Drug law reform - Page 7

jamiefrost · 30-09-2013, 12:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

because it is cheaper to buy it off a bootlegger

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

You guys really do not have a clue. Marty you and osem obviously have no knowledge on this subject yet you sprout your opinions and honestly you are talking crap

Why would el gov based weed be more expensive? when weed was reclassified prices sky rocketed as I said in my out line if el gov do 2 grams for a tenner the end user will snap their hands off. Why would there be need for duty? its a government run business so all the profit goes into the pot anyway ( see what I did there lol)

You also seemed blissfully unaware that I said breed in more sativa and less indica therefore controlling the psychotic effects

But no you pair would rather do nothing as usual and leave the billions of pounds going into the pockets of criminals

Not sure where you stand on this now, is it going to be more expensive or not, thought you said the underground bootleggers would all disappear?

Are know saying that easy access would increase the number of users or not?

J

**Maggy** · 30-09-2013, 13:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

because it is cheaper to buy it off a bootlegger

And as dangerous as buying illegal drugs because you cannot be sure what the heck has been mixed into the brew.How many times has antifreeze found it's way into booze?
Anything cheap is likely to be a knock off with all the attendant ills so I've no sympathy for anyone being so stupid.

---------- Post added at 14:02 ---------- Previous post was at 14:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiefrost

Not sure where you stand on this now, is it going to be more expensive or not, thought you said the underground bootleggers would all disappear?

Are know saying that easy access would increase the number of users or not?

J

Well that's down to those crooks who bootleg anything and everything like illegal iPhone chargers.Anyone who is willing to put their live in their hands is an idiot.

jamiefrost · 30-09-2013, 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

And as dangerous as buying illegal drugs because you cannot be sure what the heck has been mixed into the brew.How many times has antifreeze found it's way into booze?
Anything cheap is likely to be a knock off with all the attendant ills so I've no sympathy for anyone being so stupid.

---------- Post added at 14:02 ---------- Previous post was at 14:00 ----------

Well that's down to those crooks who bootleg anything and everything like illegal iPhone chargers.Anyone who is willing to put their live in their hands is an idiot.

Agreed I just don't think it's going to be any different than it currently is for tobacco etc. Some people will always go for the cheaper option.

Short term I think problems will increase as the number of users and the number of addicts will increase. Using the increase in revenue to fund education and treatment etc. will take time, as has the education on smoking and drinking.

I don't think that the current situation is sustainable, I'm just not sure of the solution.

I think there are two ways to go either increase of punishments to become a true deterrent or relaxing of laws, either one requires education

If laws were relaxed I think a massive increase in punishment of people abusing these laws are required. For example currently I think that causing a death whilst under the influence, driving or not has some form of pre-meditation and should have a greater punishment than normal not less.

You made the decision to take what ever drug (and I include Alcohol in this) so it's your responsibility for your actions.

As for increasing punishments, the result of driving whilst under the influence is a life time ban for the first offence, would it make people think twice? Or knowingly getting into a car with a drunk driver making you equally responsible.

People would think twice.

J

Russ · 30-09-2013, 13:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

The hole in your reasoning is so massive I could drive a truck through it.

And yours is so circular I could draw a coin with it. Why are you right? because you're right. Why are the rest of us wrong? because we're wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

So what you're saying is in Russ' world GBH committed by someone under the influence of drink is a mitigating factor but under the influence of coke should lead to harsher sentences.
Doe 't really gel,does it?

Yes, it does. You commit an offence under the influence of a dangerous substance that had previously been illegal for 100 or so years then you accept the consequences of it. Can't do the time? Simple, don't do the crime.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

By the way,illegal drugs are mostly not associated with violence,bar cocaine.Ask any cop to how many fight calls he's been and the ratio of alcohol v other drugs,I think you'll be surprised.

I wouldn't. You're the one who mentioned violence, not me.

---------- Post added at 14:31 ---------- Previous post was at 14:29 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

You banned me once for calling you arrogant Russ remember oh and you have called me a drug addict

More than just a slight distortion of the truth however as you're aware discussing team actions in public is against the T&Cs.

TheDaddy · 30-09-2013, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

The hole in your reasoning is so massive I could drive a truck through it.

Complete and utter rubbish.heroin prescription program's are a great success wherever they are implemented. Not only do most addicts greatly reduce their by-consumption but the crime figures go down massively.The Swiss run actual Heroin clinics,so successful has it been,and the people actually voted to keep the program running in a referendum. In Fact,every German police chief supports theses program's in all the major cities there and it sure isn't because crime is up.

Really?So people won't be able to buy their legal drugs beforehand? .

it wasn't a great success when it was trialled here and I worked in drug rehabilitation at the time so I don't need Facts from Germany or Switzerland, I saw it with my own eyes.

Yes I suppose they could but them before hand, if the late night chemist is on the way to the club and a conscious decision is made to get something before they get there, otherwise the crooks will still have their market.

Will21st · 30-09-2013, 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiefrost

Way to avoid the question (nicely made up number by the way it's actually 95.32% ). It was stated that the legalization would not have any impact when it plainly would.

Your the one stating that making some thing legal means everyone will start. I never said that

J

Right,so your first point in the quote I posted wasn't that more people wouldn't use? Which is exactly the point that you're making here? Which is the point that I'm making.
Most people wouldn't use even if it was legal... and if it's legal the drugs are far less dangerous than they are now.
Will there be an increase in use? Maybe,maybe not.A lot of people would come out of the closet,that's for sure.

By the way,addiction rates over the years tend to be constant...

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

it wasn't a great success when it was trialled here and I worked in drug rehabilitation at the time so I don't need Facts from Germany or Switzerland, I saw it with my own eyes.

Please link me to this failed trial.There have been numerous others in the UK that were successful so I'd like to know why this one failed.Thank you.

Yes I suppose they could but them before hand, if the late night chemist is on the way to the club and a conscious decision is made to get something before they get there, otherwise the crooks will still have their market.[/QUOTE]

Right,so they couldn't buy the day before or during the day.Interesting. And of course you'll buy the tainted stuff from the crook rather than sorting yourself out in advance....

30-09-2013, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Prohibition causes crime.... Fact!

What you have forgotten is that regardless of the legality of drugs ,users will still have to buy them and if they commit crimes to get the money to buy them now they will have to do the same if they are legalised ,you may also find that IF ,and it's a big IF ,the drugs are cheaper when legalised then users will most likely just use more .

TheDaddy · 30-09-2013, 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Right,so your first point in the quote I posted wasn't that more people wouldn't use? Which is exactly the point that you're making here? Which is the point that I'm making.
Most people wouldn't use even if it was legal... and if it's legal the drugs are far less dangerous than they are now.
Will there be an increase in use? Maybe,maybe not.A lot of people would come out of the closet,that's for sure.

By the way,addiction rates over the years tend to be constant...

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

Please link me to this failed trial.There have been numerous others in the UK that were successful so I'd like to know why this one failed.Thank you.

Yes I suppose they could but them before hand, if the late night chemist is on the way to the club and a conscious decision is made to get something before they get there, otherwise the crooks will still have their market.

Right,so they couldn't buy the day before or during the day.Interesting. And of course you'll buy the tainted stuff from the crook rather than sorting yourself out in advance....[/QUOTE]

I told you why it failed and that's the reason why it wasn't reported.

Your assuming recreational drug use is planned and not impulsive, some may well "sort themselves out" the day before a substantial number wouldn't.

Will21st · 30-09-2013, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

And yours is so circular I could draw a coin with it. Why are you right? because you're right. Why are the rest of us wrong? because we're wrong.

Oh Dear,hit a nerve,have I? Anyway,let me know when you have a good,logical reason for making alcohol a mitigating factor and other drugs an aggravating one.The fact you're condoning drunken crime doesn't seem to enter your mind?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Yes, it does. You commit an offence under the influence of a dangerous substance that had previously been illegal for 100 or so years then you accept the consequences of it. Can't do the time? Simple, don't do the crime.

I wouldn't. You're the one who mentioned violence, not me.

Well,whatever offence.By the way you are of the opinion that alcohol fuelled offences are ok.What a message to send to the kids,eh?

---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:33 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I told you why it failed and that's the reason why it wasn't reported.

Your assuming recreational drug use is planned and not impulsive, some may well "sort themselves out" the day before a substantial number wouldn't.

Our Press that will jump on a sensationalist drug story whenever it can will not report when a Diamorphine prescription trial fails? I find that very hard to believe Daddy.
I've just had a look and it seems there was no program in Scotland....however the SNP and Scottish Labour seem to favour trials due to,wait for it,positive trials in GERMANY!!

What do you know,those pesky Germans.

Anyway,please tell me where and when this supposed Scottish trial took place,cause making stuff up just makes your argument kind of weak.

Nidge41 · 30-09-2013, 15:51

Like I said before it got removed, Boots sell Over the Counter Meds which are legal highs.

Tut tut the message board police are out in force this afternoon.

30-09-2013, 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiefrost

Not sure where you stand on this now, is it going to be more expensive or not, thought you said the underground bootleggers would all disappear?

Are know saying that easy access would increase the number of users or not?

J

bootleggers import tobacco and booze and sell it cheaper due to less duty yes understand?

If weed was produced by el gov it can be cheaper than what you buy from dealers you can see the difference between the 2 yes?

Nidge41 · 30-09-2013, 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

bootleggers import tobacco and booze and sell it cheaper due to less duty yes understand?

If weed was produced by el gov it can be cheaper than what you buy from dealers you can see the difference between the 2 yes?

I buy my fags from a guy who goes abroad, I loath giving this government a penny.

30-09-2013, 15:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

bootleggers import tobacco and booze and sell it cheaper due to less duty yes understand?

If weed was produced by el gov it can be cheaper than what you buy from dealers you can see the difference between the 2 yes?

explain why you think it would be cheaper if the gov produced it (and i want to see your working out )

Will21st · 30-09-2013, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nidge41

I buy my fags from a guy who goes abroad, I loath giving this government a penny.

Yes,the difference is that even though you don't pay tax you know the fags are still under government quality control.
With drugs,when legal,even though it would be cheaper from the dodgy bloke you couldn't be sure what lab they came from....

**Hugh** · 30-09-2013, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nidge41

Like I said before it got removed, Boots sell Over the Counter Meds which are legal highs.

Tut tut the message board police are out in force this afternoon.

do you mean this post which is still there?

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...l#post35626827