ajt:
switchlogic:
ajt:
How can you discourage the public to use something youve just legalised? If youve made something legal you have sent out the message its acceptable.Smoking?
Smoking was never illegal
No but it’s a perfect example of the state discouraging use of a legal substance. A legal substance that’s more harmful than many illegal drugs
Hi Syramax.Yes i have seen the film but have also done a lot of work to those countries and been a '‘guest’'of Turkey and Iran in the past so know what the conditions are like.Ok it was a long time ago but i still don’t think they have TV’s and 3 squares per day.
Smoking has been reduced to “consenting adults in private” - since it’s now illegal to smoke in most public places.
Legal, but strongly discouraged.
I have mixed feelings about legalising hard drugs. There would be no point to smuggling any more, as the bottom would drop out of the street prices. On the other hand, the obtainability would reel in a whole new generation of users who thought they’d “just try it in passing” in a similar manner to people’s first ■■■■ up of their lives being whilst at University.
Those hard drugs that are highly addictive therefore are the ones that should be kept illegal. The desire to get another hit makes people commit crimes, lose their friends and family, and of course there’s the health degeneration from not eating properly, with the attendent unhealthy weight loss.
The less addictive hard drugs (so-called “recreational drugs”) would merely be brought to the common people, whereas at present they tend only to be indulged in by the high-ups in society. The term “Top Gear” springs to mind here…
Clarkson: Hey, Kate, Could I interest you doing an episode of Top Gear with me?
Moss: No thanks. I don’t do drugs.
switchlogic:
Speedy Duck has made the most sensible and adult comments on this topic. Education is the key, and I’d to add education on the ACTUAL dangers of each drug, not this silly 'ALL DRUGS ARE EVIL/BAD FOR YOU/KILL YOU approach that helps no one. Allow people to make informed choices about what they take. The fact of the matter is many illegal drugs aren’t that dangerous and most are no more dangerous than tabacco or alcohol. I mean despite all the media scare stories surrounding ecstasy its jot actually that dangerous, and I’d rather spend the night with someone who’s popped an E than someone getting ■■■■■■ up. Most of the health dangers in drug arise form the dealers cutting it with other substances so if legaliser this element of danger would go. I think it would be sold in special government shops like alcohol is in Sweden, with knowlegeable staff than can give customers proper advice much like a pharmacist would.Like he said this isn’t left wing or libral bs, its just seeing that the current way doesn’t work and it’s time for a change
It is the only way forward, or as one commentator puts it ‘ONWARDS’
As you were
Knowing what we know now, then, would alcohol and ■■■■ be legalized when they were discovered? Probably not.
switchlogic:
ajt:
switchlogic:
ajt:
How can you discourage the public to use something youve just legalised? If youve made something legal you have sent out the message its acceptable.Smoking?
Smoking was never illegal
No but it’s a perfect example of the state discouraging use of a legal substance. A legal substance that’s more harmful than many illegal drugs
Everyone knows the dangers of smoking but the vast majority just aren’t bothered
Speedy Duck:
“How can you discourage the public to use something youve just legalised? If youve made something legal you have sent out the message its acceptable.”No
You implement a program of education. Starting by saying the legalisation is not to encourage, but to deal with the problem in a better way than leaving it with criminals to supply, and addicts having to pay for it with proceeds of crime.
It is legal to drink and drive. But it is still discouraged. Ask any official body how much they recommend you drink before you drive, they will say nil.
How would addicts or new users wanting to try it be able to obtain it?
ajt:
Speedy Duck:
“How can you discourage the public to use something youve just legalised? If youve made something legal you have sent out the message its acceptable.”No
You implement a program of education. Starting by saying the legalisation is not to encourage, but to deal with the problem in a better way than leaving it with criminals to supply, and addicts having to pay for it with proceeds of crime.
It is legal to drink and drive. But it is still discouraged. Ask any official body how much they recommend you drink before you drive, they will say nil.
How would addicts or new users wanting to try it be able to obtain it?
Production would be strictly governed, dependent on product, around the world, This would be a worldwide policy. Here the existing NHS system could authorise use and distribute it. Doctors prescribing etc. As I mentioned, at the same time as robustly encouraging people not to try.
We could show new users how the lives of users are affected prior to allowing them.
No symperthy…
ajt:
switchlogic:
ajt:
switchlogic:
ajt:
How can you discourage the public to use something youve just legalised? If youve made something legal you have sent out the message its acceptable.Smoking?
Smoking was never illegal
No but it’s a perfect example of the state discouraging use of a legal substance. A legal substance that’s more harmful than many illegal drugs
Everyone knows the dangers of smoking but the vast majority just aren’t bothered
I can’t really work out the point your trying to make. But going back to your earlier point about it being made acceptable if legalised then to be honest why shouldn’t it be seem as acceptable. Its acceptable for people up and down the country to get smashed off their faces every weekend why not partake in recreational drugs. Tell you what most town centres would be a lot more pleasant at night at weekends if more people were high instead of blind drunk.
Speedy Duck:
Production would be strictly governed, dependent on product, around the world, This would be a worldwide policy. Here the existing NHS system could authorise use and distribute it. Doctors prescribing etc. As I mentioned, at the same time as robustly encouraging people not to try.We could show new users how the lives of users are affected prior to allowing them.
Sounds a bit like the current methadone program.
This wouldn’t really hit dealers though as they would still have the recreational users to target plus any users who choose to stray outside the set NHS guidelines.
ajt:
how would addicts or new users wanting to try it be able to obtain it?
My idea is from government run shops like Scandinavia has for alcohol, but with knowlegeable staff like pharmacists to advise and help
You can bet the dozy bleeder thought he was bringing ■■■■ in. He’d have to be clinically brain dead to bring class A’s in for 2 grand.
switchlogic:
I can’t really work out the point your trying to make. But going back to your earlier point about it being made acceptable if legalised then to be honest why shouldn’t it be seem as acceptable. Its acceptable for people up and down the country to get smashed off their faces every weekend why not partake in recreational drugs. Tell you what most town centres would be a lot more pleasant at night at weekends if more people were high instead of blind drunk.
The point i’m trying to make is the Government advise people about the dangers of smoking and nobody listens so why would anyone listen about the dangers of drugs?
I think they should legalise drugs and charge the same rate for them that is being charged now with no quality or strength issues.
That would net the exchequer an absolute fortune in tax, cut crime & could be administered by people who could offer advice if you want to quit.
It serves him right…And anyone else who contemplates doing it. No sympathy whatsoever, enjoy yer’porridge drive! 
Silver_Surfer:
You can bet the dozy bleeder thought he was bringing ■■■■ in. He’d have to be clinically brain dead to bring class A’s in for 2 grand.
I totally agree. What’s your rate?
ajt:
switchlogic:
I can’t really work out the point your trying to make. But going back to your earlier point about it being made acceptable if legalised then to be honest why shouldn’t it be seem as acceptable. Its acceptable for people up and down the country to get smashed off their faces every weekend why not partake in recreational drugs. Tell you what most town centres would be a lot more pleasant at night at weekends if more people were high instead of blind drunk.The point i’m trying to make is the Government advise people about the dangers of smoking and nobody listens so why would anyone listen about the dangers of drugs?
And drugs are illegal and nobody takes any notice of that either. As I say this ‘all drugs are bad’ approach is wrong and doesn’t work.
Just had a quick look through this thread. I have to say switch is very much bang on my point of view. Legalisation coupled with proper education about drugs has to be the way forward. We as a country have lost the war on drugs, and have to find a new approach. Legal highs is the new thing and there is nothing the authorities can do about it, despite them being horrendously dangerous. Legalisation would be a start in undermining and hopefully eradicating dealers, then the authorities can exert some control. And at least they can tax it.
As one person said about trying to strictly control production,this is an impossible dream while there are such vast sums of money to be made.I lived for 2yrs in Afghanistan and saw first hand the problems of trying to control drug export.When a subsistence farmer makes 10times the money for poppy production than they would make for normal farming it’s an economic no brainer.Plus the pressure on the ‘‘small people’’ to produce what the cartels in drug countries want is enormous.
Yes make all drugs legal.When half a generation has overdosed and died,maybe there will be ‘‘self regulation’’ and a better awareness of the problem.