke or whatever was made legal in the morning it would then be open to the level of abuse that the booze is encountered with..It's pointless comparing the two..My big gripe is that every person who buys drugs funds guys like "Fat Freddie" & John Gilligan,Keanes etc.. That is the problem,It is the same as aiding a rapist or murderer in his getaway from a crime...Again a bit harsh but true

I put to you that it is actually you and the legislators that are the ones funding the gangstars, and are as bad as rapists.

Prohibitive legislation largely panders to vocal and populist public opinion - in this case driven by the "drugs are bad mmkay" brigade that have little or no education on drugs in general, let alone the socio-economic problems countries that produce the items face, due to no regulation.

The gangs that import or grow exist purely due to prohibition - they simply serve a market that has always, and always will, exist.

frag420

Prop Joe wrote: »

My biggest problem with Marijuana is that it's illegal .No other reason except it funds the scum organised criminals that ruin this country.the scum who kill poor innocent people like Shane Geoghan

So your big issue with it is its legal status. Well guess what, me too!! It should be at the very least decriminalised and taken out of the hands of the sort of people that kill innocent people. Can you not see that demand will never go away for drugs and that if you want the money taken from the hands of the scumbags, the killings to stop etc then this country is going to have to look at an alternative system wherebye some if not all drugs are legalized and most imnportantly regulated, taxed etc.

Ash.J.Williams

I love drugs but I hate people who bang on about hating drugs and i equally hate people who bang on about loving drugs....

just do your own thing and sfu


PS
and fat freddie isn't real

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

As a Nation Regulations are not our Hymns any day of the week .We sign up and virtually ignore when possible ....The mere idea of Regulating Mood altering drugs in ireland is ridiculous ...it would be impossible to control properly

It already is impossible to control due in full to its illegal status!!
.

There are unlimited ways to import drugs .The problem with taking substances needs to be dealt with at the very first impulse .Why do we 'need' them in the first place ..Why in an age of unprecedented plenty do people 'need' dope ? ???

Why does it matter why we need it? Maybe its too relax after a hard days work? Why do people feel the need to drink or smole or drink coffee. Its of no relevence as you cant change the fact that people use drugs

Why are people so unhappy...A century ago well off people had nothing compared to poor people to-day and still we are miserable ....Why.That's a question nobody want's to discuss ...

Im very happy thank you. I enjoy life as do many people. Who says we are miserable? Are you miserable?

I'd be for regulating if i could believe . ? I don't but there are people who were closed down recently around Ireland looking to start up again....and the wellbeing of the Nation is not their first concern

people closed down? Looking to start up what again?

We would have bad Tourism drive out Good Tourism and many other difficulties which i've already mentioned .Where is your Patriotism at all ? Your Humanity ?

So its an economic matter now? Let me ask you where your humanity is?? Are you happy that because drugs are illegal people are going to be shot, maimed, stabbed, killed etc. Would it not be better to legalize them taking money and power out of the hands of the gangs thus solving your economic and humanitarian woes?? Just a thought......

frAg

frag420

paddyandy wrote: »

As a Nation Regulations are not our Hymns any day of the week .We sign up and virtually ignore when possible ....The mere idea of Regulating Mood altering drugs in ireland is ridiculous ...it would be impossible to control properly

It already is impossible to control due in full to its illegal status!!
.

There are unlimited ways to import drugs .The problem with taking substances needs to be dealt with at the very first impulse .Why do we 'need' them in the first place ..Why in an age of unprecedented plenty do people 'need' dope ? ???

Why does it matter why we need it? Maybe its too relax after a hard days work? Why do people feel the need to drink or smole or drink coffee. Its of no relevence as you cant change the fact that people use drugs

Why are people so unhappy...A century ago well off people had nothing compared to poor people to-day and still we are miserable ....Why.That's a question nobody want's to discuss ...

Im very happy thank you. I enjoy life as do many people. Who says we are miserable? Are you miserable?

I'd be for regulating if i could believe . ? I don't but there are people who were closed down recently around Ireland looking to start up again....and the wellbeing of the Nation is not their first concern

people closed down? Looking to start up what again?

We would have bad Tourism drive out Good Tourism and many other difficulties which i've already mentioned .Where is your Patriotism at all ? Your Humanity ?

So its an economic matter now? Let me ask you where your humanity is?? Are you happy that because drugs are illegal people are going to be shot, maimed, stabbed, killed etc. Would it not be better to legalize them taking money and power out of the hands of the gangs thus solving your economic and humanitarian woes?? Just a thought......

frAg

ed2hands

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I certainly do not extrapolate from my sympathy a claim that such people are doing anything morally wrong that I should be concerned with.

I too would not make any moral judgement on most users, but would just hope they are under no illusion that all illicit drugs have been proven to be addictive and/or harmful albeit to widely differing degrees. I'm including weed even. So the fact that some can use and enjoy them without getting addicted or without harming themselves/others is all well and good for them, but it takes no account of those others who are not so lucky. Legalising drugs would be increasing exposure to them and normalising their use in the eyes of youngsters.
That's why i'm against it.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I would not see this as relevant at all.

And i didn't see how the poster citing Prohibition was proof or relevant to establishing that keeping drugs illegal isn't working. Alcohol was used by the vast majority and was always legal. Drugs are only used by a small minority at present and have been illegal for generations. The flaws in comparing them are obvious.
If you look at the evidence as most do, that all street drugs are potentially harmful and therefore not to be encouraged, the fact that they're currently illegal is relevant in so much as why make any more addictive drugs available to a population of young people with all the consequences that could have, so that the small minority of current users may benefit?

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

How long each one has been legal or illegal should not be relevant at all. They are either good things or bad things, they do not become more or less so solely because of how long we have used or not used them legally.

Yes of course. They do not become more or less good/bad solely because of how long we have used or not used them legally.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Take the comparison between alcohol and marijuana for example. By most if not all rational measures of addictiveness, effects, side effects and more the latter is the "better" drug. That fact does not change solely because alcohol has been legally used by more people for longer periods.

I agree, and never said it did.
The fact that marijuana is "the better drug" is moot to me for reasons already posted to frag.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Again to take marijuana... there is little or no benefit to maintaining laws against it at all... and that is before you even start considering the benefits of legalizing and regulating it.

Would heartily disagree. There's plenty of benefit to maintaining laws against. It discourages it's use.
Many seem to be under the impression that marijuana is relatively harmless or not addictive. Just talk to any drug counsellor and they'll certainly have a different view.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Alas with many of the arguments for keeping some drugs illegal... the arguments against those drugs are arguments that are only created BY them being illegal.

No, the arguments against those drugs are arguments that are only created by them being dangerous. The arguments are created by the differenes of opinion on the wisdom of making street drugs available.
So why in your opinion are all street drugs illegal in virtually every country worldwide?

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

People go on about the money from drugs fueling crime, the drugs being dangerously below standard, and the effects of addiction etc etc. All of these things are created and/or adversely fueled BY the drugs being illegal.

Please explain how you think the effects of addiction are created and/or adversely fueled BY the drugs being illegal.

frag420 wrote: »

The anti drug brigade are all for keeping alrwady illegal drugs illegal and dont want to see them legalised because of the "harm" they cause society.

Correct.

frag420 wrote: »

As I mentioned before its easy to protest against legalising drugs due to the harm they cause but you wont call for other harmfull drugs to be made illlegal bacuase you like to consume them and well its about as winable as the wart on drugs!!

What? I already told you what i think of tobacco. As for alcohol, no, it's not that i wont call for it to be made illegal "just becuase i like to consume it" as you're guessing. We're not really discussing alcohol. Why keep mentioning it?

frag420 wrote: »

People are deluded if they think people are going to stop smoking a joint or taking an E just because it legally wrong.

What they do is their own look-out. If they really want to do that, that's up to them. I personally have no illusions that a small few will always partake in a bit of whatever, nor do i want to lock anyone up for doing it. However keeping it illegal is the most effective way limit it's exposure.

frag420 wrote: »

Read what I posted, I did not say demand will drop. I said that demand will never go away regardless of its legal status. Do you not think it better to embrace this and use it productively in society.

No, i think it's stupid.

frag420 wrote: »

Clean needle exchanges, more tax revenue from sales, cleaner product etc or is this too far outside the box for you to consider? Maybe a different approach is required than all out illegality.

Clean needle exchanges i'm for. Cleaner product i couldn't care less about tbh.

frag420 wrote: »

Or maybe because its not seen as rebellious anymore as its decriminalised??

Yea maybe.

frag420 wrote: »

As far as your concerned??Who are you? Who said anything about saying they are safe. I never said they are safe. they are no more safe than the legal drugs we consume weekly in this country be it in pubs or over the pharmacy counter in some cases. Its about education and acceptable risk. When you consume a few pints at the weekend you know the risk of over consumption. It should be up to you the parent to educate your kids on the effects of alcohol, drugs etc.

You're missing the point.

frag420 wrote: »

And be legalising something we are not encouraging people to try it.

Oh but we are.

frag420 wrote: »

What business it of yours or anyones what I put into MY body so long as I dont harm anyone else while doing so.

It's none of my business as i'm not your Daddy. You just have to accept that what you're doing is illegal for a good reason.

frag420 wrote: »

Says you but again that is your personal opinion and again thats up to you as a parent to look after your kid and teach him what is good/bad for him and he then decides he wants to smoke a spliff or sit in the park doing vodka shots then maybe you will have to address your parenting skills or lack of them??

You're missing what i said.

frag420 wrote: »

If you find your kid drunk some day are you going to demand the local pucs close because you cant do your job/duty as a parent??

Nope. So i'm a hypocrite right?

frag420 wrote: »

Are they relieved now that their kids are going to dodgy alleyways in dodgy estates to buy drugs from a dodgy guy that cares not for their age nor the quality of product nor the effect it will have on them? A non tax paying dodgy guy?? Must be a huge relief to you.

Whatever. The point is plenty of kids will not bother go to dodgy places for good reason. However, if it's being sold openly in a cool shop on Main st., then yeah, they'll have less reservations about trying it.

frag420 wrote: »

I could say the same thing and tell you not to be so selfish ruining other peoples fun and enjoyment.

They'll survive.

ed2hands

Valmont wrote: »

Ed2Hands, LSD is not poisonous or even addictive.

So it's not harmful right?

Valmont wrote: »

So, would you propose to legalise that substance?

No.

Valmont wrote: »

Given that you seem to classify drugs as poisonous substances, would you support a move to legalise marijuana, magic mushrooms (not addictive), peyote (not addictive) and other non-poisonous drugs?

No.

Valmont wrote: »

Also, what right do you have to prevent me from doing something in my own home? Would you reserve the right to knock my door down and arrest me if I was doing something that you personally disagreed with such as taking drugs?

How you can justify such a violent, coercive, and prescriptive position on the lives of other people is beyond me. And you say you want to protect young people from drugs. Maybe learning to mind their own business would be more useful to them.

Here we go with the usual Libertarian schtick.

as125634do

well your just old fashioned and times are changing. we have democracy now and if the majority of illegal drug users enjoy using them how can you dictate to them? All reports on how bad drugs are have to do with the abuse of drugs so you are against legalisation because of the minority who will abuse any drug? old fashioned is going out the window did you not see all the uprisings in libya etc..?

nozzferrahhtoo

ed2hands wrote: »

illicit drugs have been proven to be addictive and/or harmful albeit to widely differing degrees.

The differing degrees is mightily important, especially given the addictive level of things is not always taken into account... for example alcohol is still legal and look how addictive that is. I am personally addicted to coca cola and have failed every attempt to give it up. In fact "weed" has been shown in quite a number of studies to my knowledge as being less addictive than alcohol. Computer games are addictive too.

Addictiveness should not be the criteria here I feel, and clearly in many cases it is not. Regardless of whether we talk drugs, alcohol, computer games, mcdonalds, or even water and sex.... over use, excessive use and addiction are all dangerous, harmful and even lethal in some cases.... Even water.

The inability of some people to practice moderation is not a criteria for making things illegal I think. We should be taking drugs on a case by case basis, on the benefits and harms and addictiveness of each and not blanket ban them all with this easy to type term "addictive".

ed2hands wrote: »

Legalising drugs would be increasing exposure to them and normalising their use in the eyes of youngsters. That's why i'm against it.

That sounds good on paper but the reality is often different. For many reasons. We have examples of countries where drugs have been made legal and in fact use, addiction and the like has gone down, not up. Also the normalisation of drugs, and the reduction in social stigma, has meant people are more able to seek... and find.... help when it gets out of hand.... more so then in countries where their use is illegal, illicit and underground and stigmatised.

Underground the mixes are of lower quality and not of industry standard and likely also include elements to increase the addiction so as to increase sales (Though I will conceed that, as with cigarettes, legalisation and industry standards does not always prevent the inclusion of addictive ingredients but at least it curtails it massively both in quantity and type.).

So if this is the foundation of your arguments against drugs then it is not a good foundation I am afraid.

ed2hands wrote: »

i didn't see how the poster citing Prohibition was proof or relevant to establishing that keeping drugs illegal isn't working.

I, however, do. Clearly the cost of maintaining such laws is not scaling with the benefit of maintaining those laws. It has just pushed the sales underground, financed crime gangs, reduced the quality and safety of the drugs, tied up police resources, lost earning potential through tax and much much more. I see no other option at this time other than to declare the war on drugs lost, the trick now is to admit that and take a new tack by legalising and regulating them.

ed2hands wrote: »

Would heartily disagree. There's plenty of benefit to maintaining laws against. It discourages it's use.

A nice fantasy but the reports in the media on just how big the industry is, the money involved and the number of users clearly differentiates the fantasy from reality. It is a massive industry and there is not much sign that making them illegal has curtailed their use all that much. Of course it does not leave the figures entirely unaffected but I doubt the effect is as significant as you want them to be.

Plus the argument presumes itself. The argument is over whether use of the drugs is all that bad at all, or not and whether they should be legal or not. If they are very bad then making them illegal is a good thing. But declaring making them legal will increase the number engaging in use is a point that already assumes that they are bad.

ed2hands wrote: »

Many seem to be under the impression that marijuana is relatively harmless or not addictive. Just talk to any drug counsellor and they'll certainly have a different view.

I certainly have not, and would not, claim it causes zero harm or zero addiction. But I would heartily say LESS of both when compared to many things, especially cigarettes and alcohol. I repeat what I wrote above.... there is very little that is not addictive, or harmful, especially if the user of them does not practice moderation. Everything from sex, to computer games, to fast food to much much more. Simply calling something addictive is, these days, to say literally nothing at all.

ed2hands wrote: »

No, the arguments against those drugs are arguments that are only created by them being dangerous.

Again a nice fantasy but the reality belies it. Pushing drugs underground creates many problems and those problems are then used by people as arguments against drugs. It is a common tactic alas, used in other places like for example prostitution.

ed2hands wrote: »

Please explain how you think the effects of addiction are created and/or adversely fueled BY the drugs being illegal.

I did not say ALL The arguments are created by them being illegal. Many are, but not all, however in this case I would cite the lack of help sought by addicts due to the law and the stigma.... and the fact that underground drugs can have addictive substances mixed in that industry regulated legal versions would not. Both of those answer your question.

ed2hands

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The differing degrees is mightily important, especially given the addictive level of things is not always taken into account... for example alcohol is still legal and look how addictive that is. I am personally addicted to coca cola and have failed every attempt to give it up. In fact "weed" has been shown in quite a number of studies to my knowledge as being less addictive than alcohol. Computer games are addictive too.

Addictiveness should not be the criteria here I feel, and clearly in many cases it is not. Regardless of whether we talk drugs, alcohol, computer games, mcdonalds, or even water and sex.... over use, excessive use and addiction are all dangerous, harmful and even lethal in some cases.... Even water.

The inability of some people to practice moderation is not a criteria for making things illegal I think. We should be taking drugs on a case by case basis, on the benefits and harms and addictiveness of each and not blanket ban them all with this easy to type term "addictive".

Interesting if well-worn points. Just a couple of quick replies for the moment. Might come back to the post again later.

The highlighted bit.
I gather this has already been done and considered at official level in many countries in response to legalisation-advocacy groups and individuals. I also gather the consensus is that the laws are correct the way they are. It's a much-talked about issue, and would say the majority still advocate keeping the laws the way they are, ie stiff sentences for importation and dealing and a slap on the wrist for possession. Not high-street drugs outlets.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Also the normalisation of drugs, and the reduction in social stigma, has meant people are more able to seek... and find.... help when it gets out of hand.... more so then in countries where their use is illegal, illicit and underground and stigmatised.

I too am all for less stigma and more help for those that need it. This can be improved without legalisation. It's not a logical reason for legalisation imv.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Underground the mixes are of lower quality and not of industry standard and likely also include elements to increase the addiction so as to increase sales

Wouldn't say "likely". Occasionally you hear of coke,E cut with heroin, but for the most part the cut is with benign cheap filler. No, the product itself is the addictive element. Increasing it's quality would not lower it's addictiveness; quite the opposite in fact.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Clearly the cost of maintaining such laws is not scaling with the benefit of maintaining those laws.

I wouldn't say that's clear at all, simply because there are are no examples of any nation legalising completely street drugs use (except for limited weed in Holland)
So it's all just speculation as to if any changes would improve things.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

A nice fantasy..

Am not sure how you could describe the fact that maintaining laws against drugs discourages their use as "a nice fantasy".

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

It is a massive industry and there is not much sign that making them illegal has curtailed their use all that much.

Again pure speculation. To give this idea any credence, one would need to show a modern example of somewhere where drugs were once legal but not now. Of which there isn't any AFAIK.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Simply calling something addictive is, these days, to say literally nothing at all.

True, but that's not what anyone's doing.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Again a nice fantasy but the reality belies it.

And again would disagree. To say that that is not fantasy, you would need to outline how drugs use is not treated as a dangerous activity and legislated for in response to this.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Pushing drugs underground creates many problems and those problems are then used by people as arguments against drugs.

That may be true, but it's not something i've been doing.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I did not say ALL The arguments are created by them being illegal.

Well you sort of did but no matter.
"All of these things are created and/or adversely fueled BY the drugs being illegal."

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

.. however in this case I would cite the lack of help sought by addicts due to the law and the stigma....and the fact that underground drugs can have addictive substances mixed in that industry regulated legal versions would not. Both of those answer your question.

Not to any satisfaction i'm afraid.

I've yet to hear any convincing arguments for legalisation that would go anywhere near to outweighing the consequences.