Drugs in Shetland

[Para Handy]

Of coarse the name and address has been withheld I just could not take it seriously. when I put letter in the Shetland News or in the Times I give my name and address in full and make it clear that my name is published next to it and if? I ever win the lotto the Dogs against Drugs will get money so that they can have a dog at every port or airstrip on a permanent.. basis and lets hope that they give the fools a good bite in the backside while there at it

[Pooks]

In that case are we not supposed to take your posts seriously?

 

Whoever wrote the letter made some good points and brought the discussion to the fore again. If they had put their name and address then I would imagine they would have had difficulties with the police, their neighbours, their workplace etc etc.

 

At least they took the time to express their views. They shouldn't be penalised for not providing their name if they do not wish to do so.

[Ghostrider]

Of coarse the name and address has been withheld I just could not take it seriously.

 

The Police (who by default are acting for the government, who in turn are allegedly supposed to be acting on behalf of the general public) openly encourage anonymous contributions in their pursuit of maintaining the status quo, why should those in favour of change not be allowed the same tactics?

[ArabiaTerra]

Of coarse the name and address has been withheld I just could not take it seriously.

 

The Police (who by default are acting for the government, who in turn are allegedly supposed to be acting on behalf of the general public) openly encourage anonymous contributions in their pursuit of maintaining the status quo, why should those in favour of change not be allowed the same tactics?

An excellent point, which I totally support.

 

And surely it must be obvious to even the blind that prohibition_does_not_work, If it did, drug use would have fallen since it was introduced. It has not, not by any standard of measurement you can dream up. Prohibition has completely and totally failed across the world and across the board in it's stated aim and people are dying in ever increasing numbers. Is it not far beyond the time that something else was tried?

 

(And I haven't even mentioned the harm being done to society by the huge multi-billion pound criminal organisation that has been spawned worldwide precisely because of drugs prohibition.)

[Para Handy]

In that case are we not supposed to take your posts seriously?

 

Whoever wrote the letter made some good points and brought the discussion to the fore again. If they had put their name and address then I would imagine they would have had difficulties with the police, their neighbours, their workplace etc etc.

 

At least they took the time to express their views. They shouldn't be penalised for not providing their name if they do not wish to do so.

 

As far as I can see The Police by default are acting for them selves first, all organizations look after No one then any one else after that. and any thing I have posted on Shetlink I would have no problem saying the same thing at a any public meeting. A letter to the Shetland News should be no different than having a letter printed in the Shetland Times. if Shetlink wants to go public and use the real IDs of every one I would be quite happy to have my name and address instead of user names in print I have nothing to hide I have always assumed that the Moderators can see who I am and where I live. And any one who knows me will no that I have had the same opinion about drugs since I was at the AHS that includes drink and the fags as well. Unless my GP has prescribed something for me it does not get used and the rest of my family are just the same

[ArabiaTerra]

A letter to the Shetland News should be no different than having a letter printed in the Shetland Times.

Actually, as long as a name and address is supplied, the Shetland Times will publish a letter even if the writer asks for their name to be withheld. This is standard practice in most, if not all, newspapers.

[Ghostrider]

Unless my GP has prescribed something for me it does not get used and the rest of my family are just the same

 

Oh Boy! if you think that what you get that way is one iota safer than your average tenner bags being punted on the street every day, you have a lot to learn.

[trout]

Name and address supplied

 

There's a big difference between supplied and withheld. The writer had supplied the name but either asked for it to be withheld or the Shetland News decided in their best interests not to publish it.

 

The point is they did give their name to the Shetland News!

 

There is a larger propensity of hard drug use, namely herion, in Shetland in recent years. Where young people could eaasily get hold of dope in yesteryear - it does appear to be they are more likely to go for herion today.

 

Does this correlate with the introduction of Dogs Against Drugs? Some people believe so?! The market has definitively changed - DAD will be one of many factors whether positively or negatively.

 

Things do change - the positives of why DAD was introduced will also have an equal reaction against. That is the law of nature!

[paulb]

The results of drug use and abuse wether legal or not are very slow to show. its now known that one of the main reasons of heart problems in younger people is the use of cocaine(not counting people born with the illness). the health stats on long term users of heroin is terrible even if the survive overdoses and infections the drug itself will kill them in 20 to 30 years. Stimulants have there own health issues the same with heavy use of Cannabis .

switching to drink and smoking

smoking is so leathal forgeting about cancers of the whole body not just the lungs it is responsable for most of the long term killer diseases from strokes to loss of legs even to types of demetia its always there in the background destroying the body.

 

heavy drinking which of course there are big problems with up here is bad news to not only addiction but deaths from loads of cancers and liver dseases.

 

drugs from the doctor my mum in law was addicted to a drug her doctor gave her for over twenty years.

 

im sorry but the people who are in favour of legalising drugs are just wrong. not only do they kill you and destroy your family they can be responsable for more than half of the property crimes commited.

 

we were at the northmavine Up Hellya and the amount of drinking was a joke. infact i took my kids home because i was not happy with there safty. its odd that everybody seemed to be drinking but there was nobody walking. i wonder what the police are doing on up hellya nights. is there some law in shetland that allows drink driving. and i seem to remember that lerwick has a no drinking rule in public so why then is it ok on the big events. lets lose the drink from the big shetland does and it should attract more people.

 

its very basic realy we need to have strong controls over all drugs. so yes lets have the dogs at the port and airport and lets inforce all the laws connected to the supply of drugs and to put them away for life if they are caught supplying. now i believe that is it iceland there are only a few place that drink can be bought. what a good idea.

[Ghostrider]

its very basic realy we need to have strong controls over all drugs.

 

Exactly! and the current legal position on any and all drugs, both the so called legal and illegal ones, is no control at all.

 

Anyone of any age can obtain alcohol, tobacco etc despite so called regulations, anyone of any age can obtain any of the so called illegal drugs despite prohibition, allegedly "competent" Doctors can prescribe you substances in quantities and/or for durations that cause harm and death, with the nonchalance of someone offering you a sweetie, and rely on their colleagues and the system around them to close ranks and let them get away with it scot free......this would be strong controls, how??

 

The young, quite rightly need to be protected from substances that can be harmful, but adults have the right to use and abuse their own bodies in any way they see fit, providing it does not directly negatively impact upon anyone else. Adults also have the rights to make an informed choice on the likely pros and cons of any substance they choose to ingest, and to be aware within reasonable parameters of the quality of the substance they are about to utilise, and of any contamination in it.

 

The current system is not, and never has succeeded in any of those aims, and never will.

[Muppet]

 

 

im sorry but the people who are in favour of legalising drugs are just wrong. not only do they kill you and destroy your family they can be responsable for more than half of the property crimes commited.

 

 

This is exactly the attitude I can't understand. They are already killing people and destroying families, and the very fact they are illegal is why they are responsible for more than half the property crimes commited. I dont see how legalising drugs can make this any worse than it already is.

[Fjool]

im sorry but the people who are in favour of legalising drugs are just wrong.

Sweeping statements such as this disregard vast elements of the debate and only serve to highlight your lack of understanding. This is not a a black-and-white issue where the status-quo lies on one side, with complete deregulation on the other. It is a spectrum which begins with 'prohibit everything' (stricter than where we are today) moving towards 'compulsory drug taking for everyone' (plainly ridiculous).

 

Obviously neither of these extremes are sensible, so the answer lies somewhere in between. Revisionists seek a logical approach to finding this middle-ground. Such a policy should be based on fact rather than emotion; information rather than rhetoric; harm reduction rather than exacerbation; education rather than dictation.

 

The present system is clealy failing, and doing so spectacularly. The one thing that one does not do with a failure is attempt exactly the same thing, but harder.

[Njugle]

Well, i usually stay out of this thread but...

 

we were at the northmavine Up Hellya and the amount of drinking was a joke. infact i took my kids home because i was not happy with there safty. its odd that everybody seemed to be drinking but there was nobody walking. i wonder what the police are doing on up hellya nights. is there some law in shetland that allows drink driving. and i seem to remember that lerwick has a no drinking rule in public so why then is it ok on the big events. lets lose the drink from the big shetland does and it should attract more people.

 

While i don't condone excessive drinking, i strongly resent the fact that you assume that all the drivers there were breaking the law. I have attended many of these "big does" as you call them, or events, over many years by car and have never driven under the influence and know many people of like mind. Never!

 

I might just as easily see you walking through a field and assume you are a sheep thief.

[paulb]

i m saying that there was way to much drinking going on not implying that every person was. it would have been intresting though to see just how many people were over the limit.

[paulb]

the substances that you suggest are made legal so the sensible drug user can take are toxic and kill. so proposing that they become legal is like suggesting that we allow the sale of arsnic after all it our right to do what we want. but of course when your taxes rise to pay for the care of all the legal adicts that this policy would create , i imagine you may raise a few complaints. or should we leave the users in the street and not care for them after all its there choice.

 

ive lived were drugs are a major problem. and if i thought for a moment that that was coming up here at the same levels. i would be out of here fast. maybe there is a recovered addict out there who may like to comment on the joys of addiction.

 

please having a debate in theory is one thing in practice what you are saying is dangerous using drugs to hide from life is not going to work. it will destroy society.