Jump to content

Should drugs be legalised?

Should drugs be legalised?  

193 members have voted

  1. 1. Should drugs be legalised?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Its not a yes/no question
    • Undecided

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

my favourite

1843 Dr. Alexander Wood of Edinburgh discovers a new technique of administering morphine, injection with a syringe. He finds the effects of morphine on his patients instantaneous and three times more potent

so edinburgh really is the home of injecting herion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay try this one.

Alcohol has been used since neolithic times, there is plenty of evidence that the same is true of opiates. How come that in most of the world recreational use of alcohol is considered reasonable and recreational use of opiates not?


In the middle ages in europe alcohol had to be drunk instead of water as it was safer. Opiates were not as available and it was not an everyday part of life.

Opiates were allowed to be used, for example Queen Victoria used them for period pains, its only recently that they have been banned. Their availability was no where like the level of alcohol. Thus trying to ban alchohol which was available to the masses cheaply would have led to civil unrest such as the gin act in the 1700 where it was just made harder to get. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gin. but somthing other such as opiiates, used by a small number would never cause as much of a problem being banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for anyone who's interested there's a history of heroin here

Eh... I think you'd be better served by the likes of: The Pursuit of Oblivion, Davenport-Hines


As to why alcohol is more acceptable, Styles is correct; it is a historical issue as much as anything. Were you aware, for example, that heroin was invented as a non-addictive solution for weaning opium addicts from their 'poison'? Remind you of anything...:?


Also, as DamnSaxon points out, alcohol is not acceptable in many countries.


The USA's Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 was also somewhat racially motivated; users of opium, at the time, were predominantly Chinese immigrants.


One thing which prohibition certainly achieves is that it increases the strength of the banned substance. Take alcohol prohibition as the perfect example. Why go to all the risk and danger of shipping a product which is mostly water (beer) when you can make much more profit on a keg of whiskey instead, for the same risk? In the case of heroin users today, it is just too wasteful to smoke it - hence the increased incidence of intravenous use. Another of prohibition's success stories. :roll:


If caffeine were made illegal, you can bet that production of tea would vanish almost entirely and espresso drinkers would meet in secret to brew the strongest, most potent drinks they could manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seem to remember coffee was made illegal, or at least coffee houses, can't find easy reference.

yes I was aware of heroin's origins that's one of the reason's I put up that brief history.

Also because it lists some of the trafficking our nation and the states have done to fund their activities. Great way of funding a war, even now.

Met a guy formerly from the CIA in a conference, who insists they supplied drugs in black panther areas.


Also has anyone seen the faces of meth campaign? Seen a couple of the photos on the news but not the scariest ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Har! :lol:


Thinking about it though, a license for tobacco is probably a step closer to a license for cannabis overall. It's rather what DamnSaxon was suggesting earlier, and could be applied to various substances.


I've no idea if I like the idea or not yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken plenty of folk smoke dope for 30+ years never did them any harm apart from the legal side of things, cant say the same about smack though.

Know a hell of a lot of folk drunk coffee all their lives apart from a bit of heartburn and stained teeth not much harm done there either, can't say the same about smack though.

Get a lumpsooker grip of yourselves if you believe smack is the way forward you must be pretty lumpsooker backward.

Bloody good news about the smack bust though £50,000+ a that sharn out of the equation some sleazy bar steward is not very happy now.


[mod]Glad to see the 'ol filters in place! SS - try and get a grip. Oohh .. ahm'in I da muckle "lumpsooker" facetious fishy beggar!?!? T&C's an aa dat![/mod]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smoking license?




Interesting idea. Would it work? I'm not sure. It seems a bit half-baked, almost April Fool's-esque in some ways.



I have no problem with this idea and how about one for drink as well how about a sex one as well imaging the police trying to issue an on the spot fine for that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seem to remember coffee was made illegal, or at least coffee houses, can't find easy reference.


I can't find a reference, either, but it must have been when coffee was a new and dangerous excitement - presumably a little before J. S. Bach's time, as he wrote the "Coffee Cantata", a delightful piece in which a father tries to persuade his daughter out of her coffee drinking by promising her a husband. She doesn't mind, as she will only marry a man who will let her continue to indulge her 'habit' ...


The only thing that changes is that nowadays it's all hair-raising synthetic stuff like the awful meth. And yes, remember you heard about drug licencing here on Shetlink first! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seem to remember coffee was made illegal, or at least coffee houses, can't find easy reference.

Found one http://humboldtcoffee.com/History.htm

Throughout history, coffeehouses have been centers of political and philosophical activity. When coffee became an integral part of Islamic culture with Muslim expansion in the 11th and 16th centuries, some pious Muslims began to see secular use of coffee as a dangerous, even blasphemous habit. The development of coffeehouses was decried, for they were seen as hothouses for unsavory political ideas. In 1511, the governor of the City of Mecca banned coffee. But the Sultan of Egypt was a coffee lover and soon overruled the governor.


Wherever it spread, coffee was met with interest and controversy. Caught in the middle of 17th century political battles, the Pope’s blessing silenced coffee critics in Europe’s Catholic countries. The first European coffee house opened in England in 1637. Within 30 years, coffeehouses had replaced taverns as the island’s social, commercial and political melting pots.


At the height of their popularity, more than 2,000 coffeehouses flourished in England. Although women could own these establishments, they could not sit or sip in them. This spurred the 1674 “Women’s Petition Against Coffee†which expressed resentment at the long hours men spent in the coffeehouse. Women found the sympathetic ear of King Charles II, who considered coffeehouses “seminaries for sedition†and issued a proclamation shutting them down. But threats of serious rebellion forced the King to rescind his order two days before it was to take effect.


So maybe I was slightly wrong, I knew it hadn't lasted long, hadn't realised it never came into force.


And before anyone starts the Muslim bashing, it's not the only religion to have frowned on the use of coffee. the Ethiopian Orthodox church has also had bans, quite surprising after having to sit through a coffee ceremony, Ethiopia claims to be the home of coffee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...