Cocaine etc is everywhere?

Big Gerry

Tomaldo wrote: »

Not true, I personally knew a heavy alcohol drinker who died on his own vomit after a night's drinking and he was anti-illegal drugs.

But you are not going to drop dead form alcohol if you drink in moderation.


Cocaine on the other hand can kill some people after just one line.

Tomaldo

ElJeffe wrote: »

Each to their own but if you want to be part of the problem then go ahead. Drugs destroy lives and communities from Darndale to Foxrock and from Juarez to Bogota. I notice a lot of people telling how coke effects them without mentioning others. Maybe that's part of the selfish human condition but it's a pretty ugly part.

The last time I looked, Foxrock was one of the most expensive places to buy a property in Ireland. Could u tell me how coke destroyed the lives of Paul McCartney, Keith Richards and Kate Moss as they choose what type of Rolls Royce/Ferrari to buy next while their maids serve them the finest foods in their luxury mansions. BTW they weren't always rich, they became wealthier AFTER they took it.

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Tomaldo wrote: »

The last time I looked, Foxrock was one of the most expensive places to buy a property in Ireland. Could u tell me how coke destroyed the lives of Paul McCartney, Keith Richards and Kate Moss as they choose what type of Rolls Royce/Ferrari to buy next while their maids serve them the finest foods in their luxury mansions. BTW they weren't always rich, they became wealthier AFTER they took it.

Not to disagree but your equating being rich as not having your life destroyed. You could be rich, lose your family, friends wreck your body etc etc and your cherry picking, loads of famous people ended up in bits Kurt Contain, Amy Winehouse, Brian Jones(to your Keith Richards) and loads more

Apart from that loads of people take drugs with no real effect on their life. The difference is between use & abuse

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Big Gerry wrote: »

But you are not going to drop dead form alcohol if you drink in moderation.


Cocaine on the other hand can kill some people after just one line.

So can peanuts.

Tomaldo

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

Not to disagree but your equating being rich as not having your life destroyed. You could be rich, lose your family, friends wreck your body etc etc and your cherry picking, loads of famous people ended up in bits Kurt Contain, Amy Winehouse, Brian Jones(to your Keith Richards) and loads more

Apart from that loads of people take drugs with no real effect on their life. The difference is between use & abuse

Kurt Cobain died from a gun (suicide) Amy Winehouse from alcohol poisioning, Brian Jones from drowning. Why don't we ban guns, alcohol and swimming pools?

Alfred123

Cocaine is evil - you just have to read some of the posters above to see how it is beginning to seriously play with their grey matter. Alarming stuff !!

One poster says Peanuts can kill you just as easily as Cocaine so lets legalize Coke. (That there is brain damage pure and simple)

Another casualty of the Cocaine snortfesht is the chap above who claims since cars, buses, boats n trains etc kill more people than Cocaine, then cars, buses, boats and trains shd be banned too

And you can see his point. Why, only last week I spotted a lady trying to mount a gram of Coke in Ballsbridge to get to the city centre. I don't know if she made it

One can only hope these posters get the help they so desperately need and soon. Its very sad when you have addicts writing into Boards and seeing, first hand, their deterioration. We really should help them - at least with their reasoning.

Otherwise, we'll be finding them in bus depots tryin to snort buses LOLS. Then it will be too late ..

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Tomaldo wrote: »

Kurt Cobain died from a gun (suicide) Amy Winehouse from alcohol poisioning, Brian Jones from drowning. Why don't we ban guns, alcohol and swimming pools?

Seriously? Their lives were a mess with drug abuse. Unless your specifically talking about how people died.

Brian Jones developed a severe substance abuse problem that by the mid-1960s had taken a toll on his health, landed him in jail and alienated him from his bandmates. He was forced out of the group in June 1969. The following month, Jones was found dead at the bottom of his swimming pool; police reported that he had drowned while under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

Yeah the swimming pool was the real problem

Cobain struggled with mental illness, chronic health problems and heroin addiction. He committed suicide in April 1994,

Amy Winehouse battled drug and alcohol addiction for years

Alfred123

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

Seriously? Their lives were a mess with drug abuse. Unless your specifically talking about how people died.

No, he doesn't know what he's talking about, Gazz.

Like i say, let them show how the Coke and elephant tranquilizer is destroying to their brain cells

Their own posts here are the best argument can be levelled against the legalization of Coke

One could laugh at the logic if it were not so tragic

utyh2ikcq9z76b

I'm all for legalization, prohibition doesn't stop the flow of drugs one bit, it only enriches gangs. Far better to bring in regulations and let the government get the tax money that can be invested in education & health. Statistically alcohol is far more destructive. People find it easier to get drugs than alcohol, I would have to travel further to buy drink, a lot of dealers operate long hours over the weekend, delivering to parties, to your home etc. Black markets are very efficient.

DonalK1981

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

I'm all for legalization, prohibition doesn't stop the flow of drugs one bit, it only enriches gangs. Far better to bring in regulations and let the government get the tax money that can be invested in education & health. Statistically alcohol is far more destructive. People find it easier to get drugs than alcohol, I would have to travel further to buy drink, a lot of dealers operate long hours over the weekend, delivering to parties, to your home etc. Black markets are very efficient.

The argument doesn't need to go so far as to incentivize a government to tax it, the money they save on policing & incarcerating people alone would be immense. Illegal drug taking sweeps everything under the carpet, to decriminalize it would allow people to be more open with their habits/problems and perhaps come out and get help for it if needed. Others who don't find it impactful on their daily lives can take their lines as others take their pint as a recreational hobby, without the fear of the Garda handcuffing them, them losing their job and going to jail or being in the papers.

LuasSimon

Asked a neighbor the other day how her son was getting on , hadnt seen him in yonks.
Turns out hes in hidsbedroom for last 12 months suffering with depression from cocaine/weed use , was a fine young man , good at sport and fairly good at school, now his brain is fried from cocaine and weed and he can hardly make himself a cup of tea, great stuff these drugs .

utyh2ikcq9z76b

DonalK1981 wrote: »

The argument doesn't need to go so far as to incentivize a government to tax it, the money they save on policing & incarcerating people alone would be immense. Illegal drug taking sweeps everything under the carpet, to decriminalize it would allow people to be more open with their habits/problems and perhaps come out and get help for it if needed. Others who don't find it impactful on their daily lives can take their lines as others take their pint as a recreational hobby, without the fear of the Garda handcuffing them, them losing their job and going to jail or being in the papers.

If you only decriminalize the gangs will still operate and get more powerful. Might as well get the tax revenue and standardize the product

I don't really know of any drugs users that ended up in jail for personal stuff anyway. This isn't the US

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

If you only decriminalize the gangs will still operate and get more powerful. Might as well get the tax revenue and standardize the product

I don't really know of any drugs users that ended up in jail for personal stuff anyway. This isn't the US

That's generally because small amounts for personal consumption only result in cautions. You need to be caught with a significant amount before you and up in jail, and it's usually for intent to supply or distribute.

DonalK1981

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

If you only decriminalize the gangs will still operate and get more powerful. Might as well get the tax revenue and standardize the product

I don't really know of any drugs users that ended up in jail for personal stuff anyway. This isn't the US

The courts waste a substantial amount of time on these cases, as do the police. If people are of age and minding their own business then let them have at it.

Tomaldo

Alfred123 wrote: »

Cocaine is evil - you just have to read some of the posters above to see how it is beginning to seriously play with their grey matter. Alarming stuff !!

One poster says Peanuts can kill you just as easily as Cocaine so lets legalize Coke. (That there is brain damage pure and simple)

Another casualty of the Cocaine snortfesht is the chap above who claims since cars, buses, boats n trains etc kill more people than Cocaine, then cars, buses, boats and trains shd be banned too

And you can see his point. Why, only last week I spotted a lady trying to mount a gram of Coke in Ballsbridge to get to the city centre. I don't know if she made it

One can only hope these posters get the help they so desperately need and soon. Its very sad when you have addicts writing into Boards and seeing, first hand, their deterioration. We really should help them - at least with their reasoning.

Otherwise, we'll be finding them in bus depots tryin to snort buses LOLS. Then it will be too late ..

Cocaine is evil? how can an inanimate substance be evil. Are you confusing it with rapists, murderers or animal torturers. I didn't say those modes of transport should be banned and I don't want to sound petty or pedantic but I said airplanes not buses or boats. That's twice u misquoted me. Do you over-rate your own grey matter. Addict? I took it 3 times in 2020 and it wouldn't bother me if I never saw it again but I still don't believe it should be illegal.

Big Gerry

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So can peanuts.

But how many people have been killed by peanuts ?


Cocaine has killed far more people than peanuts.

harrymcgowan

Wasn't cocaine originally used in medicine during the 1800s? Even Coca-Cola means "drink from the coca plant".

AFAIK, eating coca leaves isn't harmful and native people in South America did it for hundreds of years.

How then is the end product, cocaine harmful?

Big Gerry

harrymcgowan wrote: »

Wasn't cocaine originally used in medicine during the 1800s? Even Coca-Cola means "drink from the coca plant".

AFAIK, eating coca leaves isn't harmful and native people in South America did it for hundreds of years.

How then is the end product, cocaine harmful?

Processed cocaine would be hundreds of times more powerful than the raw plant.

bullpost

harrymcgowan wrote: »

Wasn't cocaine originally used in medicine during the 1800s? Even Coca-Cola means "drink from the coca plant".

AFAIK, eating coca leaves isn't harmful and native people in South America did it for hundreds of years.

How then is the end product, cocaine harmful?

All kinds of everything mixed with it before joe public snorts it.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Big Gerry wrote: »

But how many people have been killed by peanuts ?


Cocaine has killed far more people than peanuts.

The point was: if a substance can kill some people upon ingrstion, it should be banned.

My point is: this is fallacy.

Proven.

Amirani

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The point was: if a substance can kill some people upon ingrstion, it should be banned.

My point is: this is fallacy.

Proven.

Your interpretation/representation of the poster's point is fallacious.

They did not say that any substance that can kill some people upon ingestion should be banned. So you've built a strawman.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Amirani wrote: »

Your interpretation/representation of the poster's point is fallacious.

They did not say that any substance that can kill some people upon ingestion should be banned. So you've built a strawman.

... then why say "it can kill in one line" if not that?

Amirani

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

... then why say "it can kill in one line" if not that?

Because it can, and that's clearly a valid factor to consider when deciding whether or not it should be legalised.

That's not the same thing as saying that it's the only factor, nor indeed that everything that has that potential should be made illegal.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Amirani wrote: »

Because it can, and that's clearly a valid factor to consider when deciding whether or not it should be legalised.

That's not the same thing as saying that it's the only factor, nor indeed that everything that has that potential should be made illegal.

Not saying it isn't, but again, we could say the same about the peanuts.

What you are trying to argue here is that the likelihood is possibly higher. And you may or may not be right. But the counter to that is that if it was legalised, it could be made safer.

This is the catch-22 situation: it is illegal because it is dangerous, but it is dangerous because it's illegal.

Tomaldo

Kelvin Screeching Topaz wrote: »

Seriously? Their lives were a mess with drug abuse. Unless your specifically talking about how people died.



Yeah the swimming pool was the real problem

Yes, a quick google search will tell you how those 3 people died. I never said they didn't use mind-altering substances, but it wasn't cocaine that they died from.

Big Gerry

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Not saying it isn't, but again, we could say the same about the peanuts.

What you are trying to argue here is that the likelihood is possibly higher. And you may or may not be right. But the counter to that is that if it was legalised, it could be made safer.

This is the catch-22 situation: it is illegal because it is dangerous, but it is dangerous because it's illegal.

Cocaine has killed many celebrities over the years.


I don't know of any celebrities that died from peanuts.

Tomaldo

Alfred123 wrote: »

No, he doesn't know what he's talking about, Gazz.

Like i say, let them show how the Coke and elephant tranquilizer is destroying to their brain cells

Their own posts here are the best argument can be levelled against the legalization of Coke

One could laugh at the logic if it were not so tragic

Your anecdote/joke about the lady in Ballsbridge almost made me laugh, but your inacurrate opinions on cocaine would be far more hilarious if the topic wasn't so serious.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Big Gerry wrote: »

Cocaine has killed many celebrities over the years.


I don't know of any celebrities that died from peanuts.

Think you're mistaken me for another poster - I know nothing about celebrities? It's not like they're a very representative demographic.

I'm any case, 53 people died from Cocaine poisoning in 2017, last year I could find numbers for. No idea star the number for peanuts was, but alcohol poisoning racked up 125.

https://www.hrb.ie/news/press-releases/single-press-release/article/drug-related-deaths-hrb-publishes-latest-figures/

So, yes. Substances and be ingested and they can kill. Legal ones and illegal ones. They can kill one person instantly and have no effect on someone else. But at 53, it's going to be a very small percentage of the people who take it and don't die.

Tomaldo

1990sman wrote: »

drugs are for idiots?

So Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger are idiots. They both made millions from their music, 'dated' the most beautiful women on the planet, received knighthoods, are idolized wherever they go and are still alive well into their seventies. I must check the definition of the word idiot, if ur right then it's not what I thought it meant.

Tomaldo

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

Prohibition has worked in many situations and places. Prohibition of smoking in the work place, in pubs and on public transport has overwhelmingly worked. The war on drink driving in recent years has also worked.

I'm talking about alcohol or illegal drugs.

Tomaldo

LuasSimon wrote: »

Asked a neighbor the other day how her son was getting on , hadnt seen him in yonks.
Turns out hes in hidsbedroom for last 12 months suffering with depression from cocaine/weed use , was a fine young man , good at sport and fairly good at school, now his brain is fried from cocaine and weed and he can hardly make himself a cup of tea, great stuff these drugs .

Did prohibition prevent your friends' son from using drugs, can u prove drugs caused his depression. Some people use drugs to mask it and yes I always thought they were great stuff, do did Keith Richards and Maradona.

vriesmays

Big Gerry wrote: »

Interesting I didn't know Bowman was a coke head.


There must be nobody in RTE that isn't one.

Had almost had his house repossessed by the bank and was able to chatter to people non-stop. Off his head on the stuff.

Strumms

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Not saying it isn't, but again, we could say the same about the peanuts.

What you are trying to argue here is that the likelihood is possibly higher. And you may or may not be right. But the counter to that is that if it was legalised, it could be made safer.

This is the catch-22 situation: it is illegal because it is dangerous, but it is dangerous because it's illegal.

It could be made safer in theory as in the quality control of the drug, manufacturing processes, ingredients etc.. regulation in theory would make it safer. Not safe but safer in that it would be purer.

If you buy a bag now, according to the most recent studies approximately 40%-60% of the content of the cocaine you buy is pure... the rest are additives... Caffeine, cornstarch, lactose, sugar, quinine, Paracetamol and dental anaesthetics like benzocaine and lidocaine have all been detected in cocaine seized by police forces in the US and Europe.

tdf7187

Tomaldo wrote: »

Did prohibition prevent your friends' son from using drugs, can u prove drugs caused his depression. Some people use drugs to mask it and yes I always thought they were great stuff, do did Keith Richards and Maradona.

So you're using a man who died well before his time and had numerous health problems over the years to justify drug use? FFS.

Tomaldo

tdf7187 wrote: »

So you're using a man who died well before his time and had numerous health problems over the years to justify drug use? FFS.

He lived 'til he was sixty, a lot of health-fanatics didn't reach that milestone. His autopsy revealed he had no illegal drugs in his system at the time of his death. I believe he was being treated for alcohol-dependency before he died. He also lived slightly longer than that other soccer-legend, George Best and it wasn't cocaine that killed him.

Steven81

From what I hear from work colleagues is that the younger generation are very conscious of their appearance so don’t want to go out drinking x amount of pints due to a weight increase. By getting coke they can get high at an ok price and keep their figure.

tdf7187

Tomaldo wrote: »

He lived 'til he was sixty, a lot of health-fanatics didn't reach that milestone.

Most who take care of themselves and are lucky enough not to have genetic health conditions do in fact reach that milestone, and many retain good health into their 80s and 90s.

Tomaldo wrote: »

His autopsy revealed he had no illegal drugs in his system at the time of his death. I believe he was being treated for alcohol-dependency before he died.He also lived slightly longer than that other soccer-legend, George Best and it wasn't cocaine that killed him.

That fact that another, and legal, addictive drug also causes massive health and societal problems does not legitimise cocaine use.

Ash.J.Williams

tdf7187 wrote: »

Most who take care of themselves and are lucky enough not to have genetic health conditions do in fact reach that milestone, and many retain good health into their 80s and 90s.



That fact that another, and legal, addictive drug also causes massive health and societal problems does not legitimise cocaine use.

You’re doing nobody any favours living to 80s and 90s

Tomaldo

tdf7187 wrote: »

Most who take care of themselves and are lucky enough not to have genetic health conditions do in fact reach that milestone, and many retain good health into their 80s and 90s.



That fact that another, and legal, addictive drug also causes massive health and societal problems does not legitimise cocaine use.

How does it affect you badly if somebody uses coke, why do you have such a puritanical opinion on others enjoying themselves. Whatever happened to that argument used in another debate 'My body, my choice'.

AllForIt

I prefer meth.

joking

but I would like to try it once just to know what it's like, i think

I always hated cocaine users. They always were the most horrible ppl I ever met in my life. If that's what it does to you - no thanks.

listermint

Tomaldo wrote: »

How does it affect you badly if somebody uses coke, why do you have such a puritanical opinion on others enjoying themselves. Whatever happened to that argument used in another debate 'My body, my choice'.

Having to listen to their ****e is enough to drive anyone demented tbf.

The worst is hearing the ****e talk at the urinals.

Christ take me away now .....!

tdf7187

Tomaldo wrote: »

How does it affect you badly if somebody uses coke, why do you have such a puritanical opinion on others enjoying themselves. Whatever happened to that argument used in another debate 'My body, my choice'.

I don't care what you do, I just thought using Maradona as an example doesn't make a lot of sense as he didn't even make it to pensionable age.

There is of course the argument that it finances murders. Perhaps it should be legalised.

tdf7187

AllForIt wrote: »

I prefer meth.

joking

but I would like to try it once just to know what it's like, i think

I always hated cocaine users. They always were the most horrible ppl I ever met in my life. If that's what it does to you - no thanks.

I met some in rehab and they were fine apart from being a bit jittery...but I was meeting them when they were off it of course.

AllForIt

tdf7187 wrote: »

I met some in rehab and they were fine apart from being a bit jittery...but I was meeting them when they were off it of course.

oh

Tomaldo

listermint wrote: »

Having to listen to their ****e is enough to drive anyone demented tbf.

The worst is hearing the ****e talk at the urinals.

Christ take me away now .....!

Non coke-users are well capable of talking ####e too, personally I haven't noticed what you're saying. Prohibition hasn't prevented people taking it or talking ####e. Anyway you don't have to socialize with users, I doubt they'd miss your company if that's what you think of them.

Strumms

AllForIt wrote: »

I always hated cocaine users. They always were the most horrible ppl I ever met in my life. If that's what it does to you - no thanks.

I’ve little experience being around coke users, mainly it was a work social scene but it mirrored your experiences... a pretty good work friend and occasional drinking buddy was a complete wanknut on coke, others not far behind....once he wanted a ‘word outside’ as I was supposedly talking about him... how he gathered that from 15 meters the other side of the bar... and not even looking at him..good stuff...

I’ve been with him just having pints, a sweetheart of a human, but that shît... man.

Tomaldo

tayto lover wrote: »

Am I the only person in the country who was never offered any type of illegal drug?
Don’t believe I’d try it even if offered. A few pints of Guinness does me.

Alcohol kills more people than cocaine, google it.

tdf7187

Tomaldo wrote: »

Alcohol kills more people than cocaine, google it.

Nobody is disputing this.

Tomaldo

tdf7187 wrote: »

Nobody is disputing this.

I don't agree, I've heard and seen many pint-drinkers on their high horses lecturing people about their coke use.

zerosugarbuzz

Strumms wrote: »

I’ve little experience being around coke users, mainly it was a work social scene but it mirrored your experiences... a pretty good work friend and occasional drinking buddy was a complete wanknut on coke, others not far behind....once he wanted a ‘word outside’ as I was supposedly talking about him... how he gathered that from 15 meters the other side of the bar... and not even looking at him..good stuff...

I’ve been with him just having pints, a sweetheart of a human, but that shît... man.

Have had exactly the same experience several times. Nice people who turn into spectacular assholes when on coke. It was commonly used In the library in Lily’s in the 90’s but I hear its more common than alcohol in bars now, when they’re open of course.