People on here who are against drugs...

tueartsboots said:
Didsbury Dave said:
I respect anyone's right to put whatever they want into their bodies as long as it doesn't harm others.

But it is certainly hypocritical of a drinker to criticise a drug user.

And let's not forget that 95% of drug users are recreational, just like 95% of drinkers.
Fair point except alcohol producers aren't armed criminals and they don't mix the alcohol with stricnene(?) rat poison, paracetemol, aspirin etc. All of which can be harmful

TB Your argument could be used as a reason for legalisation? Take the production and distribution from criminals. At the same time make a standard as in alcohol, (pint,40% alcohol by volume etc).

Generally producers don't mix their product with contaminants you want your end user to return for more! It's a fallacy- rat poison etc.
 
Matty said:
twinkletoes said:
La-di-da-di-da. Complete nonense!

Excellent retort. No attempt to argue the logic just a childish comment. You are aware that doesn't negate my point and only marginalises yours yeah?


Such a baseless argument didn't warrant a reply.
 
twinkletoes said:
Matty said:
Excellent retort. No attempt to argue the logic just a childish comment. You are aware that doesn't negate my point and only marginalises yours yeah?


Such a baseless argument didn't warrant a reply.

Yet you gave one anyway.

So what you're saying is that:-

1 - the legality of a drug has absolutely no effect on the number of people who are likely to use said drug?

2 - The number of people using said drug will have absolutely no effect on the number of people requiring medical attention?

I'd suggest that both of those statements are the exact opposite of "baseless" and any argument to the contrary (not that you DID argue, you just made an entirely pointless response) would require serious corroboration.
 
I think there are addictive personalities. Lots of people can either drink or smoke a bit of weed etc recreationally but then there are others who seem to become dependant on their particular drug of choice almost immediately. Gambling again can become a sort of drug for some people.

For me it is the idea of losing control that stopped me using anything - I'd never make an alcoholic 'cos I am a useless drinker - two and I'm falling asleep - and I always think I can be daft enough sober, I don't need to drink to be silly. And if I'm going to have a good night out I want to be able to remember it in the morning.

Unfortunately now I have heart problems I am forced to take prescription pills but it still takes me all my time to take even a paracetemol if I have a headache! I just loathe the idea of putting something into my blood stream that I have no control over.
 
Matty said:
twinkletoes said:
Such a baseless argument didn't warrant a reply.

Yet you gave one anyway.

So what you're saying is that:-

1 - the legality of a drug has absolutely no effect on the number of people who are likely to use said drug?

2 - The number of people using said drug will have absolutely no effect on the number of people requiring medical attention?

I'd suggest that both of those statements are the exact opposite of "baseless" and any argument to the contrary (not that you DID argue, you just made an entirely pointless response) would require serious corroboration.

What you say is totally without foundation.


1. It was found that while 41% of 15-year-olds in the UK had tried cannabis, with 24% using the drug. In Holland 29% had tried the drug, while 15% had used it.

2. More regulation as to what goes into the drugs together with better advice will actually reduce the number of people needing treatment.
 
twinkletoes said:
Matty said:
Yet you gave one anyway.

So what you're saying is that:-

1 - the legality of a drug has absolutely no effect on the number of people who are likely to use said drug?

2 - The number of people using said drug will have absolutely no effect on the number of people requiring medical attention?

I'd suggest that both of those statements are the exact opposite of "baseless" and any argument to the contrary (not that you DID argue, you just made an entirely pointless response) would require serious corroboration.

What you say is totally without foundation.


1. It was found that while 41% of 15-year-olds in the UK had tried cannabis, with 24% using the drug. In Holland 29% had tried the drug, while 15% had used it.

2. More regulation as to what goes into the drugs together with better advice will actually reduce the number of people needing treatment.

1. You're taking drug use and it's legality and assuming those are the only two devisive factors in the argument. I'm sure there are hundreds of differences between the teenage population of the UK and thta of Holland that those figures make no attempt to include in their analysis. Poverty level has an influence in drug use for one. Cannabis is illegal in the UK so I'm sure it's more "cool" for a 15 year old to admit using it here than in Holland, even when you actually haven't. Plus cannabis is ONE drug, that's not all encompassing. Anyone can take statistics and use them to prove they're right, even when they have polar opposite opinions.

2. That's not an answer is it, that's a different issue entirely. You're saying that better research into drugs would lead to less problems. I'm saying that if you've got 1,000 people using drugs and get 10 medical issues then by having 10,000 using you're going to get more than 10 medical issues. Anyway, people, on a fairly regular basis, find themselves needing hospital treatement for addiction to, and side effects from, perscription drugs.
 
Sam Eto's P45 said:
tueartsboots said:
Fair point except alcohol producers aren't armed criminals and they don't mix the alcohol with stricnene(?) rat poison, paracetemol, aspirin etc. All of which can be harmful

TB Your argument could be used as a reason for legalisation? Take the production and distribution from criminals. At the same time make a standard as in alcohol, (pint,40% alcohol by volume etc).

Generally producers don't mix their product with contaminants you want your end user to return for more! It's a fallacy- rat poison etc.
Producers don't cut but the final "dealer" does and can do heavily, I know a friend whose ex dealer would only sell top end stuff to them, if he knew it was heavily cut he wouldn't sell to them (He was a user so knew if the powder was pure or not)
 
tueartsboots said:
Sam Eto's P45 said:
TB Your argument could be used as a reason for legalisation? Take the production and distribution from criminals. At the same time make a standard as in alcohol, (pint,40% alcohol by volume etc).

Generally producers don't mix their product with contaminants you want your end user to return for more! It's a fallacy- rat poison etc.
Producers don't cut but the final "dealer" does and can do heavily, I know a friend whose ex dealer would only sell top end stuff to them, if he knew it was heavily cut he wouldn't sell to them (He was a user so knew if the powder was pure or not)

Plenty of Class A drugs are cut before sale. Its the drugs equivalent of a watered down pint. However this thing about being cut with rat poisin etc is a myth.

Drug dealers want their customers to be happy so they come back again.

It really is not in their interests to kill their customers. Not only do they lose future business but they ar very likely to be locked up for a long time.
 
Didsbury Dave said:
tueartsboots said:
Producers don't cut but the final "dealer" does and can do heavily, I know a friend whose ex dealer would only sell top end stuff to them, if he knew it was heavily cut he wouldn't sell to them (He was a user so knew if the powder was pure or not)

Plenty of Class A drugs are cut before sale. Its the drugs equivalent of a watered down pint. However this thing about being cut with rat poisin etc is a myth.

Drug dealers want their customers to be happy so they come back again.

It really is not in their interests to kill their customers. Not only do they lose future business but they ar very likely to be locked up for a long time.
End dealers don't care about "clients" a quick buck and fuck off
<a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6178026.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6178026.stm</a>
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.