[Closed] So, its looks like world leaders finally have finally seen the light...

it's become clear that drug users do a lot of harm

but you can't really blame the drug surely..?
It's got to be the idiot abusing it that's the problem...

airtragic - Member

I wonder if there is drug problem in North Korea?

Don't know, but there's a huge heroin problem in Iran, so it's a problem for authoritarian societies too,

I am not surprised since they can get them rather easily from their brotherly neighbour the Afgan ... yeah ... "brothers feeding each other drugs" ... Oh no ... it's good drugs because it is produced by the brother.

British drinking culture is the result of the best part of 100 years of uber tight licensing laws.

Is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Street_and_Gin_Lane

If you don't let idiots have guns they can't shoot people with them. If you don't give people anti-depressors or heoin they won't mow down pedestrians while undert the influence.

Legalising recreational drugs doesn't automatically mean you can buy crack in Tesco. You could, for example, make drugs available on prescription.

edukator.. take a chill pill maaaaaaaan..

If you don't let idiots have guns they can't shoot people with them

so what you're saying is that because some folk look at child porn on the internet we should ban computers..?

yunki - Member

edukator.. take a chill pill maaaaaaaan..

Theerrree issss morrree funnnn inn cullll themmm ... to freee uppp llivvviinnngggg sssppaaccee ...

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace

I wonder if there is drug problem in North Korea?

Yes, there is. DPRK is a manufacturer and trafficker of stimulants and there is reported to be widespread abuse.

Even your unworkable hyperbolic solution isn't a solution.

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/03/05/2011030500353.html
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32167.pdf

I don't feel the need for any pills at all, Yunki. What are you on to be ordering me around and slurring like that?

I'm just high on life edukator.. should we ban that too...?

ransos - Member
Legalising recreational drugs doesn't automatically mean you can buy crack in Tesco. You could, for example, make drugs available on prescription.

How dare you say things like that, with your fancy [i]facts [/i]and [i]words[/i].

Legalising recreational drugs doesn't automatically mean you can buy crack in Tesco. You could, for example, make drugs available on prescription.

Yup, there's absolutely zero chance of that happening so I don't know why people seem to be suggesting it. I know I keep harping on about this, but if anyone here has a genuine interest in this issue then research how it works in Portugal.

Or just carry on with ridiculous straw man arguments based on nothing. :shrug:

ransos - Member
You could, for example, make drugs available on prescription.

that's a good idea, and we already do it, we give methadone to heroin addicts.

(but why we don't give them heroin, in a clean, controlled environment, with the support required to help them lower their dose, is beyond me.)

The number of alcohol-related hospital admissions in England has topped one million for the first time, according to official statistics.

Ah, ok. I looked for a little while for reports and could only find Daily Mail articles which ran for a page of scaremongering followed by a sentence at the end going "a spokesman from people who actually know about these things said 'what a load of bollocks,'" so good spot.

Looking at the non-video 'read more' link from that page takes us to the full story [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13559455 ]here[/url]. It includes this graph,

[img] [/img]

Now, the licensing laws were changed in 2005. Can you see the massive spike in that graph? No? Me neither.

Conclusion: the 24-hour drinking laws have made no statistical difference, positively or negatively, on alcohol-related hospital admissions. It's climbing, but it's been climbing for at least years.

Being on the high of life is fine by me, Yunki. Excellent even. If you're feeling so high on life why object to someone stating the obvious on an MTB forum? You're on the attack for reasons known only to yourself and bringing in child porn and computers which is about as red as herrings get. Since when was child porn the primary function of a computer?

Perhaps you should take some of your own advice and chill a little.

If you look at the facts surrounding the Dutch decrimminalisation of cannabis ,it reveals that subsequent to this they have encountered a huge problem with Heroin misuse. Whilst there is no real evidence to link the two ,my experience is that drug takers are thrill seekers looking for the rush and when one drug stops providing that, they move on to some other substance/activity.

When the Americans first entered Afghanistan they destroyed the poppy fields totally decimating the worlds supply of heroin (95% of which originates from there). This lasted for one season when they realised that they had also killed the Afghan economy stone dead. The Americans then turned a blind eye and let them grow the poppy again in order that the country could have some sort of income.
These self same people have told us that they have failed in the war on drugs .If they had maintained their original stance then Heroin would not be the problem it is in our society.No doubt something else would have filled the void but it shows that the war on certain drugs can be won if there is a determination to do so.

If you look at the facts surrounding the Dutch decrimminalisation of cannabis ,it reveals that subsequent to this they have encountered a huge problem with Heroin misuse. [b]Whilst there is no real evidence to link the two[/b] I'm going to spout about my own prejudices as if they are facts/evidence

FTFY.

No doubt something else would have filled the void but it shows that the war on certain drugs can be won if there is a determination to do so.

Really? Are you actually serious?

You guys are missing the point.

If drugs is the problem for the society then cull the drug pushers. The more the merrier so that we have more space to live in. Effective or not at least you have more space to live in. Stop pussy footing ... human rights I hear ... shite. Cull that too.

If you don't let idiots have guns they can't shoot people with them

Whilst factually correct, this sidesteps the point that the problem isn't guns, it's idiots. Make it hard to get guns and you'll still have idiots.

If you could hypothetically remove access to all the knives in the world, you'd see a massive drop in knife crime but a comparable rise in broken bottle and tyre iron crime. Crime, as a whole, would go on regardless.

Legalise or criminalise drugs, it doesn't matter. You want to reduce drug usage, you need to address [i]why [/i]people take drugs.

Grum I said experience not prejudice. Over 20 years of dealing with addicts on a daily basis . What is your experience ?

The information about Afghanistan is fact so yes I am serious.

You do realise that if you extroplate that graph back there were no admissions at all before 1996, Cougar. That graph shows the dramatic increase in recent years after a long period in which admissions were below the 600k mark. A period that ended in about 05.

Grum I said experience not prejudice. Over 20 years of dealing with addicts on a daily basis . What is your experience ?

The information about Afghanistan is fact so yes I am serious.

You work with addicts and you believe we can 'win the war on drugs'? So what, stop the international trade in drugs and end drug addiction/use completely? 😕

If you look at the facts surrounding the Dutch decrimminalisation of cannabis ,it reveals that subsequent to this they have encountered a huge problem with Heroin misuse. Whilst there is no real evidence to link the two

Look, I realise it's "only" wikipedia but I strongly suspect you're talking shite. Can you substantiate even the first part of what you say (seeing as you've based the second part of what you say not on research - and drugs and their users have been researched to death - but on your own anecdotal experiences).

While the legalization of cannabis remains controversial, the introduction of heroin-assisted treatment in 1998 has been lauded for considerably improving the health and social situation of opiate-dependent patients in the Netherlands.[3] In 2010 research shows that the "heroin-junkies" have disappeared from the streets of the Netherlands and the treatment is upgraded from a test-trial to standard treatment for otherwise untreatable addicts. Also, the number of heroin addicts has dropped by more than 30% since 1983.

Over 20 years of dealing with addicts on a daily basis . What is your experience ?

In what capacity? Copper?

It's the primary fuction argument, Cougar. People do lots of things with knives and most don't even consider using them for anything more than eating with. There are hammers, a chain saw oand all sorts of things that could easily be used in weapons in my shed but they aren't going to be used for anything else.

The primary function of a gun is to shoot living things and the priamry function of illegal drugs is to get out of your head which is dangerous to anyone around you on the roads and in many jobs.

[b]Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it is scientific fact."[/b]

The problem is not the addicts nor the drugs but the pushers. Cull them because they have no regards about the side effects on society. They are on the high on £££$$$.

Pushers advertise their products which naturally means some idiots start buying them because they are caught up with all those advertisement of feel good factor as they "cannot" control their urge. The by product of taking those drugs are societal ills which everyone knows.

For the hard of understanding,

I said with determination the war on some drugs could be won however another substance would no doubt come along and fill the void.

Grum what point are you trying to prove.

I said with determination the war on some drugs could be won however another substance would no doubt come along and fill the void.

So the war on drugs couldn't be won then. 😕

Your statement about Afghanistan is full of all sorts of innacuracies and logical jumps also - what makes you think production wouldn't have just increased somewhere else? Was there a massive decline in heroin use in this country when 95% of the world's supply was apparently cut off?

You do realise that if you extroplate that graph back there were no admissions at all before 1996, Cougar. That graph shows the dramatic increase in recent years after a long period in which admissions were below the 600k mark. A period that ended in about 05.

So what's your point? I'm not extrapolating anything, because then we move from "facts" to "guesswork." Show me the figures.

Where's this magical 600k cutoff come from? It's arbitrary and meaningless. You could equally well argue that the graph shows "the dramatic increase in recent years after a long period in which admissions were below the 1000k mark. A period that ended in about 2010" or "... admissions below 400k which ended in 2002."

You can extrapolate what you like but there is nothing in that graph to show that anything different or special happened in 2005 when the licensing reforms took place.

Since when was child porn the primary function of a computer?

by your own logic you now appear to be claiming that the primary function of drugs is for people to drive dangerously while under their influence..!!

I'm gonna step out very quietly and carefully and find something more constructive to do as you are being completely unreasonable and a little hysterical..
my 'attack' was merely an undermining of your flawed argument..

enjoy the rest of your day folks..

Reports that show the war on drugs has failed:
http://idpc.net/publications/failure-regime-selected-publications

Reports that show alternative approaches of decriminalisation and regulation are working:
http://idpc.net/publications/alternative-strategies-selected-publications

General report on drug law reform in practice:
http://www.tni.org/report/legislative-innovation-drug-policy

The Global Comission on Drug Policy that will call on the UN to end the war on drugs
http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Documents.aspx

Drug War by the Numbers
http://www.drugpolicy.org/facts/drug-war-numbers

Final Report of the Latin American Comission on Drugs and Democracy
http://www.drogasedemocracia.org/English/Destaques.asp?IdRegistro=8

General report on drug law reform in practice:
http://www.tni.org/report/legislative-innovation-drug-policy

Given how many people (in this thread and elsewhere) seem to be happy to substitute their own ill-informed prejudices for any kind of evidence-based discussion - it looks like we get the policies/politicians we deserve. 🙁

the priamry function of illegal drugs is to get out of your head which is dangerous to anyone around you on the roads and in many jobs

The primary function of a skipping rope is to use it to jump up and down, skipping which is dangerous to anyone around you on the roads and in many jobs. Of course, if you don't act like a **** and don't try to use a skipping rope when you're driving and not at work, then it's a lot safer.

grum - Member

Given how many people (in this thread and elsewhere) seem to be happy to substitute their own ill-informed prejudices for any kind of evidence-based discussion - it looks like we get the policies/politicians we deserve.

I have no prejudice I just want to free up space on the planet so everyone is treated equally with fairness like equal opportunity.

[img] [/img]

A longer graph for you, Cougar, as requested.

It shows your original assertion that longer drinking hours didn't result in more admissions to be nonsense.

It's the primary fuction argument, Cougar. People do lots of things with knives and most don't even consider using them for anything more than eating with. There are hammers, a chain saw oand all sorts of things that could easily be used in weapons in my shed but they aren't going to be used for anything else.

I don't disagree; however, as a result of knife laws we now have legislation which makes it illegal for me to carry a knife as a general-purpose tool for sharpening pencils, opening boxes and stripping wire, but perfectly legal for me to carry a cricket bat for the express purpose of stoving someone's head in. So, that worked.

The primary function of a gun is to shoot living things and the priamry function of illegal drugs is to get out of your head which is dangerous to anyone around you on the roads and in many jobs.

Well, perhaps, but that doesn't imply intent.

For example; my grandad had a shotgun and I own a recurve bow. I've never shot anything alive and I don't imagine my grandad spent much time down in the hood with his homies popping caps in asses either.

Plenty of people take cannabis for pain control (or at least, claim to). Whether you're then 'dangerous' would depend on the drug and the individual.

And another one:

[img] [/img]

Note the leap the in alcohol poisoning and "disorder" lines in 05.

A longer graph for you, Cougar, as requested.

It shows your original assertion that longer drinking hours didn't result in more admissions to be nonsense.

Er.... doesn't that show that the rate of rise may have increased around 2005, but then plateaued/started to decline?

This is what I meant when I said

i.e. you have to get thick twunts to elect you.

ALL of the evidence strongly indicates that current practice doesn't work. ALL of the evidence indicates that prohibition has the reverse effect to that which is required, yet you'll still get people getting right up on their high chairs trying to defend the indefensible.

heuer27: I live in Ipswich where the prostitutes, (all victims of drugs) were murdered. Nowadays the Police and local authority will claim they have solved the problems that led to that. Have they? Have they bollocks..all they've done is successfully swept it under the carpet. So now instead of having prozzies openly plying their trade in and around Portman Road they advertise "services" in the local paper. So please show me your proof of successfuly winning the war on some drugs, when you do I'll show you a similar bag of hot air.

[url= http://www.ias.org.uk/newsroom/uknews/news010509/news010509.html ]And another graph.[/url]

You mean this graph, which shows the rate of increase slowing around the time of relaxed licensing laws?

[img] [/img]

Posting more graphs and ignoring all the other evidence just makes you look more and more silly.

[url= http://www.larepubliquedespyrenees.fr/2011/06/01/800-kg-de-drogue-saisis-a-urdos,197069.php ]A small local victory[/url]

I used to get called by the local court to translate when Brits got caught running stuff up from Spain. Think of all the poor trnaslators, lawyers, judges, prison guards and construction concerns that will be out of work if they legalise the stuff.

A longer graph for you, Cougar, as requested.

Cool, ta. It's not very clear, but let's go with it for now.

It shows your original assertion that longer drinking hours didn't result in more admissions to be nonsense.

Three things.

1) I've never asserted anything of the sort. What I'm asserting is that nothing anyone has presented on the subject on this thread here, myself included, has shown any correlation other than conjecture.

2) Your graph shows a fairly smooth increase overall, rather than any particularly dramatic changes. It spikes slightly in 2001 (inexplicably) and then again in 2005 (perhaps due to licensing changes, perhaps periodically like it did in 2001) before actually [i]falling [/i]in the period 2006-07-08. Arguably from your graph, we could say that the changes resulted in an initial increase during the change period followed by a steady decrease as the scheme started working.

3) That's a graph for Wales. Is Wales representative of the country as a whole? Or is it merely cherry-picked to try to prove a point? Who knows.

Anyone capable of reading graphs won't think I'm silly, Grum. They will however find Cougar's choice of graph and the interpretation he made of it on the previous page rather strange.