Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy
The public aren't stupid, I assume you are one of them on this subject. Nice example of his experience there, sitting in offices and giving lectures, wonder if he has ever treated anyone for drug addiction, no thought not, I doubt anyone with first hand experience would agree with him.
|
LOL,David Nutt has treated people with substance abuse problems for years,you joker..
---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy
The classification system isn't designed to tell you how harmful a drug is and the government found plenty of support for their decision to reclassify amongst the public. What makes these people experts, the amount of people they treat for addiction or the ability to read stats and do tests.
|
No? What else is it supposed to do then?The MDA is there to classify drugs by harm and recommend sentences according to harm....
---------- Post added at 09:25 ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Again, you're belittling a very important constituency of opinion here. Whether you denounce them as Puritans or Middle Englanders feeding off hysterical tabloids, they are a sizeable chunk of the population and they are entitled to decide what is and is not allowed to happen in their communities.
We simply do not live as subjects to the kind of all-knowing State that decrees what we are and are not allowed to do based on the opinions of experts, no matter how highly qualified. That is not how the UK operates. The democratic principle that ultimately, it's the people who decide what's acceptable is woven right through our society and the systems that underpin it. It's even evident in the courtroom: a jury has the power to acquit a man no matter how strong the evidence against him. It is not possible to launch a criminal appeal on the basis that 'the jury was wrong'. The jury cannot be wrong. The British people acting democratically cannot be wrong. That's how it works.
Nutt is a member of our democratic society and was IMO entitled to his say before he was sacked. The Government has behaved disgracefully in sacking him and in being scared to admit that there may be more to drugs policy than carefully-conducted scientific studies. But ultimately, the Government rightly has the power to set policy in that way. We will judge them on this and all the other issues at the ballot box.
|
Ok,so in your opinion Homosexuality was also wrong before it was made legal.....?
You also don't like to be called and puritan and yet you wrote that drug use is a 'moral choice....' .How does that go together?
Also,you claim that 'the public' is in favour of this drug policy.... no,it's not!I speak to many people from all walks of life about this and most have had enough of our drug policies.
I don't claim that most people support legalisation,however I DO claim that most people agree that our policy,as it stands now,isn't working.
Let's face it,this whole squabbling between the government and the scientific community is just a place-holder for the real issue here,which is
prohibition.I believe Prof. Nutt knows this too,but he didn't have the courage to say it.