Should drugs be legalised?

[Jessica Rabbit]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 14:32)

QUOTE (Jessica Rabbit @ May 27 2004, 14:11) Well then why are asking for drugs to be 'legalised', you should be asking for drug use to be 'decriminalised', there is a big big difference. I disagree. It's not that big a difference. yes it is - legalisation means that production and supply would be controlled and they would be sold in the shops like alcohol and cigarettes.   Decriminalising personal use means that supply and production are still illegal, but personal use is not. So if you are caught with a few pills on you (or whatever constitutes personal use) you are not committing a crime and do not get arrested.

[russelldust]

QUOTE (Jessica Rabbit @ May 27 2004, 14:59)

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 14:32) QUOTE (Jessica Rabbit @ May 27 2004, 14:11) Well then why are asking for drugs to be 'legalised', you should be asking for drug use to be 'decriminalised', there is a big big difference. I disagree. It's not that big a difference. yes it is - legalisation means that production and supply would be controlled and they would be sold in the shops like alcohol and cigarettes.   Decriminalising personal use means that supply and production are still illegal, but personal use is not. So if you are caught with a few pills on you (or whatever constitutes personal use) you are not committing a crime and do not get arrested. that makes it worse- decriminalising means it is still associated with the violence of drugs gangs and the likes and is still black market (or at least grey). It's a typical sitting on the fence response to my mind.   And it does little about raising taxes or attempting to control supply/quantity of supply.   Your last message was excellent but I haven't got time to respond in full just at the moment as I've lots of things to do before I go out tonight.   I still don't believe that any of these drugs are WORSE than alcohol or nicotine- the things you've listed sound no worse than liver cirrhosis or lung cancer (or beating some guy to a pulp outside a club, or glassing someone- crap examples but you get my point).   We are talking comparative hear and in that sense I don't see where the dispute is- yes drugs are bad, but are they any worse?   At best you have a 'maybe', but it reads more like 'maybe, maybe not' to me.   Hope the studying is going ok by the way. R

[Jessica Rabbit]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 14:34)

QUOTE (Jessica Rabbit @ May 27 2004, 14:11) But think about it, you are putting a foreign substance into your body which messes with the chemicals in your brain, it kind of makes sense that there will be some side-effects. I know for a fact that my mental state is so much better and I generally feel healthier and have more energy when I have been drug-free for a few weeks. Exactly the same could be said of alcohol. Why should alcohol be legal but ecstasy illegal? First of all, if you think you feel the same after a weekend spent drinking as you do after a weekend getting fuct, then you are very lucky. I am guessing you would not think twice about having a couple of drinks on a work night, but you wouldn't do a pill and then go to work the next day (if you do, I don't think I'd employ you ) Alcohol and drugs are not in the same league, sometimes I wonder if the reason clubbers bang on about the side effects of alcohol is so that they can justify their drug use to themselves.....   And anyway, another thing to remember is that alcohol is so deeply entrenched in our culture, throughout history ale was drunk like water (usually because the water system had things dying in it) which is one of the reasons it is legal.

[Lisa]

I disagree with you there JR, I could go out for a few drinks & not even get drunk & fell awful for at least 3 days, whereas a a pill or two, im generally ok, so i guess as, I stated before it is down to the individual in question.

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE

and what is most annoying is that if you stood for parliament on a legalisation of drugs ticket the fact that you may have dabbled in the past would be taken as a huge negative and you would be ripped apart by the press...

^ Yeah that. It's a circular problem: as with many (more important) issues, such as the pensions crisis in our country, and (IMHO) situations like Iraq, it takes radical (and controversial) action to fix the big problems of the world.

 

But the public, and the press, are too small-minded, self-interested, and short-termist to vote for / support a government who does something remotely controversial (in their minds).

 

The pensions crisis is a good example, insofar as the the government can't do the "right thing" due to public pressure. For example, say the best solution (or part of it) is to raise the age of retirement. Well no fucker is going to vote for a government that does that (because we're a nation of selfish bastards -- "I'm not working another 3 years" etc etc).

 

Any form of taxation - again people are totally selfish. Say for the sake of argument, we all need to pay more tax so that hospitals/education/etc can be better. But no fucker will vote for a government that says they will put tax up. Most people want to have their cake and eat it. So we're stuck in this endless cycle where no "radical" government ever gets into power, yet everyone whinges about the state of the country.

 

So back to drugs ... I think the government know that ecstasy shouldn't be class A (or possibly should be legalised) [... and/or alcohol should not be legal]. However keeping it illegal is a nice tidy "one size fits all" approach. Fuck the people who want to use it responsibly. Putting a few responsible citizens in prison is a small price to pay for keeping in the public's good books and in power.

 

It's a triumph of politics over morality.

Edited May 27, 2004 by LiquidEyes

[Ginge]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 14:22)

Are you taking the piss? You have essentially stated that any drug that is "natural" should be exempt from criminalisation. I think that's a load of rubbish. Instead of trying to patronise me, give me *one* reason why "natural" drugs should never be illegal.

I said that drug that is natural and can be taken in its natural form (therefore NOT processed or had chemicals added) should be legal. You may think its rubbish but this is a message board, a place to express opinions. Ive expressed mine. Just coz you dont agree with it doesnt make it wrong.

 

I wasnt trying to patronise you, I just felt that your question was so pathetic that I struggled even to give that one word answer. As Lisa said, different thing affect people in different ways so it would be impossible for 1 thing to affect everybody in the same way IE turn them all into crazed psychotic axe weilding maniacs or whatever it was that you put.

 

I just think its stupid making plants illegal for consumption. Like I said in an earlier post of mine, my dad use to be a herbalist and has used alot of "illegal" plants in some of his remedies therefore I know that in the right doses, these plant that are frowned upon by society have good properties and can be helpful to you.

 

And AM I TAKING THE PISS? there isnt really many occasions when I'm NOT taking the piss.

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Jessica Rabbit @ May 27 2004, 15:06)

I am guessing you would not think twice about having a couple of drinks on a work night, but you wouldn't do a pill and then go to work the next day (if you do, I don't think I'd employ you )

Let's compare like for like: one pill is not really comparable to a "couple of pints". Now, if you had said "5 pints", then I would argue that neither alcohol, nor a pill, are a particularly good idea on a "school night".

 

QUOTE

Alcohol and drugs are not in the same league, sometimes I wonder if the reason clubbers bang on about the side effects of alcohol is so that they can justify their drug use to themselves.....

Agreed. But just as there is such a thing as sensible alcohol use, I think there is also such a thing as sensible ecstasy use. There's no need to lump all clubbers under one bracket ... not all of us go out to get completely twatted!

 

So long as you only do it at the weekend, don't drive under the influence, don't do too much (etc etc) then I really don't see the big deal.

 

Thanks for the comments about coke BTW, interesting reading. I'm talking about ecstasy in particular really, as I think it's "A" classification is a joke. I'm not convinced ALL drugs should be legalised, but I increasingly feel that perhaps ecstasy should be.

[Lisa]

I certainly think it all needs looking into again & studies taken up on certain chems, def LE

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Ginge @ May 27 2004, 15:13)

I said that drug that is natural and can be taken in its natural form (therefore NOT processed or had chemicals added) should be legal. You may think its rubbish but this is a message board, a place to express opinions.

Ginge, I *do* want to hear your opinion!

 

But basically you made a statement, and gave no reason whatsoever to back it up. Then when I asked you why you felt that way, you just said "it's obvious". You still haven't explained why "natural" drugs are okay.

 

It may be your opinion, but why not tell us the reason behind your opinion?

 

I never make a statement that I'm not prepared to back up with reasoning or facts.

[LiquidEyes]

Ginge: "I think all drugs that are yellow with green bits should be legal."

LiquidEyes: "why?"

Ginge: "It's obvious isn't it. I don't see why I should have to explain myself."

[russelldust]

can I just be crap and say I am really enjoying this... it is fascinating.

 

However, I must go do some work so will leave you to it.

 

R

[Ginge]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 15:28)

It may be your opinion, but why not tell us the reason behind your opinion?

Urm...OK...MY REASONS ONCE AGAIN...my Dad, herbalist, illegal drugs in his remedies, they arent bad when used correctly.

 

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 27 2004, 15:29)

Ginge: "I think all drugs that are yellow with green bits should be legal." LiquidEyes: "why?" Ginge: "It's obvious isn't it. I don't see why I should have to explain myself."

Now who's being patronising.

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Ginge @ May 27 2004, 15:39)

Urm...OK...MY REASONS ONCE AGAIN...my Dad, herbalist, illegal drugs in his remedies, they arent bad when used correctly.

That's the "obvious" reason...?

 

So what you're saying is, that because there are SOME natural, illegal drugs that are not bad, therefore ALL natural drugs are not bad. If that's not what you mean, then please clarify.

 

I'm not trying to patronise you - I'm using analogy to make my point. My point being, that to cite a drugs "naturalness" as a justification for its use, is as contrived and arbitrary as citing its colour as justification for its use.

 

I.e. whether it's natural has no bearing on its effect, or degree of harmfulness.

 

Natural things can be seriously harmful.

Un-natural things can be beneficial.

(and vice versa)

[Scream]

QUOTE (Louise @ May 27 2004, 14:16)

QUOTE (Scream @ May 27 2004, 14:12) well what about people that smoke the green to releave pain, still a drug most of use but it used for that to.  So i remain by my original point!  a thank you! (we need a take a bow smiley) it still has side effects though scream & it can still be addictive and so many things lou, i mean if you had to much sugar the side effect is you go hyper. or to much caffine. everything has side effects if given to much to what the body can tolerate!

[Lisa]

well there you go, everything is harmfull if abused or over used, but used correctly & dose correctly in moderation, things can be safe & beneficial bring on the chems!!