Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cocaine seizure - Dublin Port

Options
12467

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That's not seeking an argument. Your attempts to belittle and make contrived points from each of my posts are grating tbh.

    I haven't sought to belittle any of your points, and if you look back, you've been the one to throw things like parody, or your reluctance to respond to me in argument. I haven't said anything about your posting style except to point to the vagueness of your opinions. As for my posts being contrived, hardly.. but then I suspect this is just another vague opinion of yours, and you'll deflect/hedge rather than deal with it directly.

    But look, fine. We'll end the discussion here, because you're not responding to my requests for detail/specifics.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,277 ✭✭✭km991148




  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    it's not totally inaccurate.... want proof.. crack open google scholar and throw those keywords in and fill your boots and get down off the "show me the proof" high horse....

    you will see earlier studies 90's and earlier will refer to marijuana addiction, where, as the the perception of legalising weed changed in the 00's, studies tend to refer more to "dependency"..... why? because it's bad publicity to legalise something that is potentially addictive and detrimental to some people...

    now, you can go down the rabbit hole and throw spears trying to pick this apart in what you find in your favour.... but at the end of the day, there is a known link between weed with high THC content and addictiveness...



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    it's not totally inaccurate.... want proof.. crack open google scholar and throw those keywords in and fill your boots and get down off the "show me the proof" high horse....

    it's not totally inaccurate, is the same as being inaccurate. That poster made a claim, and I asked for evidence, which wasn't given. In any case, the post you quoted was to do with more than the claim about addiction.

    I'm well aware of the research regarding cannabis, and in another post to that poster, I referred to the bias within the research community regarding cannabis over the decades... a bias that has been influenced by political considerations, since many of the research organisations were financed by the US government, the tobacco companies, etc. You could do your own searching to verify what I've said, but i doubt that you will. All the same, there's a variety of decent documentaries out there which describe the influence the US government, and other governments have had on the research done, and the desire to condition society against cannabis.

    you will see earlier studies 90's and earlier will refer to marijuana addiction, where, as the the perception of legalising weed changed in the 00's, studies tend to refer more to "dependency"..... why? because it's bad publicity to legalise something that is potentially addictive and detrimental to some people...

    The switch between addictive and dependency came about due to the rise of psychology in the US, where the traditional view of addiction referring to the physical, and dependency referring to the mind. Hence a dependency on cannabis, because it was difficult to prove the addiction part. There were too many research papers which sought to prove the theory of addiction to cannabis on a physical level, but failed. So, they switched to dependency, because it's easier to make claims about psychology, and get the research to back it up. The criteria for psychological research tends to be easier to pass/prove (since a lot of it is peer reviewed), than something that is physical.

    now, you can go down the rabbit hole and throw spears trying to pick this apart in what you find in your favour.... but at the end of the day, there is a known link between weed with high THC content and addictiveness...

    I don't need to pick your post apart since you didn't seek to prove anything. You posted a variety of opinions. And you're the one throwing spears... not me.



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    is there a TL:DR version of this?

    I'm guessing the majority of it is you trying to make out you're right in every single way possible, while posturing that you don't need to support points, but yet write a book about it?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's quite sad that you, (or others) would consider that to be too long. Takes less than a minute to read it, but you consider that to be too much.

    Are you sure that you want to be on CA?



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,053 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    what's all this about



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    It's not really, I spend the majority of my time elsewhere other than boards



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Why start a discussion if you've no interest in engaging in it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    But it does effect others. I've a family member who's a cocaine addict, and has repeatedly gotten paranoid thoughts about me "stealing things" from him. He'd no idea what was missing etc, didn't stop him attacking me with a knife though. Drug induced psychosis effects everyone around the junkie.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    because I like brevity....I guarantee you most of the fluff post could be condensed



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Clarity beats brevity though. You're three posts deep now on a completely irrelevant tangent. Would have been quicker to read and respond or just not respond at all (which is also a valid option).



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭xckjoo




  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    it'd be spot on if the grammar wasn't terrible... obviously you have the time for a verbose circle jerk, good for you... trying to use it against someone else is a bit pathetic though.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Tis a quiet day at work so I'm fine for time thanks for your concern. I'm a good at time management.

    Obviously you don't have much for doing either when you respond to every single one. Feel free to not respond. It'll save you far more time than trying to be brief. I'd say most of us are fine without seeing more of your opinions on things.



  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    Your family member's cocaine use is not the same as mine or the majority of its users. I have never threatened anyone with a knife whether I had taken coke or not. The "J" word you used is not nice, addict is the preferred word. I'm neither, I'm an occasional recreational user.



  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    Als,o he may have had other issues in his life that caused this aggression.



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    your point can be directed quite easily back at you ... I didn't have any concern about your day also



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Yup. I'm aware of that but you seem unable to grasp the irony that you're complaining about another poster using too many words to make a point while you 1) have no point to make yourself, 2) have filled half the thread making no point and 3) try to pass it off as you being above it all but really just don't seem to have anything to add.

    To get back on topic, I think how we deal with drug use and abuse is an important one and one that's currently ruining a lot of people's lives without helping many. It's also a complex one. Hopefully the people with the power and ability to improve things are able to comprehend things that are more than 3 sentences long



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    He started off with a line or two back at a session. “It’ll never happen to me” is something I’ve seen over and over again. You’re deluded if you think you’ve some super anti-addictive personality. It all starts off quite sedately, and then your a junkie without even realising it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    I'm in my mid fifties and in 2021 I've taken it 3 times 'cos I got it for free and in previous years about the same. I know several users and they take it at weekends or special events, not one takes it 24/7. It's not addictive for the vast majority of its users.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    Keep telling yourself that. You probably just like the smell of it, eh?



  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    Why would I lie about it, my posts won't make me rich. Have you ever taken it yourself?



  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You're mid fifties??

    think that coke is doing more harm then you think



  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    The only drug I had a problem with is alcohol. It wouldn't bother me if I never saw coke again but I still don't believe it should be illegal. Have you ever taken cocaine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,093 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    My own 2 cents:

    It's all about the person. If the person is a dick on coke, they're most likely a dick in general anyway. From my circles of friends, out of about 20 people who I know take coke, only 1 is a cnut on it. The rest are the same as they always are, up for a laugh/the craic but never harming/interfering with others. Most the time. Same as drink, most people are grand on it, but it only takes that 1 extra to turn someone into a cnut. The problem with coke, is people think they're Tony Montana and shoveling it up their snots. A small bump every hour or so just to keep a little buzz and keep you awake. That's how most people I know take it. Same as anything, too much and it changes you. I will admit though, that it does seem to attract the dick types in general, usually the same ones who identify as a "mad bastard".

    Re: Cannabis, while not completely safe, it's by far the safest "drug" out there. Yes, it doesn't suit everyone, just like literally everything else in life. But for the vast majority of users, it's a harmless (if legal, you could grow your own or it would be regulated). I'm full time smoking for about 5 years now, completely replaced that poison alcohol, and suits my lifestyle perfectly. I don't smoke if I have to drive, nor before work. Albeit, I'm pretty sure I'd be better at both if I did (would reduce my road rage and allow me to work without getting annoyed at work). I'm harming no one directly (no idea where it's coming from, due to the lack of regulation), and it's a product that's being legalised the world over, so it's definitely not going to go away. Legalise growing your own, 4 plants max, and it will remove a lot of the criminal element imo. Shur there's boxes out there for a few grand, you just pop in the soil and seed, close the door and open it a few months later to a fully grown plant. No effort required. You would make your money back in no time, depending on your usage. Still not legal to buy in a shop, but no need to if you have it at home, safely grown without contaminants.

    Also, for what it's worth, in my 9 years as a Garda, the vast majority I've arrested have had drink taken. I actually can't recall if I've ever arrested someone because they did something because they were stoned/needed money for weed. I reckon I can honestly say I never have. Because stoners don't usually cause trouble. I'd love to get the stats where cannabis was detected but see what else it was detected with.



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    it's nothing about too many words... it's being verbose for the sake of it... quantity over quality... as I said, fluff



  • Posts: 1,263 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]



    These are the exceptions, not the rule. What about all the coke-addled entertainers, sorry 'artists' that have 'careers' that go precisely nowhere? Taking coke is about all they have in common with the Stones etc.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Tomaldo


    Do you mean Kate Moss who was photographed having a snort, Nigella Lawson who admitted taking it, so did Robbie Williams and Rod Stewart. Noel and Liam Gallagher wrote and sang about coke. Traces of cocaine were discovered in a pipe found in William Shakespeare's home. Oh yeah totally coke-addled people, I SARCASTICALLY agree.



Advertisement