Time to legalise some drugs?

Dudess

But it's up to them not to be stupid and irresponsible if they decide to use it.

hussey

Have a read of this Book about a satirical approach of legalising drugs.

flanum

too many pages to bothered reading. when the op is talking about drugs... er caffeine/nicotine/alcohol/paracetemol/adrenaline??? be a bit more specific on yer opening post otherwise its not worth reading!

nibble

^^
You can do perfectly legitimate surveys in a tactful way to give just about an result you wish. But yes of course chronic cocaine use is not good for you, its a strong stimulant and powerful local anaesthetic, shooting it is just asking for trouble if it becomes a regular thing. If You think coke is bad just wait until meth penetrates Ireland...

Just to touch on something rubadub said, prohibition is indeed a pretty recent phenomena, the last hundred or so years really. I mean opium and coca goes even further back than alcohol, we're talking predating the invention of the wheel! Was there this kind of uproar then? Did politicians penetrate and legislate every aspect of life? No there wasn't, and did society crumble into chaos? Once again, no.

The drive to get high is as human as sex and always will exist, no matter how much the "Nanny State" tries to curb it.

Sam Vimes

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Rat poison?

Aye, people dropping dead from poisoned cocaine and it being in the papers is a great way to keep your business going. FFS.

i was using hyperbole

Tha Gopher wrote: »

With the Morrocans clamping down heavily on hash and the majority of weed available here being so weak it is not worth buying, the government has no incentive to legalise. The stuff will either be gone within 10-15 years, will be too expensive due to the distace travelled or, in the case of weed, will be of such poor quality nobody will bother buying it.

Cocaine has taken a massive dive in popularity in Dublin compared to its height in 2004 and 2005, it was litreally everywhere. Again, cost and poor quality product meant the trade effectively killed itself.

Some might say they will increase the quality of weed by not mashing so much herbs and sh1te into it.
Cocaine use nosedived. Doesnt mean they cut the amount of mixing of that sh1t did it? Greed always wins out.

you trotted out this argument a few months ago. It was ridiculous then and it's ridiculous now. I went through the whole argument point by point the last time but is cba this time. I'll just say that hash has been smoked since 10,000bc according to wikipedia so if you're suggesting that something is going to fundamentally change in ireland to make it the first country to eliminate hash for 12,000 years you haven't a clue what you're talking about

dublindude wrote: »

No. Having a nation of druggies is not the solution.

The solution is to introduce draconian anti-drugs laws, for example, dealing is an automatic life sentence, etc.

The problem is we are too soft on crime in this country. We should take the scum off the streets permanently. I'd be willing to pay more tax to accomplish that.

as i already mentioned in this thread, there are countries that execute drug dealers and those countries still have drugs problems so your statement is provably wrong

dublindude wrote: »

No one thinks the current system is particularly good, but personally I prefer knowing the average person I meet around me isn't off their heads on something. We already have a ridiculous amount of selfishness/moronic behaviour/scumbags during sobriety.

That assumes there is some correlation between the chances of someone taking a drug and it being legal. Since i could make one phone call and have a mountain of pills in front of me in an hour, i don't believe any such correlation exists

dublindude wrote: »

You think you're being clever, but you're not. Your trick of saying "recreational drugs" when discussing illegal recreational drugs and then claiming you were talking about alcohol is playground stuff.

If you want to talk about alcohol, use the word "alcohol". Don't try to blur things by lumping it into the same group as illegal drugs.

Everyone knows alcohol is a problem. No one is claiming it isn't.

The difference is alcohol is legal. Is it hypocritical that alcohol is legal? Probably.

Is there some particular genetic marker in illegal drugs? The "illegal genes" perhaps? Or is it that which drugs were made legal and which weren't was almost arbitrarily chosen and lumping in the two most commonly abused drugs is perfectly legitimate?

you need to get out of this blinkered state of mind where illegal=bad and actually think about why they're illegal and what the effects of legalising them will be. These weren't some wise sages with some inspired knowledge who banned them, they were flawed human beings and it's entirely possible they were wrong

personally what i think would happen is:
there would be an initial jump in use when they were made legal. Then maybe more people would become regular users but maybe not. I think that anyone who's inclined to become addicted isn't really bothered about the legality and is already using. Whether drugs are legal or not, kids have to be raised and bills have to be paid. Society isn't just going to collapse because you can get coke in an off license, rather than going to the house of the dealer who lives next door to the off license

most importantly, the drug dealers would lose the vast majority of their revenue. They would move onto something else of course but nothing makes them as much money as drugs.

the government would print leaflets advising people on correct dosages and monitor the quality etc so drug related deaths would plummet since the vast majority are from ill educated mis use.

the government would save billions in protecting the borders and imprisoning users, and make money from tax

but no one wants to hear all this because they had "drugs are bad" beaten into them and refuse to consider anything to the contrary or even question the conventional wisdom despite the fact that it's been proven worldwide that the conventional approach has zero impact on drug use

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

as i already mentioned in this thread, there are countries that execute drug dealers and those countries still have drugs problems so your statement is provably wrong

It is unfair to compare drug producing countries with Ireland.

It is unfair to compare third world countries with Ireland.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you need to get out of this blinkered state of mind where illegal=bad and actually think about why they're illegal and what the effects of legalising them will be.

Eh... I have done this.

I don't just think "oh it's illegal so it must be bad".

My opinion is based on the fact that the majority of Irish people are irresponsible and uneducated and I do not want those sorts of people having free access to mind altering drugs. Our system could not handle this.

I'm sorry to keep repeating myself, but I'm not worried about the nerdy boards user taking drugs and then going home to play World of Warcraft.

I'm not worried about you or rubadub or dudess.

I'm worried about the hundreds of thousands of monkeys on our street who are already out of control due to booze. Adding coke and pills and heroiin into the mix won't help matters.

But you know what? Hard drugs will never be legalised, so this entire conversation is pointless.

nibble

dublindude wrote: »

My opinion is based on the fact that the majority of Irish people are irresponsible and uneducated and I do not want those sorts of people having free access to mind altering drugs. Our system could not handle this.

They already essentially have free access, and maybe a nice fat shot of H would calm some of these "people" down. I don't think most would be doing much robbery and raping with reckless abandon while nodded out on opiates..

dublindude wrote: »

I'm worried about the hundreds of thousands of monkeys on our street who are already out of control due to booze. Adding coke and pills and heroiin into the mix won't help matters.

Fair enough I suppose but don't use monkeys in a derogatory way, after all were nothing but a load of mutated monkeys anyway. This is getting away from the point but we are just animals ffs, I mean we let cats have their catnip why cant we have ours? Ok, Ok that's a little bit of a skewed way of putting it but it is basically the truth.

dublindude wrote: »

But you know what? Hard drugs will never be legalised, so this entire conversation is pointless.

True, not in our lifetime anyway but hey it's fun to argue!

AARRRGH

nibble wrote: »

True, not in our lifetime anyway but hey it's fun to argue!

It sure is

/Sorry monkeys

flanum

Anybody got any skins?

j1smithy

Well one way to cut down on coke use would to force anyone who was found with the drug, be forced to take the coke vaccine.

Heres the thread on it:
http://m.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055307792

LolaLuv

Dudess wrote: »

But it's up to them not to be stupid and irresponsible if they decide to use it.

That's exactly the point; no one's willing to be accountable for their own actions anymore. Sure, some people have a natural predilection for addiction, but people are ultimately responsible for their own health. If everyone's so obsessed with taking care of others and keeping bad things illegal, then not only should alcohol and nicotine be banned, but so should greasy foods. But just as we allow people to assume responsibility for their dietary choices, so should they assume responsibility for their recreational drug use.

rossie1977

PillyPen wrote: »

That's exactly the point; no one's willing to be accountable for their own actions anymore. Sure, some people have a natural predilection for addiction, but people are ultimately responsible for their own health. If everyone's so obsessed with taking care of others and keeping bad things illegal, then not only should alcohol and nicotine be banned, but so should greasy foods. But just as we allow people to assume responsibility for their dietary choices, so should they assume responsibility for their recreational drug use.

or like escape from la ban smoking, alcohol, red meat, owning firearms, profanity, non-Christian religions (including atheism), and non-marital sex

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

It is unfair to compare drug producing countries with Ireland.

It is unfair to compare third world countries with Ireland.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

you said that draconian measures are what's needed. I said that many countries already have draconian measures and they haven't worked. It's hardly apples and oranges

dublindude wrote: »

I don't just think "oh it's illegal so it must be bad".

what i said was in response to you saying "the difference with alcohol is that it's legal..." as if there's some massive difference between legal drugs and illegal ones anywhere except in the heads of people who are blinkered in their view on drugs

dublindude wrote: »

My opinion is based on the fact that the majority of Irish people are irresponsible and uneducated and I do not want those sorts of people having free access to mind altering drugs. Our system could not handle this.

sorry mate too late. Anybody who wants to get drugs in this country can with absolutely no hassle. In fact if they were legal it might even be slightly more difficult to get them because dealers don't ask for id, they push drugs on kids.

your point only makes sense if prohibition has some measurable impact on the availability of drugs. It has been shown the world over that it doesn't

also, who are you to decide what these people can and can't do? You might think they're irresponsible and uneducated but they're adults and they should have the right to do whatever they want regardless of whether you think they should or not. Some people go to mc donalds every day of their lives and end up leaving a 30 stone corpse. Should fast food be banned because some people are too irresponsible to eat it in moderation?

anything can be bad in the hands of stupid people, be it a burger or a knife or a car or a joint. You can't ban everything that's dangerous in the hands of stupid people because that would entail banning every single thing on the planet

Irishcrx

This conversation is had once a month. Yes soft drgus such as weed should be so they can focus on hard drugs, I think the US approach to marijuana has been very well done and is working very well, others should follow...we can hope...

Tigger

dublindude wrote: »

snippity


I'm worried about the hundreds of thousands of monkeys on our street who are already out of control due to booze. Adding coke and pills and heroiin into the mix won't help matters.

what if we make drugs only legal in limerick

and we enforce the carrying of hatchets

and ban defibrulators

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you said that draconian measures are what's needed. I said that many countries already have draconian measures and they haven't worked. It's hardly apples and oranges

Yes, but you are saying draconian measures don't work, and your example is a drug producing country with a third world population.

We have nothing in common with drug producing third world countries.

Your comparison is fud.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

sorry mate too late. Anybody who wants to get drugs in this country can with absolutely no hassle. In fact if they were legal it might even be slightly more difficult to get them because dealers don't ask for id, they push drugs on kids.

This is pointless.

If you really believe having free access to drugs will make it more difficult for kids to get their hands on them, well then there is no point in me continuing this conversation.

Think about what you're saying.

Your points make no sense.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

your point only makes sense if prohibition has some measurable impact on the availability of drugs. It has been shown the world over that it doesn't

I don't think there is an easy solution to the drug problem. It'll never go away, whatever the Government does.

But I think it makes more sense to severly punish drug dealers instead of legalising hard drugs.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

also, who are you to decide what these people can and can't do? You might think they're irresponsible and uneducated but they're adults and they should have the right to do whatever they want regardless of whether you think they should or not. Some people go to mc donalds every day of their lives and end up leaving a 30 stone corpse. Should fast food be banned because some people are too irresponsible to eat it in moderation?

Again, apples and oranges.

I have no problem with people destroying their lives if they want to.

The problem with drugs is they affect the entire community.

You are only thinking about what's best for you. You need to look beyond yourself and see how the actions of people affect those around them.

There are loads of things I would love to be able to do, but I choose not to do them because they would be bad for society or those around me.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

anything can be bad in the hands of stupid people, be it a burger or a knife or a car or a joint. You can't ban everything that's dangerous in the hands of stupid people because that would entail banning every single thing on the planet

Should we legalise the carrying of knives?
Should we legalise the carrying of guns?

Of course we shouldn't. It makes sense to restrict things which are bad for society.

The Government has no interest in banning everything. They try to get some sort of balance, e.g. alcohol is legal.

Dragan

c - 13 wrote: »

Because no one in the country have ever been mugged by a junkie so they can get their next fix ?

And drink makes husbands beat wives and kids every weekend. ( default reply for these threads ).

These things are actions of the person at the end of the day. Why do these threads always boil down to the same tired rubbish?

AARRRGH

Dragan wrote: »

And drink makes husbands beat wives and kids every weekend. ( default reply for these threads ).

These things are actions of the person at the end of the day. Why do these threads always boil down to the same tired rubbish?

So two wrongs make a right?

No one is disputing alcohol causes all kinds of problems.

Do we really want to introduce more problems?

Dragan

dublindude wrote: »

So two wrongs make a right?

No one is disputing alcohol causes all kinds of problems.

Do we really want to introduce more problems?

No. I'm just saying people always trot out the same tired bull**** in these threads. You have two groups, one who thinks drugs should be legalised and one who things they shouldn't.

Normally both sides operate arguments completely devoid of logic or reason aiming only to hammer home why they feel they are right.

Are there advantages to legalising certain drug types for public availability? Yes....there are.

Are there disadvantages? Yes, there are.

The simple fact is that alchohol is a more destructive, more addictive substances than many of the illegal drugs that people use.

And yet the world is not on fire, people are not looting and rioting in the streets despite having access to alchohol on a practically 24/7 basis.

Do you know why? Because people are actually clever and more responsible as a whole than we normally give them credit for. So, we can handle legalised alchohol no problem, but legalising something like cannibas would be the end of society.

It makes no sense to me tbh.

Terry

Dudess wrote: »

That's a ridiculous statement - wishing illness or death on someone because they might try cocaine once out of curiosity.

Although I doubt drugs would be cut with harmful substances - why would a dealer try to kill potential customers?

Legalisation of drugs ftw - after that, personal responsibility.

Then you would be extremely naive.
These are people who have no problem shooting their rivals, friends and customers.
Do you remember the recent damp cocaine thing?
Have you ever heard of contaminated heroin being sold?

These are people who prey on the weaknesses of others for their own profit.
They really don't give a damn about their customers because there will always be some jackass looking to buy.

~Rebel~ wrote: »

theres 2 issue's from this imo.
1) Alcohol is legal and I would imagine spawns far more problems then drugs.
2) Freedom of choice. People who take drugs aren't forced to (well in most cases id imagine!), they choose to. Anything in excess is a bad thing, drink, drugs, food. I just think more education about the drugs and how you should use them If you're going to would go a lot further then scare-mongering, whether they become legalised or not.

1) There is an alcohol problem in this country from people drinking too much. Do you think that legalising other drugs will take away from this? Do you think that people will no over indulge in other drugs if they were legalised? If so, then I believe you to be very naive.

2) Freedom of choice?
Not when the addiction kicks in.
Ever seen how someone addicted to coke or heroin reacts when they can't get their fix?
I have and it's not a very nice thing.
Take the stigma away from these drugs by legalising them and all you will get is more addicts (over 10,000 heroin addicts in Dublin at the moment.) and more problems. Do you honestly think that legalised coke or heroin will make things better?
It won't. People will overdo these drugs. They will drive while on these drugs. They will commit crimes while on these drugs (read the court pages and look at how many people use the defense that they were not of sound mind because they are an alcoholic. They get away with it then because alcohol is legal). They will get addicted to these drugs and steal to pay for them. Don't think that they won't.

Dudess wrote: »

dublindude wrote: »

There is an article in the Sunday Times today about 1/4 of all heart attack victims (who are under 30) in the UK being the result of cocaine.

But heart attacks under 30 are so very rare, a large number of them are bound to be caused by drug misuse.

Indeed.
Legalise it and watch those numbers soar even higher.

Illegal drugs are nature's way of weeding out the stupid people in society.

chickenhawk

Irishcrx wrote: »

This conversation is had once a month. Yes soft drgus such as weed should be so they can focus on hard drugs, I think the US approach to marijuana has been very well done and is working very well, others should follow...we can hope...

You are joking right?

Most large companies in America do a drugs test before you can start and randomly during the year. It has happened to me and I think the legalisation of some drugs would bring random drug testing by companies into Ireland. It's an extra hassle I don't need.

Dragan

Terry wrote: »

Illegal drugs are nature's way of weeding out the stupid people in society.

Just wondering why you always sit on the Class A end of this argument Terry? Do you see any place for some of the softer drugs being legalised?

Tigger

cannabis is every bit as much of an issue as "hard drugs" alsohnol is too but thats a different story

i'm pro the end of prohibition but i would also condone the use of random drug tests on drivers and by employers

Terry

Dragan wrote: »

Just wondering why you always sit on the Class A end of this argument Terry? Do you see any place for some of the softer drugs being legalised?

No. Stoners inevitably turn into lazy cúnts. People who take E, mushrooms and other hallucinogenics usually end up being paranoid weirdos.

Dragan

Terry wrote: »

No. Stoners inevitably turn into lazy cúnts. People who take E, mushrooms and other hallucinogenics usually end up being paranoid weirdos.

Some mighty fine generalisations there Terry. Thanks for coming back to me on it though.

daveharnett

I have a question for those who say no to decriminalising popular recreational drugs. Many of your arguments seem based on the assumption that consumption of these drugs would increase, if they were legalised. Is there any evidence to back up this assumption?

I would also like to address the argument that illegal drugs are responsible for muggings and robberies. I would contend that in fact muggers and robbers are responsible for muggings and robberies respectively.

chickenhawk

daveharnett wrote: »

I would also like to address the argument that illegal drugs are responsible for muggings and robberies. I would contend that in fact muggers and robbers are responsible for muggings and robberies respectively.

Ok. So that means that if someone is shot by another person (in a drug war for example) the shooter is the cause of that incident and people should just ignore the reasons behind the attack because it was not immediately evident?

Terry

Dragan wrote: »

Some mighty fine generalisations there Terry. Just Thanks for coming back to me on it though.

Just going by the people I know.

daveharnett wrote: »

I have a question for those who say no to decriminalising popular recreational drugs. Many of your arguments seem based on the assumption that consumption of these drugs would increase, if they were legalised. Is there any evidence to back up this assumption?

Mine eyes have seen.
Twenty years ago, the idea of doing cocaine would have bee abhorrent to most people. However, as it became more popular, more people decided that it was not abhorrent and started using it.
Decriminalise these drugs and you remove the stigma.
With the stigma gone, more people will use them and more people will become addicted to them and there will be more junkies on our streets.

I would also like to address the argument that illegal drugs are responsible for muggings and robberies. I would contend that in fact muggers and robbers are responsible for muggings and robberies respectively.

They mug people to get money to pay for their drugs. They are not taking the money to buy food or any other essentials.

Unless you propose giving people free drugs, then this problem will only increase if they are legalised.

Dragan

Personally know one would be able to put forth a compelling argument for the legalisation of cocaine, heroine, or any of those types of drugs.

I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing for that, or at least i hope not.

Terry

Dragan wrote: »

Personally know one would be able to put forth a compelling argument for the legalisation of cocaine, heroine, or any of those types of drugs.

I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing for that, or at least i hope not.

Some people are.
Have a look back at page one.