Head Shop in Roscommon

Theponylady · 30-05-2010 4:00pm

Chipboard wrote: »

A guy in a high powered car drove up the N4 at 160 mph the other day and he made it to Sligo without crashing so from now on everyone can drive at whatever speed they like ?

This is not the same thing. If speed limits were raised, the law abiding citizens would also be driving much faster, because it was legal. And that much traffic going that fast we do know is going to cause a whole lot of deaths. The majority of law abiding citizens STILL break the speed limit regularly.

As it stands right now, many law abiding citizens use legal drugs bought in headshops, off licenses, hardware stores. And many other otherwise law abiding citizens, including many who are supposed to be upholding our laws(including gardes, judges, solicitors, prison guards), are using illegal drugs such as cannibis, very regularly. You don't notice them, because they don't have the huge effect on the majority of people that many other harder drugs do.

Cannabis is considered to be one of the more "safe" drugs, because a person can grow it at home(quality control), or it can be bought but it's relatively obvious if something else has been mixed into it.

I suppose that opens up the debate that cannabis can be a gateway drug, but from what I've seen, tobacco can be a gateway drug(leading people to be more likely to smoke cannabis), and alcohol is definately a gateway drug(when people get drunk, they are more likely to use OTHER drugs they normally wouldn't touch were they not drinking), yet those are legal.

The worst thing about closing down legal avenues of buying drugs is, that it is going to increase the amount of illegal activity. You don't see head shop owners running around shooting each other in drug wars. They declare their territory by legally buying/renting property, paying taxes, following the law, and selling what people want to buy. You do see the big and small illegal drug dealers establishing their territory, by killing each other and innocent bystanders as well, and selling drugs that often are not what they are made out to be, and are MUCH more dangerous than drugs that have been made legally with some sort of quality control.

PogMoThoin · 30-05-2010 4:05pm

You need to look at Holland, the Dutch are recreational drink and drug users, the people with the problems are the immigrants. They educate their childen in schools of the dangers and effects of drink and drugs. I lived there for 5 months and the only people I saw strung out were the foreignors.

On a side note, another thing we could take from their society, the legal age of sex is 12 and prostitution is legal and taxed, there's virtually no rape and much lower teenage pregnancies, the children are educated better in school, even shown how to put on a condom. We're a long way away from that.

We're a backward nation really, led by backward un-educated politicians

frag420 · 30-05-2010 4:23pm

so now that the protestors have forced have pushed these substances back into the hands of criminals am I right to assume that these same parents, worried adults etc will be marching outside your local dealers house then in order to close down his bussiness. you know the person I am talking about. Lives somewhere dodgy, does not work, pays no tax, prob has a gun maybe...............or were headshops just an easy target for you??

If you protestors really cared about the health implications drugs have on your loved ones then get of your arse and go protest outside the scumbag dealers house............

not so vocal now eh??

frAf

bandit197 · 30-05-2010 4:27pm

PogMoThoin wrote: »

You need to look at Holland, the Dutch are recreational drink and drug users, the people with the problems are the immigrants.

Some good views from the last three posters there. Just to further your points:

"The number of opiate addicts in the Netherlands — between 26,000 and 30,000 — is stable, and low compared to other EU countries (2.6 per 1,000 inhabitants in the Netherlands; 4.3 per 1,000 inhabitants in France; and 6.7 per 1,000 inhabitants in the United Kingdom)."
Source:
Trimbos Institute, "Report to the EMCDDA by the Reitox National Focal Point, The Netherlands Drug Situation 2002" (Lisboa, Portugal: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Nov. 2002), p. 8.

"The ratio of drug-related deaths in The Netherlands is the lowest in Europe."
Source:
Johnston, Philip, The Daily Telegraph, "International Conventions: UK Regime Among the Most Severe in Europe" (London, England: The Daily Telegraph, March 31, 2000.), and van Dijk, Frans, and de Waard, Jaap, "Legal Infrastructure of the Netherlands in an International Perspective: Crime Control" (The Hague, Netherlands: Ministry of Justice Directorate of Strategy Development, June 2000).

"Violent crime rates in The Netherlands are much lower than in the US, as is the rate of transmission of HIV/AIDS through injection drug use."
Source:
van Dijk, Frans, and de Waard, Jaap, "Legal Infrastructure of the Netherlands in an International Perspective: Crime Control" (The Hague, Netherlands: Ministry of Justice Directorate of Strategy Development, June 2000).

There was also a study done recently that showed that the Dutch youth have one of the lowest cannabis usage figures in Europe despite it being widely available. I will find the study and post it here here. Education is the key not prohibition.

Chipboard · 30-05-2010 10:57pm

Sorry, had to skip off for lunch and a nice glass of wine (but no heroin).

Theponylady wrote: »

I have MANY friends who are very respected good people. Doctors, solicitors, etc. And a large number use cannabis regularly.

I don't believe you. What kind of circles do you hang around in that you, who doesn't even drink, are surrounded by all these Hedonists? Suits your argument methinks.

Theponylady wrote: »

I belive the councellor is EXTREMELY representative of society.

Come off the grass. Ming Flanagan.... extremely representative of society.

Theponylady wrote: »

But alcohol, a VERY dangerous drug that kills many people(including those who do not use it but are killed by others who do while they are driving cars, or who do insane things while drunk), and destroys many many lives(I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of severe alcoholics I know personally, who have destroyed their lives and often those of their families thanks to drink), is legal, while cannabis is not. What is the sense in that?

I'll say it again, that while everyone admits that alcohol does damage, you can't use it to justify even more damage.

Theponylady wrote: »

Why is it that alcohol, which is dangerous, very mind altering, dangerous to unborn children if the mother is drinking, dangerous to any person in the vicinity of a drunk person, why is that okay, and many other relatively benign drugs are not? I have met alcoholics who were every bit as much a mess as those on heroin. I know of alcoholics who steal so they can go out on a binge. Where is the difference?

Do you feel in danger when you go into a pub?

Theponylady wrote: »

I have met alcoholics who were every bit as much a mess as those on heroin.

Have you really met someone who is addicted to heroin?

Theponylady wrote: »

I find it terribly hippocritical to say "well, this drug is okay, cause everyone else is doing it, but this one isn't, cause less people are doing it".

I never said alcohol is ok. I said that it was socially acceptable. There's a difference.

Theponylady wrote: »

Either ban everything, or allow everything, and tax the heck out of it and use if for drug/alcohol education and rehab.

Even you don't believe this.

Chipboard · 30-05-2010 11:19pm

Theponylady wrote: »

This is not the same thing.

No, its not the same thing, its a similar thing. I'll say it again - an analogy doesn't have to be identical to be relevant.

Theponylady wrote: »

If speed limits were raised, the law abiding citizens would also be driving much faster, because it was legal. And that much traffic going that fast we do know is going to cause a whole lot of deaths.

Soooo, if we change the laws, everyone will be doing drugs and the world will turn to sh1t. Or, is it, its ok for one person to do it but if everyone does it there will be chaos. My point was that just because there is an exception to a rule, it doesn't mean we should change the rule. What was your point?

Theponylady wrote: »

As it stands right now, many law abiding citizens use legal drugs bought in headshops, off licenses, hardware stores. And many other otherwise law abiding citizens, including many who are supposed to be upholding our laws(including gardes, judges, solicitors, prison guards), are using illegal drugs such as cannibis, very regularly. You don't notice them, because they don't have the huge effect on the majority of people that many other harder drugs do.

The headshops are being dealt with. You can't do much about someone who gets a kick out of sniffing jeyes fluid or sticking nails in himself but then again unless he's a very good marketeer and he manages to convince a lot of people to join him, its not a big problem.

The Gardai, judges etc are subject to the same laws as the rest of us. Just because its not possible to achieve 100% enforcement, doesn't mean you just give up.

Theponylady wrote: »

Cannabis is considered to be one of the more "safe" drugs, because a person can grow it at home(quality control), or it can be bought but it's relatively obvious if something else has been mixed into it.

One of the most socially acceptable of drugs. I personally am not terribly concerned about cannabis. Lets talk about the fun stuff, the stuff that makes you think you should beat an innocent newborn baby to death.

Theponylady wrote: »

The worst thing about closing down legal avenues of buying drugs is......selling drugs that often are not what they are made out to be, and are MUCH more dangerous than drugs that have been made legally with some sort of quality control.

Not so. Many of the drugs sold by headshops are not designed for the purpose they are sold for and it even says so on the packaging. Furthermore they are not tested or certified as being safe.

Chipboard · 30-05-2010 11:28pm

frag420 wrote: »

so now that the protestors have forced have pushed these substances back into the hands of criminals am I right to assume that these same parents, worried adults etc will be marching outside your local dealers house then in order to close down his bussiness. you know the person I am talking about. Lives somewhere dodgy, does not work, pays no tax, prob has a gun maybe...............or were headshops just an easy target for you??

If you protestors really cared about the health implications drugs have on your loved ones then get of your arse and go protest outside the scumbag dealers house............

not so vocal now eh??

frAf

The headshops weren't illegal so people protested against them. Thats how laws are enacted, public opinion (majority, not minorities) make their feelings known, and public representatives change the laws.

When the laws are enacted, it is then a matter for the Gardai. Drug dealing is already illegal and it is not the role of private citizens to enforce the laws.

Having said that, in situations where the law failed to deal with it, there were numerous instances of the public taking the law into their own hands in parts of Dublin in the last 20 years.

PogMoThoin · 31-05-2010 12:13am

Majorities of ignorant un-educated assholes.

I'm not a young teenage drugtaker preeching here, I'll be 35 on my next birthday. I'm married and a family man for years, I've not taken any drugs in a long time, but I have taken them, I do drink alcohol, not every week though. I've got 11 and 12 year old children, I got a daughter going into secondary school next September. I wouldn't dream about telling them not to take drugs, that would be hypocritical, when I know its a given that they're going to encounter them and try them. I'd much prefer to see a controlled situation here, not have them down the alleyway sniffing tipp-ex thinners or lighter gas. I do advise them not to take anything they know nothing about and not to give into peer pressure, education is the key.

Your backward approach changes nothing, prohibition hasn't worked for the last 50 years and all its done is create a big market for criminals. There are thousands of non-criminals out there who recreationally take drugs and don't rob or steal to provide for them. Instead of campaigning to close the headshops we should be regulating them, we should be watching what they sell, to whom and we should make them display ingredients on the packaging. We should also educate our children of the dangers and effects of drink and drugs, but we first need to educate the ignorant majority who are keeping this country from moving forward.

Theponylady · 31-05-2010 10:53am

Chipboard wrote: »

Sorry, had to skip off for lunch and a nice glass of wine (but no heroin).

I don't believe you. What kind of circles do you hang around in that you, who doesn't even drink, are surrounded by all these Hedonists? Suits your argument methinks.

Come off the grass. Ming Flanagan.... extremely representative of society.

I'll say it again, that while everyone admits that alcohol does damage, you can't use it to justify even more damage.

Do you feel in danger when you go into a pub?

Have you really met someone who is addicted to heroin?

I never said alcohol is ok. I said that it was socially acceptable. There's a difference.

Even you don't believe this.

You can choose to live in your fantasy world if you like. My friends are not "hedonists", they are just normal people, people you'd be doing business with every day. You'd never know they were drug users unless they told you. They are normal functiional and often quite successful people. My guess is you are not the type of person people would be comfortable opening up to, or perhaps you have a very small circle of friends.

I grew up in a large metropolitan area, and I've done a bit of travelling and lived in several different countries. I've had the opportunity to meet a lot of different people, and see how things are done in other places. I've seen things that work, and things that don't work.

The United States has spent literally billions on their "war on drugs" campaign. Drugs are much more prevalant now than EVER before in the history of the country. Gangs and criminal activity are prevalant. It hasn't worked.

Amsterdam has instituted a good education system on drugs. You can buy drugs easily, but you can also walk down the street and feel safe.

Do I feel unsafe going into pubs? On occasion, YES. I've been around a few bar fights, those are not something you want to be anywhere near, you can get hurt even if it's got nothing to do with you. I've had drunks who were VERY intimidating come after me. There have been times when I've left because I was scared. Now, MOST of the time, it's not like that. But it's happened more than a few times.

I have not EVER been intimidated by people who were smoking cannabis.

I don't use alcohol to "justify" doing more damage. You did that-you claimed it was socially acceptable and therefore it was okay, drugs weren't socially acceptable, therefore, not okay. I called into question why it was okay if it was "socially acceptable", even though alcohol does as much or more damage as all the other drugs combined. They are all drugs, regardless of whether they are the fashion or not. I will restate my opinion-either drugs should be legal, or they should not. This halfway thing doesn't work.

However, prohibition has never worked either. The only way it seems to work even halfway is if there are extreme punishments for using, long term jail or death. And I don't think that's the route to go either.

Have I met heroin addicts? Yes, sadly. None of them my personal friends, thank goodness. That is an awful drug, and how anyone can be stupid enough to take it is beyond me.

Perhaps with more drug awareness and education programs, we could reduce the numbers of people trying hard drugs like that. And with more rehab programs, we could help the people who made the bad decisions anyway.

But programs like that cost a LOT of money. They have to be paid for somehow. It seems to me making drugs legal, taking away the stigma so people can talk about them openly, give people information, and keep otherwise lawabiding citizens out of jail(where they meet and learn a LOT about those who break the law for a living-not a great place to send already vulnerable people), would be wiser. Taxing the drugs and earmarking that money for those programs would be helpful. It would also remove much of the criminal element.

And right now, many people in society have found that society has lied to them, they didn't drop dead when they smoked pot, so maybe society has lied about the harder drugs, and they try them. We don't talk about drug use openly in Ireland. Kids get most of their information from other kids, not a great place to go for info!

Do I believe we need to either ban everything, or legalize everything? Absolutely! We can't have it both ways. It hasn't worked in any other country in the world, it's not going to work here.

Theponylady · 31-05-2010 11:05am

Thanks for that information. I know when I have been in Amsterdam, it seemed very clean, and there weren't a bunch of druggies hanging on street corners. I had no qualms walking around the city late in the evening. Even the red zone, wasn't intimidating (although, it was a bit shocking to my eyes!) Very unlike most other large cities I have been in.

I found the mix of sex/head shops sitting next to toy stores rather strange, but it was normal there and of course not shocking to them. I think the easy availability of stuff, and the amount of education available to the general population makes the stuff less attractive.

My first time in Amsterdam, I was young and exceedingly naieve, and didn't know about the coffee shops. I was fairly shocked when I went in one, and discovered what was going on! However, I found them to be relatively quiet, with people behaving themselves quite well, just like the smaller rural pubs in Ireland.

I'd been looking for those statistics, but hadn't found them, thanks for posting them here.

bandit197 wrote: »

Some good views from the last three posters there. Just to further your points:

"The number of opiate addicts in the Netherlands — between 26,000 and 30,000 — is stable, and low compared to other EU countries (2.6 per 1,000 inhabitants in the Netherlands; 4.3 per 1,000 inhabitants in France; and 6.7 per 1,000 inhabitants in the United Kingdom)."
Source:
Trimbos Institute, "Report to the EMCDDA by the Reitox National Focal Point, The Netherlands Drug Situation 2002" (Lisboa, Portugal: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Nov. 2002), p. 8.

"The ratio of drug-related deaths in The Netherlands is the lowest in Europe."
Source:
Johnston, Philip, The Daily Telegraph, "International Conventions: UK Regime Among the Most Severe in Europe" (London, England: The Daily Telegraph, March 31, 2000.), and van Dijk, Frans, and de Waard, Jaap, "Legal Infrastructure of the Netherlands in an International Perspective: Crime Control" (The Hague, Netherlands: Ministry of Justice Directorate of Strategy Development, June 2000).

"Violent crime rates in The Netherlands are much lower than in the US, as is the rate of transmission of HIV/AIDS through injection drug use."
Source:
van Dijk, Frans, and de Waard, Jaap, "Legal Infrastructure of the Netherlands in an International Perspective: Crime Control" (The Hague, Netherlands: Ministry of Justice Directorate of Strategy Development, June 2000).

There was also a study done recently that showed that the Dutch youth have one of the lowest cannabis usage figures in Europe despite it being widely available. I will find the study and post it here here. Education is the key not prohibition.

Theponylady · 31-05-2010 11:24am

Chipboard wrote: »

No, its not the same thing, its a similar thing. I'll say it again - an analogy doesn't have to be identical to be relevant.

You are talking apples and apple tarts-they aren't close enough to make the anology useful.

Soooo, if we change the laws, everyone will be doing drugs and the world will turn to sh1t. Or, is it, its ok for one person to do it but if everyone does it there will be chaos. My point was that just because there is an exception to a rule, it doesn't mean we should change the rule. What was your point?

My point being, the roads in Ireland can't support "everyone" driving at high speeds, they aren't built for high speed travel. We know for a fact if it was legal to drive faster, a lot of people, particularly younger inexperienced drivers, would be going a lot faster, and would be killing themselves and others. It's an anology that doesn't work, is not similar to what we are discussing, and has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

The headshops are being dealt with. You can't do much about someone who gets a kick out of sniffing jeyes fluid or sticking nails in himself but then again unless he's a very good marketeer and he manages to convince a lot of people to join him, its not a big problem.

My point being-how is this helping? People walking into those shops and buying stuff are also often buying stuff illegally. I'd rather see them buying stuff legally, paying tax on it, and having them know exactly what they are sniffing etc, then have them buy stuff from some dodgy guy on a street corner who is going to pull a gun and shoot at some other dodgy guy on another street corner-possibly shooting me or you while he's at it. Putting head shops out of business isn't going to stop ANYONE from putting foriegn substances into their bodies, it just changes where they get it and how it's sold.

The Gardai, judges etc are subject to the same laws as the rest of us. Just because its not possible to achieve 100% enforcement, doesn't mean you just give up.

True. However, humans have been self medicating since the beginning of time, and will always continue to do so. I would prefer no one use illegal drugs, or abuse legal drugs. But since I know that's not going to happen, and I know that when drugs are illegal and are driven underground, and I know a very dangerous nasty underground criminal system that kills many many people will grow, I would rather see drug legal. And I'd rather see tax revenue from those drug sales going to a good education/mental health program, so FEWER kids will be inclined to start taking drugs.

One of the most socially acceptable of drugs. I personally am not terribly concerned about cannabis. Lets talk about the fun stuff, the stuff that makes you think you should beat an innocent newborn baby to death.

So, you DO consider cannabis to be socially acceptable? Do you believe it should be legal, as alcohol is?

Not so. Many of the drugs sold by headshops are not designed for the purpose they are sold for and it even says so on the packaging. Furthermore they are not tested or certified as being safe.

No arguement from me there. It says pretty clearly on the majority of packaging "NOT INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION". Seems to me, educating people of the real dangers of doing that stuff would be more helpful than banning people from buying it.

Chipboard · 31-05-2010 10:56pm

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Facepalm

Doesn't work on boards. Make a valid argument or don't.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Majorities of ignorant un-educated assholes

Thats democracy. If you don't like it go elsewhere.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

I wouldn't dream about telling them not to take drugs, that would be hypocritical

In my view, its ok to be hypocritical when you're a parent. You don't want you kids to learn the hard way, especially if you learnt the hard way.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Your backward approach changes nothing, prohibition hasn't worked for the last 50 years and all its done is create a big market for criminals. There are thousands of non-criminals out there who recreationally take drugs and don't rob or steal to provide for them. Instead of campaigning to close the headshops we should be regulating them, we should be watching what they sell, to whom and we should make them display ingredients on the packaging. We should also educate our children of the dangers and effects of drink and drugs, but we first need to educate the ignorant majority who are keeping this country from moving forward.

You want the minority to tell the majority how to live. It doesn't work like that.

Chipboard · 31-05-2010 11:16pm

Theponylady wrote: »

You are talking apples and apple tarts-they aren't close enough to make the anology useful.

The original analogy was perfectly useful, but you have dug a huge hole which you can't get out of and you've starting concentrating on the analogy rather then the issue at hand. You're correct - this isn't about speeding cars, its about people thinking that we should change the law to suit the desires of a minority.

Theponylady wrote: »

My point being, the roads in Ireland can't support "everyone" driving at high speeds, they aren't built for high speed travel. We know for a fact if it was legal to drive faster, a lot of people, particularly younger inexperienced drivers, would be going a lot faster, and would be killing themselves and others. It's an anology that doesn't work, is not similar to what we are discussing, and has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

True. See above.

Theponylady wrote: »

My point being-how is this helping? People walking into those shops and buying stuff are also often buying stuff illegally. I'd rather see them buying stuff legally, paying tax on it, and having them know exactly what they are sniffing etc, then have them buy stuff from some dodgy guy on a street corner who is going to pull a gun and shoot at some other dodgy guy on another street corner-possibly shooting me or you while he's at it. Putting head shops out of business isn't going to stop ANYONE from putting foriegn substances into their bodies, it just changes where they get it and how it's sold.

They don't have to buy off the the dodgy guy. They can have some self respect.

Theponylady wrote: »

True. However, humans have been self medicating since the beginning of time, and will always continue to do so. I would prefer no one use illegal drugs, or abuse legal drugs. But since I know that's not going to happen, and I know that when drugs are illegal and are driven underground, and I know a very dangerous nasty underground criminal system that kills many many people will grow, I would rather see drug legal. And I'd rather see tax revenue from those drug sales going to a good education/mental health program, so FEWER kids will be inclined to start taking drugs.

Prostitution and murder and several other undesirable actions have been around longer than drugs and yes it is illegal to commit murder and this has driven it underground. You have to go to some dodgy guy who lives in a bad area, and probably owns a gun, but thats ok. Thats as it should be. Be assured, the tax wouldn't go to good education or mental health programs, for the same reason that car tax doesn't go to build roads - because the government needs the tax to pay for all the Mercs. Even if it did, I don't see the logic in creating a problem and using the tax revenue to try and solve it.

Theponylady wrote: »

So, you DO consider cannabis to be socially acceptable? Do you believe it should be legal, as alcohol is?

I wouldn't be worried if it was but I have no desire to legalise it. I know what your getting at - if I say its ok you'll use that as the thin end of the wedge to argue that other drugs are too. I recognise that many fully functioning people use it but I don't think it in enhances their lives. Its up to them. I don't care what people do behind closed doors (within reason) as long as it does no harm to innocent people (especially children).

Theponylady wrote: »

No arguement from me there. It says pretty clearly on the majority of packaging "NOT INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION". Seems to me, educating people of the real dangers of doing that stuff would be more helpful than banning people from buying it.

Maybe they shouldn't have abused their position when they had it good.

PogMoThoin · 31-05-2010 11:39pm

Chipboard wrote: »

In my view, its ok to be hypocritical when you're a parent. You don't want you kids to learn the hard way, especially if you learnt the hard way.

Learn what the hard way? Whats there to learn, that taking drugs can be enjoyable? That a man and a woman can go out for a night out taking them to enjoy themselves and be intimate? That its possible for people to gather together under the influence to dance and not fight. That its possible to take drugs and still live a normal life?

Chipboard wrote: »

They don't have to buy off the the dodgy guy. .....................You have to go to some dodgy guy who lives in a bad area, and probably owns a gun, but thats ok.

Thats where You're completely wrong, there are no such thing as drug pushers, there is no shady character, people buy drugs off friends, most often people they've known for years.

You have no idea, honestly.

Chipboard · 01-06-2010 9:05pm

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Learn what the hard way? Whats there to learn

Good for you that knew it all from the age of 2. Are you honestly saying that you haven't learned anything in your time on earth. I think you're twisting the truth to suit you're argument again. I would be first to admit that I didn't always do things the best way, but I learned from my mistakes and I'd hope to pass some of it on to my sons.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Thats where You're completely wrong, there are no such thing as drug pushers, there is no shady character, people buy drugs off friends, most often people they've known for years.

You have no idea, honestly.

and earlier...

Theponylady wrote: »

They don't realize that they just took millions in taxable revenue that the government could have used for drug awareness and rehab programs, and put it in the pockets of drug dealers. They may as well have given the bad guys the green light.

Make up your mind. The drug dealer is your friend or he is a bad guy, or here's a novel idea, maybe your friends are bad guys.

Or do you think that the guys burning down the headshops are doing it so that they will have the honour of supplying the drugs in the town. Their not in it for the money. Don't be so naive.

PogMoThoin · 01-06-2010 10:06pm

Chipboard wrote: »

Good for you that knew it all from the age of 2. Are you honestly saying that you haven't learned anything in your time on earth. I think you're twisting the truth to suit you're argument again. I would be first to admit that I didn't always do things the best way, but I learned from my mistakes and I'd hope to pass some of it on to my sons.

Course, I've learned lots, but the vast majority of drug takers in this country do so and don't mess up their own lives or anyone elses. I grew up in a pub and saw first hand that alcohol causes a much greater threat to society. I was also a smoker and saw how unhealthy that made me. I pass this on to my children.

Chipboard wrote: »

Make up your mind. The drug dealer is your friend or he is a bad guy, or here's a novel idea, maybe your friends are bad guys.

Or do you think that the guys burning down the headshops are doing it so that they will have the honour of supplying the drugs in the town. Their not in it for the money. Don't be so naive.

You just quoted two different people

Criminal gangs control the substances coming into this country, they have no direct dealings with the ordinary drug user who gets them in a "friend of a friend has this deal". You want to close the headshops and give the market back in the control of the criminal gangs or even worse have them down the alleyways sniffing tipp-ex thinners, lighter gas or any other aerosol they can get their hands on easily, this is what my generation were taking 20 yrs ago as there was a shortage of hash. Regulation is what we need, not close them down. Banning substances doesn't make them go away, everything sold in the headshops is available online anyway or there's always something better available from the criminal gangs. It also wont make people stop taking substances, they'll just find something else to take.

The whole world is looking for a new approach, in Liverpool, Manchester and all over the UK, Police completely turn a blind eye to soft drugs, feel they don't cause a problem. Germany has de-criminalised cannabis and has it available in coffee shops like in Holland. Its looking like California are going to legalise cannabis very soon. Even a top UK Health advisor has argued that the risk of taking ecstasy was similar to horse riding. But in Ireland We are stuck in the dark ages

srfc19 · 01-06-2010 10:27pm

Chipboard wrote: »

I wouldn't be worried if it was but I have no desire to legalise it. I know what your getting at - if I say its ok you'll use that as the thin end of the wedge to argue that other drugs are too. I recognise that many fully functioning people use it but I don't think it in enhances their lives. Its up to them. I don't care what people do behind closed doors (within reason) as long as it does no harm to innocent people (especially children).

But you don't think it enhances lives because you haven't seen the effects it can have. I have never seen someone have a few spliffs or take some pills and go out looking for trouble, it just doesn't happen. It can enhance a night in a big way, some people just want to enjoy themselves.
The problem here is that people taking illegal drugs behind closed doors does do damage to innocent people through the actions of drug dealers, if these drug dealers were forced off the streets as they almost were before the closing of the head shops, the damage to innocent people could be severely limited.

Jamiekelly · 04-06-2010 12:03pm

yessam wrote: »

Donna,

I applaude all the work you are doing in roscommon to highlight the dangers of the products being sold in the Head Shops. I also have young children and I do often wonder what will be ahead of then when they are teenagers.

I am not sure that the closing of these Head Shops will do anything to curb the use of drugs in our villages and towns, after all drugs and different substances are around for a long number of years.

Would you consider going down the road of licencing these shops and try and get some control on some of the drugs that are around.

By licencing the shops you could;

1. control who runs or manages the shop
2. have licencing hours
3. have all products to a standard
4. ensure trading is only done in the shop
5. strictly only over 18s or even 21s
6. product liability

Donna, as for delivery service, I heard it mentioned on the Joe Duffy radio programme.

Actually, by these shops doing a delivery service, is,nt that the same as the drug pusher on the corner..

Finally a protester that makes sense! They should be regulated and taxed appropriately. Since the actual ban now, drug dealers have made such a profit its unbelievable! and if it was taxed it could have helped create employment opportunities for your kids in the future! I seen a protester banner on the news a few months back that read "Just because it's legal, doesn't mean its safe!" Well DUH!!!!!

Jamiekelly · 04-06-2010 12:39pm

Sorry for the double posting but I had to tell this guy where hes an idiot lol sorry I couldn't resist. The [] is the comment left by the guy im responding to, who was quoting another poster known as Theponylady

Originally Posted by Theponylady
I have MANY friends who are very respected good people. Doctors, solicitors, etc. And a large number use cannabis regularly.

[I don't believe you. What kind of circles do you hang around in that you, who doesn't even drink, are surrounded by all these Hedonists? Suits your argument methinks.]

I know 2 army soldiers that smoke weed on a regular basis and detox themselves before the planned medical and even get news on surprise medicals months before they happen so they can still keep their jobs. I also know a 48 year old mechanic who smokes weed everyday. Just because you don't deal with these "Hedonists" doesn't mean others don't aswell.

Originally Posted by Theponylady
But alcohol, a VERY dangerous drug that kills many people(including those who do not use it but are killed by others who do while they are driving cars, or who do insane things while drunk), and destroys many many lives(I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of severe alcoholics I know personally, who have destroyed their lives and often those of their families thanks to drink), is legal, while cannabis is not. What is the sense in that?

[I'll say it again, that while everyone admits that alcohol does damage, you can't use it to justify even more damage.]

Of course you can't. Because we DON'T want to do more damage. Most want it regulated. Take out the mephodrone and leave in the lightweight "joints" they sell. That didn't do much damage, only to stupid teens who didn't know how to handle themselves and would have most likely have done something worse if they were off their face on drink.

Originally Posted by Theponylady
Why is it that alcohol, which is dangerous, very mind altering, dangerous to unborn children if the mother is drinking, dangerous to any person in the vicinity of a drunk person, why is that okay, and many other relatively benign drugs are not? I have met alcoholics who were every bit as much a mess as those on heroin. I know of alcoholics who steal so they can go out on a binge. Where is the difference?

[Do you feel in danger when you go into a pub?]

That is the stupidest response I have ever heard (and i spend alot of time on youtube). Just because you don't feel in danger when you go into a pub, does not mean that something dangerous won't happen. Where is the most common place fights and brawls start? Pubs and night clubs. What are involved in the majority of these fights? Alcohol. Face the facts.

Originally Posted by Theponylady
I have met alcoholics who were every bit as much a mess as those on heroin.

[Have you really met someone who is addicted to heroin?]

What ****ing Utopia are you living in? Like I said before. Just because you don't know someone like that, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't either. Take a walk around the Curragh camp in Kildare or Athy. I have seen plenty of Heroin addicts in Dublin before.

Originally Posted by Theponylady
I find it terribly hippocritical to say "well, this drug is okay, cause everyone else is doing it, but this one isn't, cause less people are doing it".

[I never said alcohol is ok. I said that it was socially acceptable. There's a difference.]

So it doesn't matter if its dangerous as long as its "socially acceptable"? I actually lol'd when I read that originally.

Originally Posted by Theponylady
Either ban everything, or allow everything, and tax the heck out of it and use if for drug/alcohol education and rehab.

[Even you don't believe this.]

This is the main problem with "protesters" such as you. You want to tell people what they believe and what they should think. They can believe it if they want. Just because you don't want them to, doesn't mean they can't do it. Start respecting others. It will help you become more "socially acceptable"

Sorry for the length of the post but I had to reply to that poster. Sorry to any mod who sees the huge size of the post. I just hate people that don't want anyone to have their own opinion.

Chipboard · 04-06-2010 9:50pm

I think you might want to consider retracting that comment about me being an idiot.

I'm only going to ask once.

Jamiekelly · 04-06-2010 10:55pm

Chipboard wrote: »

I think you might want to consider retracting that comment about me being an idiot.

I'm only going to ask once.

Is it because you don't want me to express my opinion about you? Oh and don't worry, what I have posted is not against the rules in any way. Since I am not randomly calling you an idiot without backing up my claim it is not known as flaming and is my right to do so. I suppose you probably want to ban me from expressing my opinion since it is clear we are on opposite sides of the debate..

P.S don't take it to heart. This thread is basically a debate now and to be honest I really wanted to get IBTL.

Head Shop in Roscommon

Comments