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

Guest Anonymous

you say this

And you say you have kids....what if they had got hold of them?


then you get upset when I say this

unlike some I keep any and all medication where they can not be gotten at by my kid or any other muppet that may want them for nefareous reasons, can you say the same?

in reply to this

these kids are stealing them from parents and handing them out . Parents need to be a lot more careful where meds are stored , ultimatley someones going to wind up dead.


so what were/are you accussing me of peat


I hope you have very sound evidence, making false accusations is the act of desperation within a debate


I cant see anywhere that I was accussing you of anything other than being foolish in your opinion


oh bob are you saying your kids are drug abusing muppets or there mates are. you really need better control of who comes into your home.

i would suggest that you avoid those that want to buy drugs from you. if the local druggies know you have drugs they may break in.


not at all paulb I would hope my kid has enough sense to keep clear of opiates in all their forms but when it comes to drugs of the potency of dihydracodine you can never be too careful, or are you sugesting that the parents of these kids mentioned by xoni are fully aware that there little darlings are helping themselves to the drugs cabinet.

when i state i am being responsible you slate me


you do have some strange friends/neighbours bob.

grew up with one of them as was said a old school friend are you sugesting I abandon all contact with folks I went to school with just in case in the intervening years they have done something I may disagree with, I have said on here before that I was shocked and saddened when I discovered what folks I grew up with are up to now. as for neighbours cant chose them unfortunately.


You do say you are away from home allot, bit unfair to publish them sorta details on an open forum.

Ive been slated on here for being anonymous yet here you are claiming every junky will be making a beeline for my house because they will want drugs that I have allready stated went on the fire and you have critisized me for putting on the fire.

consistancy is not your strong point peat along with quite a few other failings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

bob even if they were my best mate at school if they were into drugs and wanted you to sell them controlled drugs then yes i would drop them. its good that your getting rid of out of date drugs. but the best choice is to return them to the chemist. they will destroy them safely. never heard of pain killers causing fish to get stone(not unless its a really big pill)

i have had them and stronger and i don't see the attraction as an addictive substance all it did was bung me up. even morphine only made me slightly unsteady but the pain free period was nice. hope your backs better.

i think we have got off track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bob I would guess that some folk on here know who you are.

Some may guess who you are by your attitude.


You need to stop making accusation or insinuations about folk.


Hmm," my kid or any other muppet " tis what you said bob.


Just not a good idea really to say when you are away for long periods, with the way you post here. Just some friendly advice, one human to another..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dont think we should be looking to legalise any drugs.

The only way to solve these problems is with Discipline, strict regime obedience to all orders, respect for authority


By authority; I take it you mean whatever passes as a governing body at the time and not any intellectual authority.


in 1937 Harry J. Anslinger, ran a campaign against marijuana the media was swarmed with propaganda regarding the effects of marijuana.

A dominant leader in the prohibition against drugs, he devised advertisements and commercials to inform the public of the believed side effects of marijuana. Citizens who were high on marijuana were crazy, insane, suicidal, had murderous intentions, etc. according to the propaganda.

Disregarding the scientific research on the subject and the falsified claims, the Marijuana Tax Act passed in 1937 quickly and with little debate and no opposition in Congress.


at no point did i say that Prohibition was the answer , this is drugs we are talking about not booze


ArabiaTerra covered the confusion with the terminology; this piece may help clear up the confusion in the rest of that sentence:


An important part of what is generally called the drugs problem is the set of attitudes that society maintains towards drugs and drug taking. Much of the damage that is associated with drug taking is a result of mistaken laws and policies, and of a hypocritical and self deluding attitudes. We live in a society which tries to reconcile its disapproval of the use of drugs for non-medical purposes with the fact that vast amounts of psychoactive drugs are consumed in this way. The term 'drug taker' is used as a condemnation, as a way of identifying someone who is involved in a strange and deviant form of behaviour. There is a continuing reluctance to face up to the fact that drugs and drug takers are a part of our everyday life. Many people find it to threatening to acknowledge this, including a sizeable number of scientists, doctors and other 'experts'. Society is not made up of drug takers and non-users.

We all take drugs in one way or another. The essence of the drugs taking problem seems to be that other people sometimes take different drugs for different reasons.

When people are faced with inconsistencies of this sort, they frequently use psychological defence mechanisms in an attempt to reconcile the conflict. One of the most common of these defence mechanisms is called 'denial'. In order to resolve their conflict they deny that their own use of alcohol, tobacco or whatever, has anything in common with the illicit drugs that are used by the people they like to think are 'drug takers'. The general reluctance to recognise that their tea, coffee, alcohol and tobacco really are drugs is a reflection of a widespread, completely irrational fear of drugs. Of course this not to deny that many people are badly damaged by the way they use drugs. But the generalised fear of drugs is misplaced. There are sensible as well as stupid ways to use drugs. It is a reasonable expectation that no drug should be considered completely safe; and even the least dangerous of drugs can be used in a way that is likely to be damaging to the person who is taking it. But since there is no chance that man will stop using drugs, it is imperative that we try to understand what sort of process drug taking really is. We can only do this if we re-examine some of the basic misunderstandings that surround the whole issue. At the very centre of the muddled thinking is the refusal to acknowledge that we are all drug takers.


If it's the idea that the law is always right; then try these insiders:


Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP)


The mission of LEAP is to reduce the multitude of harms resulting from fighting the War on Drugs and to lessen the rates of death, disease, crime, and addiction by ultimately ending drug prohibition.


LEAP has two primary goals:


To educate the public, the media and policymakers about the failure of current drug policy by presenting a true picture of the history, causes and effects of drug use and the elevated crime rates more properly related to drug prohibition than to drug pharmacology.

To restore the public's respect for law enforcement, which has been greatly diminished by its involvement in imposing drug prohibition.


LEAP's main strategy for accomplishing these goals is to create a constantly growing speakers bureau staffed with knowledgeable and articulate former drug-warriors who describe the impact of current drug policies on police/community relations, the safety of law enforcement officers and suspects, police corruption and misconduct, and the excessive financial and human costs associated with current drug polices.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm from California, and i support the legalization of marijuana.


As for other substances- heroin, opiates, meth, cocaine, DMT, etc. I'm not sure on that. There are several pros and even more cons.


I think we should consider heroin and/or cocaine as the next drug to re-legalize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Many folk are frightened of change or a new approach. Some will let personal experiences jade their rational and seek only revenge. Some are simply not educated, even to secondary school levels about society.

These two countries show forward thinking. Their treatment of folk, their folk far surpasses any thing we do and that shows.

If you address the problem, rather than trying to bludgeon folk in to complying. The problem is far bigger than one person, and it it the fact it is against the law that has brought us to this level.

There are far worse evils in this world, yet we spend allot of our time and cash on it.

And it will get worse, as we know, deprivation and poverty bring it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

smack is ilegal in holland so your rational to legalise it here dose not stand up.

And I hope you will be telling your hoped for voters in your forthcoming grasp for political power your views on drugs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smack is ilegal in holland so your rational to legalise it here dose not stand up.


It's not sold over the sweetie counter but given freely to those who really need it.


It seems to be that just the very idea of free smack being used as a solution to a smack problem, that sticks in the craw of so many and leads them to assume, anyone supporting it must be; (as has been posted on Shetlink)..."desperate to fill society wi degenerates to the point of collapse"


It may be an understandable knee jerk reaction to the idea at first glance but once it is spelt out with the reasons why, I fail to see how anyone can make a rational case against it.

It is not a magic bullet solution to stopping people taking drugs because there is no such thing but the massive harm reduction it would bring is surely clear to be seen.


And then there's the evidence...


Free heroin brings everyone a bit of peace


Government-supplied free heroine for heroine addicts. It sounds crazy, but a decade after just such a project began in Utrecht, it seems like it actually works.


Both addicts and their carers speak very positively of the once-controversial project. The ‘patients’ no longer need to steal to buy their daily shots and some have even got themselves jobs. The nuisance caused by addicts in Utrecht – and now in many other major cities as well – has all but disappeared and there are few new addicts appearing on the scene. Society is no longer paying for their petty theft and illness.


The success of free supply has also got through to politicians in The Hague. Heroin became an official medicine in 2006. Last year, MPs passed legislation designating supply of the drug under medical supervision as a recognised treatment of ‘therapy resistant’ addicts.


None of the addicts in the Utrecht programme have been in trouble with the law since starting the treatment. The mere fact that they know they will get their heroin every day means they are calm. They don’t need to steal any more. They can even think about what they want to do with what’s left of their lives. They used to spend the whole day just worrying about scoring.




I've never been anywhere near Utrecht so that may well be "fictitious nonsense gleaned off the internet" as is usually put up as a counter argument about this point but if you care to check through the many reports about the introduction of this policy; you may well find yourself also coming to the conclusion that the system works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smack is ilegal in holland so your rational to legalise it here dose not stand up.

And I hope you will be telling your hoped for voters in your forthcoming grasp for political power your views on drugs


It is in Portugal too, so, slowly the EU may move towards a common policy,

the second point, I will, that it needs to be addressed in a manner that will work, and we now have 2 examples. If you take away the drug dealers ans treat folk for it, you will help remove the risk. Why would folk rob other folk if they can get free treatment, not be constantly seen as an outcast and can plan their lives to work with society again.

But really, it has nothing to do with you. You are not in any of the boroughs or wards.


And on your last comment, I am trying to do something, apart from posting anonymously on a forum. There are local councilor places available, perhaps you could actually make a difference.


He he grasp for political power, you are funny. Now you think I am unelectable. Read what Koy writes here, and do some researd on all sides, not just picking scenarios that only suit your way of thinking.

I have made my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Having spent a lot of time in Holland both for work and recreation I would say the drop in crime is down to the tougher line the dutch police have taken towards those committing them in the last decade. they have come down a lot harder on the street dealers deporting those not from Holland and jailing those that are, it is now a pleasure to walk down the street in any dutch town or city of an evening, something that could not be said ten years ago, unless you were out your face on the excellent quality pot readily available.

The price of pot in the coffee shops of Amsterdam has exceeded the price of pot in Shetland. Even away from the tourist areas pot is expensive.


So in the situation that we legalize drugs the pot smokers will be penalized so the smack heads can get free smack, I've no idea who you are koy but i'm sure this is a situation that would piss us both off equally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are needle exchanges and dispensaries dotted around Amsterdam, Haig and Rotterdam. You are correct in that the Police take a tougher line, that is part of the policy of having a culture open to sorting this out. Hiding such places away will not work.


I think though that it is funny you cannot smoke tobacco in a cafe in Holland.


I don't think we are saying you are completely wrong, there has to be a strong reaction from the Police, but you have to have that with the carrot. It has stared already, there are clinics now that were not there before.


If it was controlled and distributed through an authority, there would be no need to buy it, no robberies for your daily dose and so on. Then you can really see how big the problem is or how small.


You would also reduce the amount of women forced into the sex trade, and kids. You would reduce the Hepatitis, HIV and septicemia associated to drug taking of that nature.


It is a case of co-joined thinking.

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...