The Frontline 1/03/2010

Spiritoftheseventies

Have to ask. The head shops supposedly sell "above the counter" stuff. But if you get behind the wheel having consumed one of these concoctions and were in an accident Im guess it wouldn't be.
Drugs are drugs are drugs.

MaceFace

How interesting that all the comments are alleuding to the anti-brigade being the lunatics and the pro-brigade being the sensible ones.........

I didn't see any of the usual brigade from the Clondalkin drug rehab centers to give their opinion. Surely they would be better to speak on the subject than a hippy councillor or an A&E doc.

BaZmO*

TheDoc wrote: »

Also what happens when the drug dealer stats offering me some free samples?

TheDoc wrote: »

Or when a drug dealer offers you some stuff on credit and you cant pay.

I can guarantee that those two scenarios won't happen.


I enjoyed the show last night but the debate on headshops was so one sided it was unfunny. Stuart Clarke came across really well and didn't get drawn into a ridiculous back and forth debate on the rights and wrongs of drug taking, he just presented the facts as they are. The aul lad screaming, "won't somebody please think of the children!!!" was typical of the level of debate you get when discussing drugs. Even though he started talking about kids ending up under trains or buses due to taking level highs :rolleyes: he still got the biggest round of applause.

itac

MaceFace wrote: »

How interesting that all the comments are alleuding to the anti-brigade being the lunatics and the pro-brigade being the sensible ones.........

I didn't see any of the usual brigade from the Clondalkin drug rehab centers to give their opinion. Surely they would be better to speak on the subject than a hippy councillor or an A&E doc

I'm not saying I think these shops are good idea, I'm just welcoming some "reasoned" debate. Personally, I'd be happier if these products were all gone from the streets. I'd also be a lot happier if the scumbag dealers were gone too. Yet at the moment, nobody seems to be coming on air to give yards of abuse to the dealers.

My biggest annoyance with the most recent comments is that the anti-brigade (whilst meaning well) do come across as people on a mission, unwillingly to listen to what their opposing speaker is saying, which, when used as it was on the programme last night, makes them seem like "lunatics".

While hearing a personal story from someone affected can help drive a point home, when the message of the story gets lost in hysterics, you have to wonder is it worth having them there? I wish they'd actually brought someone in who just speak about the problems these drugs have caused calmly, like you suggested, someone who actually dealing with the problems these things cause.

I'd love to say I have every faith in the Gov't to help sort this out, but ehhh....something tells me that's not going to happen any time soon...:rolleyes:

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Have to ask. The head shops supposedly sell "above the counter" stuff. But if you get behind the wheel having consumed one of these concoctions and were in an accident Im guess it wouldn't be.
Drugs are drugs are drugs.

Alcohol is a drug. Granted, it's far more socially acceptable to abuse alcohol than it is cocaine/heroin, but it is still a dangerous drug, no matter how harmless people think it is. I don't know if we have laws that state if a person is under any drug related influence, they shouldn't be driving, but if we do, why aren't they being advertised like the recent don't-drink & drive campaigns?

p.s. if we do have, I'm completely open to correction on that...!

BaZmO*

itac wrote: »

I don't know if we have laws that state if a person is under any drug related influence,

We do

transylman

Had to laugh at the oul lad reading his notes off the back of a paddy power betting slip. Then this other one banging on about "these drugs are memetic pshychotics, they reproduce insanity"

Teddy Chips

transylman wrote: »

Had to laugh at the oul lad reading his notes off the back of a paddy power betting slip. Then this other one banging on about "these drugs are memetic pshychotics, they reproduce insanity"

You will always have a couple of loons on debates like this. I thought Kenny balanced the argument quite well.

fcussen

I'm aware my comments are a day too late, but I've just watched the man on Frontline reading his sob story from the Paddy Power docket being applauded while the four or five people before him who made their points in a cogent manner were met with wilful misunderstanding and disapproving headshakes, and I have this is the most utterly depressing example I have ever seen of how wrongheaded so many people in this country are.

rovert

Im sure Stuart Clarke's defence of Head Shops has nothing to do with the amount of adverts for them in the publication.

fcussen

Hot Press carries ads for head shops because the magazine is aimed at the same demographic as head shops.

I really doubt the Irish Times/Independent/Examiner would carry head shop ads no matter how much money the shops offered them.

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. Because he is protecting his financial interests by defending head shops, any points he makes are therefore completely invalid?

rovert

fcussen wrote: »

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. Because he is protecting his financial interests by defending head shops, any points he makes are therefore completely invalid?

Just questionable, Hot Press ran a big cover story an issue or two back favouring Head Shops and a few pages on there was a half page ad for one.