Recreational drug users are responsible for organised crime gangs


This is an interesting point. I remember in my college days there was always this huge ordeal associated with someone trying to get their hands on spamspamspam/hash, with a whole runaround of 'the guy said he'd have it thursday', 'now he is sayin friday', 'darn - didnt get it in time for the weekend', 'ive to meet him at a different place, different day', etc... it seems to me had government brand spamspamspam been available back then we would have have legged it round to the local 'spamspamspam off licence' and bought it when we wanted it and not risked these furtive meetings with dodgy people in dodgy areas - never knowing if you were going to be robbed or not.

So in that for instance - government spamspamspam would have won out.
 
shnaek said:
You and I can make that choice, as we are doing here by debating the issue. There are those who are addicted to drugs who are unable to make that choice, and making them criminals isn't a help.
Click to expand...
Tough. Excuse me if I don't have much sympathy for drug addicts.
 
- Why do you think people take drugs in the first place? - Do you think people want to end up as junkies?

No.

One of the main reasons people indulge in recreational drug taking, why they take health risks, and risks with the law (for 'illegal' drugs), is because it's fun! I don't want to read about how much fun someone else has had, I want to experience it myself.

A subtle point you seem to have missed.
 
shnaek said:
You and I can make that choice, as we are doing here by debating the issue. There are those who are addicted to drugs who are unable to make that choice, and making them criminals isn't a help.
Click to expand...
They make that choice every day. Unfortunately they have fallen into the trap of making the same bad choice every day. It shouldn't mitigate their responsibility but it should inform society's response. Legitimising their behaviour supports it and diminishes their responsibility. The truly difficult road is not making it easier for them to obtain their poison by legitimising their abuse of medicine but to help them in facing up to their own choices, their own responsibilities, their own issues. That is the long hard road. Legalisation is a cop-out.
 

leghorn, I am perfectly aware that the "reason" (an interesting application of the word in this context) people take drugs is to experience a high. This goes back to my premise that the driving force is selfish and illusory. It also is in line with my point that people a woeful risk assessors. They take the risk with the drugs because they have an inflated view of their own self-control and are selfish enough to consider only their own ephemeral pleasure.

The justification of their own pleasure is the worst reason for them to engage in an activity that is illegal, potentially harmful to themselves, potentially harmful to their family, definitely harmful to their society, definitely harmful to the environment and ultimately futile and without benefit.
 
There will never be Government spamspamspam.

What there might be at some point is Government allow you to grow a couple of plants for your own use without criminalising you & therefore doing away with your need to give business to a drug dealer. Or possibly Amsterdam -style regulated Coffeeshops. Although I suspect that either option is very unlikely to happen, at least anytime soon.

With regard to the case for lobbying to have laws changed rather than ignoring them - it just doesn't happen really, does it?
Were there protest marches to shout for the right to carry on using your mobile phone while driving? No, and when was the last time you made a car journey without seeing someone using one? People do ignore laws that don't suit them, to some degree.

Taking the smokers out of the equation would radically reduce the number of people supporting organised crime, would probably please a sizeable part of our young population & release resources to fight bigger dangers to society.
Can't see it happening though.
 
Jock04 said:
There will never be Government spamspamspam.
Click to expand...
Maybe not Government spamspamspam (there is no government tobacco either) but what may happen in the future is that a pharmaceutical company may isolate the chemicals from spamspamspam that are beneficial to individuals suffering from glaucoma or provide relief to individuals suffering from multiple sclerosis (i.e. genuine medical need) and those drugs may become licenced and available on prescription.
 
Indeed - it won't happen, no matter how much lobbying, because we aren't really an independent nation. Our laws reflect our interaction with other nations, particularly Britain and the US, but also our relations with the EU. Legalising certain currently illegal drugs would not endear us to the US multinationals who prop up our economy. Legalising viagra on the other hand...
 
leghorn, I am perfectly aware that the "reason" (an interesting application of the word in this context) people take drugs is to experience a high. This goes back to my premise that the driving force is selfish and illusory.
Click to expand...
Of course the driving force is selfish! So what?
What do you mean by 'illusory'?

It also is in line with my point that people a woeful risk assessors.
Click to expand...
I'm the living proof that this is incorrect.
I've taken many risks and illegal recreational drug use certainly paid off, for me.
They take the risk with the drugs because they have an inflated view of their own self-control and are selfish enough to consider only their own ephemeral pleasure.
Click to expand...
Some people are so selfish, they would like to deny others the right to live their lives the way they want to. Yes, risks, warts and all.

- Harmful to society because of government policy.
- Illegal because of government policy.
- It didn't harm my family.

- Certainly not futile.
- Cartainly had a benefit. I enjoyed myself.
 


........is a different kind of propping up!
 

Yep, and I'll be delighted for those individuals.

In the scheme of things though, the amount of TCH-related products which are bought by these groups is negligible.
 
leghorn said:
Of course the driving force is selfish! So what?
What do you mean by 'illusory'?
Click to expand...
So what? The consideration of self-pleasure as the only motive is of least benefit to society as a whole (i.e. none). The consideration of self-pleasure over the obvious reasons against abusing drugs betrays a character at odds with the society you wish to belong to and engage in. Your behaviour adds a little bit to the misery of people around the world not just in this society and nothing positive. So what? Ask me that when you are on the receiving end of that misery.

By illusory I mean that it gives the appearance of existence without the substance. The mechanism by which most drugs deliver their high is to hijack and interfere with bio-chemical pathways used to reward beneficial behaviour. They provide the "high" without ever providing the benefit for which that pathway evolved.

Not quite, you are living proof that risk is not definite outcome. You can take a risk and it may work out or it may not. The fact that it did work out for you in those circumstances does not make the risk any less, it just makes you lucky. It is fallacious and foolish to assume that the outcome you experience is the outcome that everyone else enjoys. You aren't living proof of the efficacy or safety of drugs, just as the unfortunate person who does not have your luck/genes/background is not the living proof of the detrimental effects of drugs. You are part of a dangerous, uncontrolled, social experiment. A Russian Roulette type of scenario. Just because you pull the trigger and survive does not guarantee survival.
What is selfish about wishing the best for all members of society? Wishing the healthcare wasn't tied up with fools and their self-indulgent, self-induced problems? Wishing available police resources weren't tied up chasing the nasty bogeymen with drugs? Wishing the social service wasn't overstretched with families that cannot function because of the selfish and foolish behaviour of members?
It is selfish and unwise from a position of safety and security to deem that a little bit of foolish behaviour on your part is more valuable than the good of society as a whole. We all compromise, some of us prefer our compromises to be globally beneficial rather than selfishly indulgent.

leghorn said:
- Harmful to society because of government policy.
- Illegal because of government policy.
- It didn't harm my family.

- Certainly not futile.
- Cartainly had a benefit. I enjoyed myself.
Click to expand...
- No harmful to society because the of the potential and actual damage to the individual, the family, the village, the town, the community (all of which was evident prior to the introduction of control of the substance).
- As I already pointed out the correct term is controlled. Diamorphine (heroin) is used for example as a painkiller for the terminally ill.
- Lucky you, hope other families are as lucky ... oh wait, not all of them are.
- How is it not futile? In other words what was the point?
- Lucky you - you enjoyed yourself, without thought, care or consideration you acted for your pleasure and your pleasure alone. It isn't a benefit. It is the illusion of a benefit that you enjoyed.
 
Jock04 said:
Yep, and I'll be delighted for those individuals.

In the scheme of things though, the amount of TCH-related products which are bought by these groups is negligible.
Click to expand...

As is the amount of palliative opiates. The justification for their usage is based on need not want.
 
- Harmful to society because of government policy.
- Illegal because of government policy.
- It didn't harm my family.

- Certainly not futile.
- Cartainly had a benefit. I enjoyed myself.
Click to expand...
I have to say leghorn you sound pretty sad in fairness - Mr.Bears friend is like you and as I said earlier if he was a guy in his early 20's he'd be concidered "cool" - by some people standards. But now nearing his 40's he is pretty pathetic - even his gf has tired of him as what was once occasional is now more and more part of his life, and has ruined theirs.
The use/abuse of a substance is not really the point of the OP - but yes illegal drugs and the increase in use has both increased the power of gangs and the ferocity of them. You may think I am making this up but we (Mr. Bear and I)were witness to a cocaine related shooting some years ago... The shooter who was eventually caught had been involved in 16 shootings that year, the police told us...

Harmful to society because of government policy.
Click to expand...
So please don't try and tell me that the increase in drug usage is unharmful to society..
 
so-crates said:
What is selfish about wishing the best for all members of society?
Click to expand...
Many people can make this arguement, but what makes them the best judge of what is best for all members of society? Who is qualified to make that decision?

so-crates said:
Wishing the healthcare wasn't tied up with fools and their self-indulgent, self-induced problems?
Click to expand...
There are far far more people in there because of alcohol and cigarettes than there are because of illegal drugs.[/QUOTE]

so-crates said:
Wishing available police resources weren't tied up chasing the nasty bogeymen with drugs?
Click to expand...
Legalise like Holland/Switzerland etc and police resources will no longer be tied up.

Only in a 1984 like society can we legislate on every single personal choice and the world will be all the greyer because of it.
 
Well lucky you shneak - you may have been/are a recreational use and sing of the joy of choice - you obviously haven't seen the other end - the shootings...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register