vortexring

The sensible reasons for legalising currently illegal drugs has nothing to do with 'appeasing the want or need'. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Everyone of them! Prohibition doesn't and will not work. Bill mentioned the ridiculous alcohol prohibition reducing numbers of alcohol drinkers - yet this misses far more pertinent points. Heroin prohibition started in the UK around the late sixties, it's believed there was around 500 users. It's now believed there's 500000 users. . . 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Of course you're not - what gave me that impression I wonder? 'Just'!? Who said she wasn't? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I get to pick who they are. Me! Me! Me! Pick M.............................. fuck. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

It's more because of it being illegal mate. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I disagree. The percentage of users overdosing will decrease. Wrong. My perception of heroin users is generally one of irresponsibility and stupidity. My point isn't about unscrupulous dealers. It's about the blackmarket in general making the drug far more dangerous than what the drug is itself. Did you know nicotine is more addictive? MUST? Not always. There are more than enough users who've been smoking it for decades, who didn't have to increase their dosage. A minority? Yes, but still a valid point, as this is an aspect most aren't aware of. Like many other aspects regarding illegal drugs. Remember my point about knowledge through honest education being the greatest deterrent? Thank goodness that isn't my primary argument then, eh? 'the only danger of heroin is that its illegality makes it hard to safely determine dosage' Hilarious Bill. Isn't it just! So tell me, other than addiction and overdoses, what else is dangerous about heroin? Once you start answering this question properly, you'll be getting back to my original points. Oh by the way: "Heroin is very addictive but does not in itself cause any serious illnesses, nor does it harm any organs or tissues." Dr Ben Goldacre Dr Ben Goldacre, 'Methadone and Heroin: An Exercise in Medical Scepticism' "When heroin-dependent persons have been provided with daily maintenance doses under medical supervision, marked physiological deterioration or significant psychological impairment has not been observed. In fact, most of the serious adverse consequences of chronic heroin use are generally related to lifestayle and factors involving needle administration." Cox et al, Toronto Addiction Research Foundation "The available evidence indicates that heroin, when provided in pure form, is a relatively safe drug. Hence it is primarily the illegal nature of the drug, rather than its pharmacological properties, which leads to the health and social problems associated with its use." Ostini, Bammer, Dance and Goodwin. 'The Ethics of Experimental Heroin Maintenance.' Journal of Medical Ethics, 1993. "There is thus general agreement throughout the medical and psychiatric literature that the overall effects of opium, morphine, and heroin on the addict's mind and body under conditions of low price and ready availability are on the whole amazingly bland." Edward M. Brecher, 1972 It equally speaks little of your counter-argument by using the alcohol prohibition. You're disregarding that the two aren't quite related as you assume. You also forget my main point, which is the problems which arise through the illegality. Which leads us nicely to your alcohol-prohibition: "I am against Prohibition because it has set the cause of temperence back twenty years; because it has substituted an ineffective campaign of force for an effective campaign of education; because it has replaced comparatively uninjurious light wines and beers with the worst kind of hard liquor and bad liquor; because it has increased drinking not only among men but has extended drinking to women and even children. -- William Randolph Hearst, initially a supporter of Prohibition, explaining his change of mind in 1929. From "Drink: A Social History of America" by Andrew Barr (1999), p. 239. "The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this." Albert Einstein "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Sure, once the drugs are no longer illegal, the blackmarket as we know it dies; your problem is solved.

No. Your missing an important point. Making it legal will allow users to know exactly what purity they're taking. This will therefore reduce overdoses. Most overdoses are caused by taking heroin of a purity far higher than what they're used to, never mind the issues arising from the drug being cut/mixed with other substances. A minority, which I agreed with earlier. Perhaps I should have made clearer I refer to the majority of people. And sure, some people won't take them only because they may well be tested for illegal substances in their work (which I think is a great idea), but if people want to do it, they most often will. The greater deterrent is knowledge through honest education. I think of such people as law abiding citizens. Which is good in my book. Why on earth would I regard them as idiots? I believe making drugs illegal increase their use, as explained to you earlier. Forget your alcohol prohibition. As well as suitably not mentioning the serious issues which arose from the law, it's a completely different kettle of fish, as explained earlier. Well, thank goodness for that eh? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Oh yeah! Someone as dumb as this chik I should just run up to and cuddle and tell her it's not her fault and tell her she's gonna be ok. AHHHHHHHh NO! She a fucking idiot. You could run up to her with a machete and slice her head in half for all I care; but why are you so angry with her? I must assume you've never done anything that could be construed as stupid - well done you! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

That isn't the argument Bill. Making it legal, will, amongst other things, allow people to know the strength of the drug they're taking, hence less overdoses. You haven't proven anything. You've simply provided a few names. Besides, that prohibition you speak of was nothing more than ultimately stupid. People consumed alcohol legally before it came in. Do people take illegal drugs legally today? It's a different kettle of fish. Listen mate, this is reality: People will take drugs whether they're illegal or not. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I read this article about Ecstasy from the US DEA. It appears as an honest and informative description, unfortunately it's just not quite as informative as it should be: 'Ecstasy has rapidly become a favorite drug among young party goers in the U.S. and Europe, and it is now being used within the mainstream as well. According to the 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, Ecstasy use tripled among Americans between 1998 and 2001. Many people believe, incorrectly, that this synthetic drug is safer than cocaine and heroin. In fact, the drug is addictive (not quite - certainly not in the long term, certainly not physically) and can be deadly.(HOW!?) The drug often results in severe dehydration(How? It just dehydrates you!?) and heat stroke(How?) in the user, since it has the effect of “short-circuiting” the body’s temperature signals to the brain.(No it doesn't quite short circuit anything) Ecstasy can heat your body up to temperatures as high as 117 degrees.(Lies) Ecstasy can cause hypothermia, muscle breakdown, seizures, stroke, kidney and cardiovascular system failure, as well as permanent brain damage during repetitive use, and sometimes death.(How!? Just by eating a pill!? Nonsense.) The psychological effects of Ecstasy include confusion, depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, drug craving, and paranoia.' http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/demand/speakout/03so.htm Now, there are dangers from taking this drug, such as not quite getting the chemical MDMA that you were expecting. Or the strength. People have suffered heat stroke from dancing like dickheads in a hot environment and not taking enough water, as people have died through drinking too much water whilst not dancing like dickheads for that matter. Why doesn't it mention that? Why does it just say it's addictive. Like heroin? Why can it be deadly? How often to people die using it? Going by that description, if I take an ecstasy pill I might suddenly go down with heat stroke or hypothermia, just from simply taking the drug, or from my actions after taking the drug? Can I control how long I dance? In the UK a couple of people died through taking ecstasy; they danced so long and hard, without drinking enough water and died of heat stroke. The official Government advice was to make sure you drink enough water if you're going to take the drug. Some did; and drank too much water, and sadly died. Death through ignorance! What a shame. Or because it's best they don't do drugs, we'll not bother with drug education and advice, because they shouldn't be doing it anyway? It's a misinformed article either through ignorance, (From the DEA?) or through the simple propaganda reasoning that all drugs are evil and dangerous and this war must be waged! Nuts. What would someone curious about experimenting with ecstasy make of such an article? Would it frighten him or her off? It certainly would if that's all they read! But what if such a person was educated around the real issues regarding the drug? What would they make of the article then? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

They're dying of overdoses through stupidity? In a sense yes, using heroin is stupid. You don't know what it's been cut with, or exactly how pure it is. And making the drug illegal is the cause for this. That's also what's stupid. Nope. Alcohol is regulated. It isn't 'cut' with potentially harmful substances. The container has to legally read how strong the drink is. Really? Who are these people? I've never, ever met anyone in my life who didn't do drugs because they were illegal. You're speaking of a minority. I've met many who didn't do drugs because they were educated on the substances and were able to make informed decisions though. Like I said, if somebody wishes to take drugs, they'll take them, whether they're illegal or not. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

It's only unpopular because people so readily believe the propaganda and bullshit they're fed over there. And here! It shouldn't have anything to do with being a liberal though.

You're obviously a man of great compassion eh? If only we could eradicate the stupid people!

Sure, but being serious for a minute; imagine the hundreds of millions of pounds which would be released by stopping this pointless war? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I've known many heroin addicts who've been using for greater than twenty years, who go about their daily business just like anyone else. Who are just like anyone else. Addiction can be problem though; my point is that the blackmarket only serves to exasperate that problem. Have you seen how fucked up alcoholics are!? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Regarding heroin, it isn't from both. It's simply from the blackmarket. Why are people dying from overdoses? Is it through the fact the drugs aren't regulated so you never quite know whether the drug is 20% or 90%? Or you never quite know what it's been cut with? Why less dangerous? Heroin becomes seriously dangerous in the blackmarket, not in the hospitals. It's easier to die from a paracetamol overdose than a heroin overdose. Why less addictive? Would legalisation suddenly have heroin addicts springing up left right and centre? If people want to do heroin, they'll do it whether it's illegal or not. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What hype? And what's bullshit? Some quite assertive replies from someone who doesn't seem to know what he's talking about. How would you know? Odd belief you have there. Did I mention the 'real' or 'heavy' dealers? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

"The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this." Albert Einstein "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Consider new users. The easiest way for them to fund their habit is to sell the drugs and use the profit for themselves. The find new users to sell to. When someone in the class starts using, soon others join in. One user in the streets? Friends and neighbours soon join in. Black market drug use spreads geometrically - pushers push. In the late 60's the 'official' figures of herion users was reckoned to be less than a thousand, yet now, despite the war, it's around 500000. Pyramid selling at it's most effective. Prohibition, similiar to the alcohol ban you mention, is quite simply stupid. The real danger isn't from the drugs, it's from the blackmarket. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What is the point of this war? What does it achieve? What is the point of prohibiting heroin, as an example? Benign in the hands of the doc, yet highly dangerous when cut by unregulated and illegal dealers. And then look at the crime involved around this blackmarket. This is a war being lost. Prohibition spreads drug use. But being tough on drugs win votes doesn't it? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Ref. PM I'll look at what I can see to pass onto yourself; although I'm a bit gutted you're a root-vegatable/rainbow trout boxhead like!

I remember you asking about UK DZ's and weather recently! Easy answer - weather is as poo as NW America - but please let me know when you reckon you'll arrive, I'd be delighted to give you that Auld Scottish pub experience - make it a particular date in the summer and I might even have you up in the whirligig machine! Ya'll love it - be wanting to jump out in no time! Either way, it'll be a laugh! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Hence the reason for being 'dick licks' I suppose. I've always been fond of the idea of at least a genuine SC get together somewhere. It couldn't be a DZ though - it'd have to be a bar. Imagine the conversation fight? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

He's right - at least on a personal level. How it relates to a national economy internationally? Who can tell? Encouraging the banks to lend again? Wasn't that one of the fundamental causes? It isn't as if they'll immediately start lending responsibly; they never did! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'