The drugs thread

whadabouchasir

since there is a thread discussing smoking i thought that there should be one about drugs?Have you ever done drugs?What are your experiences?Do you think that some illegal drugs should be legalised?

I've never touched anything that i didn't get in a pharmacy and I don't intent to change,although i've been offered plenty of times.i would be in favour of legalising cannabis and some head shop highs too.

Extrasupervery

At Glastonbury this weekend there were people storlling through the crowds just shouting out 'MDMA, E, Charlie' and waving little bags around. Not into it myself, but I do like taking the piss out of the ones who walk up to me saying '...need any, stuff?' 'Yeah a maxi twist would be lovely thanks.' Or 'awright for pills, love? 'I'd have a few ibuprofen if you've got any.' They look so very confused. Bless them.

Fad

Pretty sure this has come up before.....

In favour of legalising almost everything and taxing it. That way you could buy stuff that wasn't funding criminal activity AND you'd know it's clean.

Fad

Extrasupervery wrote: »

At Glastonbury this weekend there were people storlling through the crowds just shouting out 'MDMA, E, Charlie' and waving little bags around. Not into it myself, but I do like taking the piss out of the ones who walk up to me saying '...need any, stuff?' 'Yeah a maxi twist would be lovely thanks.' Or 'awright for pills, love? 'I'd have a few ibuprofen if you've got any.' They look so very confused. Bless them.

Sure we made a pact the first time we met anyway!

Extrasupervery

What did we do?

Ginja Ninja

I've smoked a bit of Hash and I've tried weed.
That's all the drugs I have ever and will ever go near.In my opinion marijuana is a much safer drug than most other illegal drugs [class b/a drugs] it's not far removed from tobacco and is completely safe[in the short term at least,no real chance of instant death from use] and isn't "cut" near as much or with chemicals as dangerous as other drugs

As for the sh*t in headshops,it's not legal,there's just no law against it,those are two very different things.I'd much prefer to use the illegal,tried and tested and proven drug than an un proven and as more research is showing much more deadly form of the illegal chemicals.

My general philosophy,if it grows it goes.So: Nicotine[tobacco],THC[weed] and Ethanol[Booze] are all the drugs I would ever have any interest in and in that order most of the time

whadabouchasir

Fad wrote: »

In favour of legalising almost everything and taxing it.

I wouldn't say almost everything.I think that if a drug was to be legalised then it should have to go through strict testing just like medicines to make sure that one dose wouldn't kill you ordo serious damage.Also certain drugs liike coke are notorious for making people aggressive and i definitely don't think that it should be legal.

Extrasupervery

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I wouldn't say almost everything.I think that if a drug was to be legalised then it should have to go through strict testing just like medicines to make sure that one dose wouldn't kill you ordo serious damage.Also certain drugs liike coke are notorious for making people aggressive and i definitely don't think that it should be legal.

As is alcohol

Ginja Ninja

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I wouldn't say almost everything.I think that if a drug was to be legalised then it should have to go through strict testing just like medicines to make sure that one dose wouldn't kill you ordo serious damage.Also certain drugs liike coke are notorious for making people aggressive and i definitely don't think that it should be legal.

well by that logic radiotherapy should be disallowed,the pump posionous radioactive waste into your system,not enough to kill you but just enough to kill of the badness.

EVERY drug has side effects,something like aspirin can kill you if you have a heart condition[it thins the blood quite a lot]

Alchohol has to be one of the worst IMO,apart from thinning your blood it has no benefit to your body at all[it literally is just a poison] and will chew your insides to bit over time [sclerosis of the liver is nasty,nasty condition and a lot of irish people live with it]

whadabouchasir

Extrasupervery wrote: »

As is alcohol

It's only legal because people have been using it for thousands of years.If alcohol was discovered tomorrow then I don't think that it would be legal,and the same goes for tobacco.

We live in a nanny state that doesn't allow us the freedom to use drugs if we want to even if we know that they aren't going to do us serious damage.Instead we have to trust in the judgements of others who claim to know what's best for us even though they refuse to even have a debate about legalising drugs.

whadabouchasir

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

well by that logic radiotherapy should be disallowed,the pump posionous radioactive waste into your system,not enough to kill you but just enough to kill of the badness.

EVERY drug has side effects,something like aspirin can kill you if you have a heart condition[it thins the blood quite a lot]

The reason why these are legal is because they cure diseases,you take them because you have to,not because you want to.every drug has side effects but that shouldn't stop you from taking it.my point was that recreational drugs shouldn't be legalised if taking them poses a severe danger to your health even if taken in relatively small amounts.

as for the dangers of alcohol,well these are well doccumented and usually only occur as a result of excessive drinking.You could say the same about fast food,it too can lead too an early death,if eaten excessively.

Pigwidgeon

I've tried weed and hash once or twice. Wouldn't again, didn't see anything that great about it, plus it seriously messed up my chest.
I've also seen what it can do to people, a few of my friends smoke it pretty much all day everyday, and they've all become so boring and have nothing to talk about anymore.

I've been offered pretty much everything under the sun at some stage or another, but would never try anything else, I don't think the risks of trying pills/coke/heroin whatever are worth the high. Again a lot of people I know regularly do pills and coke.

I'd be along the same lines of Fad's opinion of legalising most things, there would be so much more control, people are going to take them no matter what, may as well make them as safe as possible and get taxes from it.

jumpguy

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

well by that logic radiotherapy should be disallowed,the pump posionous radioactive waste into your system,not enough to kill you but just enough to kill of the badness.

Tbh that's a bit of an illogical argument. In the case of radiotherapy, the good outweighs the bad. It is also a procedure done by nessicity.

I would be in favour of legalising weed, and taxing the feck outta it. 20 pack of cigarettes are usually 8.50€, 20 pack of rolled up weed and tobacco would be 15€, 20€ (not sure of production costs). The government would make a killing, guaranteed clean weed and made as safe to consume as possible (filters, controlled additives). They'd easily undercut illegal channels. It'd cut out a huge amount of drug-funded crime.

However, I would not be in favour of legalising anything "harder" than weed. Drugs with proven dangerous mental effects such as ecstasy, cocaine, LSD and heroin and so on should remain controlled substances.

highlydebased

Never have and never will tbh.

Richard Cranium

One of my flatmates during first year was a complete stoner, as I'm sure I've mentioned here several times before. Living with him and seeing the effects of whatever he and his friends were taking at the time, and even idle small-talk about what his weekend/night out entailed, has done more to put me off drugs of any description than all the health warnings and awareness programmes in the world.

As well as that though, I think I would have gone off the idea of drugs anyway. I used to be ambivalent about/mildly-pro legalising a few things when I was younger, but I'm not so much anymore. I'm not a fan of the so-called nanny-state or anything, but it would be a seriously bad move to send out the message that smoking weed or popping pills or whatever is considered safe enough to be acceptable. I don't accept the double-standard argument either, that alcohol and tobacco are considered safe when everything else isn't; it should be clear from just how heavily restricted the sale of those things are (and the restriction is in general getting heavier) that they are unhealthy (for the most part- there is such a thing as responsible drinking), and should be treated as such.


One final note: I was absolutely delighted when the head shops closed a couple of months ago because the stuff they sell smells fúcking disgusting, and the aforementioned bastard flatmate stoner couldn't stink the place up with it any more.

soccymonster

Neon-Circles wrote: »

Never have and never will tbh.

+1. Never. Watching Jeremy Kyle has taught me many life lessons tbh
And that thing about alcohol ginja said is kinda scary.

Fad

Extrasupervery wrote: »

What did we do?

We'd only try non-Irish E, Acid and Mary Jane!

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

That's all the drugs I have ever and will ever go near.In my opinion marijuana is a much safer drug than most other illegal drugs [class b/a drugs] it's not far removed from tobacco and is completely safe[in the short term at least,no real chance of instant death from use] and isn't "cut" near as much or with chemicals as dangerous as other drugs

Having never tried weed, more out of reluctance to take drugs bought in Ireland than anything else, I cant say it for sure, but from what I have been told, weed in Ireland is almost always sprayed with something to make it heavier (I have heard fiberglass mentioned, and that genuinely worried me)

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I wouldn't say almost everything.I think that if a drug was to be legalised then it should have to go through strict testing just like medicines to make sure that one dose wouldn't kill you ordo serious damage.Also certain drugs liike coke are notorious for making people aggressive and i definitely don't think that it should be legal.

Side effects of lots of legally prescribed drugs make people aggressive too, it depends on the person. The thing about coke/and stuff along those lines is that it has years and years of research behind it, mephedrone and all that muck doesn't.

If people are supplied PURE drugs and are told what dosage levels to follow, everything would probably be much safer. If people ignore those levels, that's their call.

boudy

Well as said above weed/hash/pollen should be legalized for the reasons as said above. as for harder drugs it gets more complicated, personally i believe they should, heroin should be made available for addicts as it would be distributed by doctors/ nurses in a safe and clean environment in adequate amounts for the user in conjunction with a rehab programme.cocaine/extacy i believe ok also because once the product is made clean it solves a lot of problems straight away and once the dangers are made very clear, have drug awareness ads on tv like alcohol and tobacco. in believe acid should not be made legal though, thats another level compared to cocaine/extacy.

Davidius

Never have and never will. I tend to find drug users to be either a bit boring or impossible to relate to.

I don't know or care enough about the legalisation of drugs. Generally when the subject is brought up I have to reply along the lines of "Shut the fúck up and find something else to do".

In terms of people who buy illegal drugs, I feel a bit uneasy about them handing money over to criminals.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I'd be in favour of legalising everything really, that way steps can be made to make sure it isn't being sold to kids and a massive amount of revenue would be taken out of the hands of murdering gangs and into the hands of the government. Okay so it would be taken out of the hands of your friendly local stoner as well but on balance, probably worth it.

I think the double standard argument does stand up; if you can drink, smoke or eat yourself to death as long as you're paying tax on it, why is does it suddenly clock over to "wrong and immoral" to pill yourself to death? Just ****ing tax it. Also the amount of garda/court time and resources spent chasing and processing people who possess or supply weed is ridiculous, considering they're likely to be law-abiding, non-violent people apart from that.

jumpguy wrote: »

I would be in favour of legalising weed, and taxing the feck outta it. 20 pack of cigarettes are usually 8.50€, 20 pack of rolled up weed and tobacco would be 15€, 20€ (not sure of production costs). The government would make a killing, guaranteed clean weed and made as safe to consume as possible (filters, controlled additives). They'd easily undercut illegal channels. It'd cut out a huge amount of drug-funded crime.

Woohoo!

Pygmalion

I've tried weed a few times, and was majorly disappointed.
The first time I spent maybe 5-10 minutes maximum ****ting myself laughing at lolcats, which for all I know I would've done anyway.
The next few times I just didn't really feel any effect at all.
I was a bit drunk every time though, not sure what effect that would have had, if any.

Oh, to answer the OPs questions I think it probably should be legalised, if only to stop wasting the courts/gardaís time and get a bit of tax money from it.
No reason for that to be illegal when alcohol isn't.

Jay P

I've done drugs, and do when the occasion arises. I'd never go out of my way to get drugs though, alcohol is generally much more enjoyable. Apart from that time we were smoking while watching The Blue Planet...

There are some drugs I wouldn't touch, most notably heroin and E. Heroin because I've seen Requiem For A Dream and it was truly terrifying. And E because more so than most other drugs, you literally have no idea what is in the stuff.

Fad wrote: »

Pretty sure this has come up before.....

In favour of legalising almost everything and taxing it. That way you could buy stuff that wasn't funding criminal activity AND you'd know it's clean.

I wouldn't really agree with this. I know from the head shops becoming popular that people would just end up doing more drugs. My friends started smoking a lot more than they used to when they found out about the headshops nearby, they'd get stuff two or three or four times a week. Now that the shops are closed, they sometimes get weed, maybe once or twice a month.

Ok, granted, anecdotal evidence isn't exactly damming proof, but it's the way I'd see it. With easier access, I can see a lot more people being attracted by drugs.

whadabouchasir

Richard Cranium wrote: »

One of my flatmates during first year was a complete stoner,

I was in the same situation as you.My flatmate didn't go to any lectures and used to smoke a couple of joints a day as well as some head shop stuff and speed.He was the messiest person I've ever met and was fairly dopy as a result of all of this drug use.this really put me off doing drugs,ever.

Pygmalion

Davidius wrote: »

I don't know or care enough about the legalisation of drugs. Generally when the subject is brought up I have to reply along the lines of "Shut the fúck up and find something else to do".

In terms of people who buy illegal drugs, I feel a bit uneasy about them handing money over to criminals.

To be fair, that's usually given as a pretty good reason for legalisation, when people do buy drugs it'll be going towards the state and not criminals.

KnifeWRENCH

I've tried weed, that's about it. (Although I did take mephedrone about a week before that headshop law came in and it was banned) Was offered speed once but didn't accept it.

I'm strongly in favour of legalising weed. Not sure about other drugs. Though I think the Government's new headshop laws are ridiculous and bordering on the nanny-state side of things.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

I've tried weed, that's about it. (Although I did take mephedrone about a week before that headshop law came in and it was banned) Was offered speed once but didn't accept it.

I'm strongly in favour of legalising weed. Not sure about other drugs. Though I think the Government's new headshop laws are ridiculous and bordering on the nanny-state side of things.

Agree with that, but they did need to be much more regulated than they were, you can't really rely on drug dealers to be responsible on their own. Though there have been head shops around for years before the recent hullabaloo kicked off, the funky skunk in Cork and a few in Galway were around for yonks, feel kind of bad for them getting tarred with the same brush as the ones who caused all the bother by selling to under-age people/giving stuff on tick/not making the risks clear etc

Jamie Starr

I haven't tried any droogs yet, and I'm not really too pressed about it either, seeing as pot is the only one I'd have any real interest in. Maybe acid, but I've heard off-putting things about that. The rest of them; heroin, cocaine, meth, PCP and all those other nasty chaps I think I'll stay away from. They're just plain bad.

The fact is I'm not that into alcohol, a drug I can legally buy, so other drugs aren't a huge deal.

Pygmalion

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

Though I think the Government's new headshop laws are ridiculous and bordering on the nanny-state side of things.

Muggings are down 500% since the ban, Joe Duffy said it so it must not be painfully impossible and pulled out of the ass of someone who doesn't understand percentages.

KnifeWRENCH

Hugh Shy Gumbo wrote: »

Agree with that, but they did need to be much more regulated than they were, you can't really rely on drug dealers to be responsible on their own. Though there have been head shops around for years before the recent hullabaloo kicked off, the funky skunk in Cork and a few in Galway were around for yonks, feel kind of bad for them getting tarred with the same brush as the ones who caused all the bother by selling to under-age people/giving stuff on tick/not making the risks clear etc

No problems with them wanting to regulate it a bit; they could have done so reasonably if they had put any sort of effort into it. Slapping a ban on everything without any research, on the other hand, was just a foolish knee-jerk response that pandered to the vocal "ALL DRUGS ARE EVIL AND ARE KILLING AND RAPING OUR PRECIOUS CHILDREN" minority.

Pygmalion wrote:

Muggings are down 500% since the ban, Joe Duffy said it so it must not be painfully impossible and pulled out of the ass of someone who doesn't understand percentages.

Oh wiat....Joe says drugs are bad? Well then they must be!
I was wrong; ALL DRUGS ARE EVIL AND ARE KILLING AND RAPING OUR PRECIOUS CHILDREN. ALL HAIL THE HEADSHOP BAN! RABBLE RABBLE something about Clontarf RABBLE. :mad:

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

No problems with them wanting to regulate it a bit; they could have done so reasonably if they had put any sort of effort into it. Slapping a ban on everything without any research, on the other hand, was just a foolish knee-jerk response that pandered to the vocal "ALL DRUGS ARE EVIL AND ARE KILLING AND RAPING OUR PRECIOUS CHILDREN" minority.

Yeah definitely, seemed like it was easier for teenagers to get mephedrone than cans of beer at one point though, which wasn't good. A knee jerk reaction was ridiculous though, I was actually listening to Liveline the day the ban came in (my mother had control of the radio), and it was infuriating, all these mammies ringing in saying thank god, my son took DRUGS AND THEN HE FELT THE EFFECTS, the shops are closed so now he'll never be able to do that again :rolleyes:

strobe

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

My general philosophy,if it grows it goes.So: Nicotine[tobacco],THC[weed] and Ethanol[Booze] are all the drugs I would ever have any interest in and in that order most of the time

Mescaline[peyote, san pedro], Opium[opium poppies], Cocaine[coca], Salvinorin A[salvia], DMT, 5 Meo DMT, Bufotenin[hundreds of plants], Psilocybin, psilocin[magic musrooms] etc etc etc..............

Your general philosophy is going to lead to some pretty mental weekends man....have fun....:D

Richard Cranium

Hugh Shy Gumbo wrote: »

I'd be in favour of legalising everything really, that way steps can be made to make sure it isn't being sold to kids and a massive amount of revenue would be taken out of the hands of murdering gangs and into the hands of the government. Okay so it would be taken out of the hands of your friendly local stoner as well but on balance, probably worth it.

I think the double standard argument does stand up; if you can drink, smoke or eat yourself to death as long as you're paying tax on it, why is does it suddenly clock over to "wrong and immoral" to pill yourself to death? Just ****ing tax it. Also the amount of garda/court time and resources spent chasing and processing people who possess or supply weed is ridiculous, considering they're likely to be law-abiding, non-violent people apart from that.

On the flip side of that, it can and should be argued that it is wrong and immoral (or just plain selfish) to drink, smoke or eat yourself to death for a number of reasons. It's not a victimless non-crime. Leaving aside the effect that it would have on family and friends to see someone do that to themselves, it costs the country a fortune and clogs up the health services dealing with people who have done themselves damage this way. How many people get treated for cancer or liver sclerosis or diabetes or anything else caused by not looking after themselves properly? How much time and money are we expending trying to treat them, when there are others (dare I say it) much more deserving of those services? I agree with Jay P when he said that increased availability of drugs will increase usage. I've seen it myself, although I don't have hard and fast statistics to quote either.

Drug use/abuse is dangerous and does do serious harm to people a lot of the time. Not just physically either, it seriously messes with people's heads. As far as I know there is a proven link between cannabis (or whatever you want to call it) and psychosis, and in a country that already has such an obscenely high suicide rate (not to mention awful mental health services), decriminalisation would be completely illogical and indefensible.

Have I got the right to drive my car like a lunatic and then crash and kill myself in front of all my family and friends? I don't think so.
Should I have that right? Almost certainly not.

strobe

Richard Cranium wrote: »

Have I got the right to drive my car like a lunatic and then crash and kill myself in front of all my family and friends? I don't think so.
Should I have that right? Almost certainly not.

Have you got the right to race in rallys or go rock climbing, or horse riding, or surfing huge waves, or do boxing, or sky diving?

Should you have that right?

Novella

Tried a lot of that head shop shit tbh. Will never ever touch any kind of drugs again. One night, after smoking some and taking a few pills, I had a huge panic attack and I honestly thought that I was gonna die. I couldn't breathe, didn't know where I was (I was in my own living room) and my heart was racing so fast it felt like it was gonna burst. One of the scariest moments of my life.

I've also tried hash and weed, but as I said, no drugs for me ever again. I'm actually pretty ashamed that it took something like a bad trip and putting my health and safety at risk for me to realise that drugs are bad. Serious respect for those who never try 'em.

unknown13

Once you are 18, taking it under your own will and not intoxicated. I couldn't care what you take because at the end of the day it is your own body and life. Do what you want to with it.

Pygmalion

Richard Cranium wrote: »

Have I got the right to drive my car like a lunatic and then crash and kill myself in front of all my family and friends? I don't think so.
Should I have that right? Almost certainly not.

Attempted suicide isn't actually a crime in this country, so you do have the right to kill yourself, doing it in front of friends and family probably isn't illegal either.
You can't drive like a lunatic and crash on purpose though, there are laws against endangering other people while driving.
Drugs on the other hand don't directly endanger other people (I added in "directly" for a reason here, I'm aware it isn't exactly going to put a smile on your families face if they find out you've died).

As for the extra medical treatment we give to those people, most drinkers don't end up getting super expensive medical treatment, all drinkers pay a lot of extra tax which goes towards hospitals and the like.

A lot more smokers do end up in hospitals, but still nowhere near 100%, and in most cases it takes years/decades before they end up in hospital.
Almost €5 on a pack of cigarettes is in Tax (based on 2008 numbers, probably higher now). If someone smokes a pack a day for 20 years and then gets hospitalised they've paid almost €40000 extra in tax, so they're not getting that treatment for free.

Richard Cranium

strobe wrote: »

Have you got the right to race in rallys or go rock climbing, or horse riding, or surfing huge waves, or do boxing, or sky diving?

Should you have that right?

That's not my point. I'm not saying that people should be banned from doing anything remotely dangerous (as I've said before, I'm not a fan of the nanny-state), I'm saying that it's wrong to allow someone to be self destructive, especially when they are not the only ones who will pay the price of their actions.

And no. I shouldn't be allowed to race in a rally, go rock climbing, surf huge waves, sky dive or box- not at the moment anyway. I don't know how to do any of those things and without the guidance and supervision of an expert I might kill myself or someone else. That would be bad, don't you agree?

If, however, I did know how to safely do those things then of course I should be allowed. Similarly, if a certain drug is shown to be safe when used responsibly then it should be sold in a regulated way to people who can use it responsibly. Cannabis has side effects that don't justify the benefits, as do many if not all of the other illegal drugs. They aren't banned for the craic, like.

Pygmalion

Richard Cranium wrote: »

If, however, I did know how to safely do those things then of course I should be allowed. Similarly, if a certain drug is shown to be safe when used responsibly then it should be sold in a regulated way to people who can use it responsibly. Cannabis has side effects that don't justify the benefits, as do many if not all of the other illegal drugs. They aren't banned for the craic, like.

Am I correct to assume that you would much prefer if alcohol was illegal?
If you do think that I won't argue, since clearly this is just a policy we disagree on for our own reasons.

My main problem is with people automatically assuming that alcohol is safer than illegal drugs and shouldn't be held to the same standards, purely because it's legal.

byrnem31

I have tried nearly every drug thats available in this country and I have been addicted to a few with serious consequences.
Alcohol is by far one of the most damaging drugs there is. The class people put drugs into is rubbish. Hash and weed are aslo very damaging. I smoked a lot of it when I was younger but moved onto different dugs. The people who kept smoking it turned into cabbages from it.
Tobacco is another filthy, highly dangerous and addictive drug. The government make money off it in the short run, but the health issues it causes in the long run are costlty.If you legalise drugs you will make money in the short run but in the long run it proves a financial burden.

We tell children drugs are bad for you, but when they do them they have the time of their lives. There should be more drug awarness campaigns with real ex-addicts to tell their story first hand to children instead of suits and ties telling them. Children dont listen to authority. At least if addicts talk they can witness the consequences of taking drugs over the course of your life. Just let them take a look people who have suffered from drug abuse. All sorts of different addicts too, not just the sterotypical junkie. Let them see people damaged from hash, ectasy, alcohol, tobacco, acid, heroin, cocaine etc.

All drugs are utter dirt and a curse on society. They make people irrational and act in ways they would never usually behave. We see this every week on the streets of our towns and cities. The damage they cause is horrendous. Just look at all the fighting, deaths and drink driving related incidents around the country every week. They are caused not by addicted people, but your average office worker, student, carpenter etc. and why ? Because of the effects of drugs. They give people crap for brains.

Richard Cranium

Pygmalion wrote: »

Attempted suicide isn't actually a crime in this country, so you do have the right to kill yourself, doing it in front of friends and family probably isn't illegal either.
You can't drive like a lunatic and crash on purpose though, there are laws against endangering other people while driving.
Drugs on the other hand don't directly endanger other people (I added in "directly" for a reason here, I'm aware it isn't exactly going to put a smile on your families face if they find out you've died).

As for the extra medical treatment we give to those people, most drinkers don't end up getting super expensive medical treatment, all drinkers pay a lot of extra tax which goes towards hospitals and the like.

A lot more smokers do end up in hospitals, but still nowhere near 100%, and in most cases it takes years/decades before they end up in hospital.
Almost €5 on a pack of cigarettes is in Tax (based on 2008 numbers, probably higher now). If someone smokes a pack a day for 20 years and then gets hospitalised they've paid almost €40000 extra in tax, so they're not getting that treatment for free.

Suicide is a completely different issue. I wasn't asking if I had the right to deliberately kill myself, more whether it was morally acceptable to allow someone do something like that. I don't think it is.
Drugs can directly endanger other people though- coke makes people aggressive, other drugs make people paranoid and liable to attack others. It does happen, even though I haven't done a great job of elucidating. You know what I mean I hope...

I'm not sure if the extra tax paid by drinkers and smokers completely covers the cost of treatment though. Maybe one of the medical people here could tell me how much it costs the state to provide chemo or an organ transplant for someone. I'd be very surprised if the extra taxes on cigarettes and alcohol covered it completely though.


EDIT: I do think alcohol should be legal. I do drink, I do get drunk, and occassionally I get completely irresponsibly shít-faced. For the most part though, I'm responsible. I don't believe I'm doing any serious damage to my own body (I know this sounds a bit naive after what I've just said but I mean it- the vast majority of the time I don't drink heavily at all, nor do I drink very frequently), and I certainly don't ever put anyone else in danger.
But I digress. There is such a thing as a responsible level of drinking, and it does have health benefits (a glass of red wine a day is good, or something, I dunno exactly.) More importantly than that, we know the risks and the benefits of alcohol, and it is regulated. Possibly a good answer to the question you asked is that I support a lot of the restriction on sales of alcohol (but again that's a discussion for another day). Everyone should know exactly how dangerous it can be, but also they should have allowed to drink.

Does that make me a hypocrite? Possibly.

Pygmalion

Richard Cranium wrote: »

I'm not sure if the extra tax paid by drinkers and smokers completely covers the cost of treatment though. Maybe one of the medical people here could tell me how much it costs the state to provide chemo or an organ transplant for someone. I'd be very surprised if the extra taxes on cigarettes and alcohol covered it completely though.

Well drinkers/smokers generally are less likely to get an organ than non-drinkers/smokers IIRC.
And it may not completely cover it, but there's still a massive offset, and keep in mind that the €40000 isn't necessarily all, if only 50% of smokers end up in hospital then it'd be more like almost €80000 (adjust for whatever the actual percentage is, but it's not 100% anyway) per treatment.

Bobalicious93

Hang on, there's a difference between 'hash' and 'weed'?

I was under the impression they were the same thing..

Pygmalion

Bobalicious93 wrote: »

Hang on, there's a difference between 'hash' and 'weed'?

I was under the impression they were the same thing..

Same plant, but different parts of it, or prepared differently or something.

Jay P

Bobalicious93 wrote: »

Hang on, there's a difference between 'hash' and 'weed'?

I was under the impression they were the same thing..

I'm not entirely sure what Hash is, but it's something to do with the root of the cannabis plant. It's generally brown, and looks quite like an oxo cube. Weed is the leaves of the cannabis plant, but dried. As they're leaves, it's green.

strobe

Richard Cranium wrote: »

And no. I shouldn't be allowed to race in a rally, go rock climbing, surf huge waves, sky dive or box- not at the moment anyway. I don't know how to do any of those things and without the guidance and supervision of an expert I might kill myself or someone else. That would be bad, don't you agree?

I do agree. That would be bad. People that take drugs should learn how to take them in a way that limits the dangers aswell.

If, however, I did know how to safely do those things then of course I should be allowed. Similarly, if a certain drug is shown to be safe when used responsibly then it should be sold in a regulated way to people who can use it responsibly. Cannabis has side effects that don't justify the benefits, as do many if not all of the other illegal drugs. They aren't banned for the craic, like.

That's a little mixed up. Boxing has never been shown to be safe. It is a dangerous thing to do and will always remain so. Boxing has "possible" side effects that "some people would argue" don't justify the benefits, as do many, if not all "potentially" dangerous activities. Lot's of people don't want to ban boxing for the craic, like.

strobe

Bobalicious93 wrote: »

Hang on, there's a difference between 'hash' and 'weed'?

I was under the impression they were the same thing..

Pygmalion wrote: »

Same plant, but different parts of it, or prepared differently or something.

Jay P wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure what Hash is, but it's something to do with the root of the cannabis plant. It's generally brown, and looks quite like an oxo cube. Weed is the leaves of the cannabis plant, but dried. As they're leaves, it's green.

Hash is cannabis resin. The buds on the plant produce a sticky resin that prevents them from drying out. Hash is this resin collected and allowed to solidify. That is what hash is supposed to be but some of the hash that you would buy in the street is also mixed with other crap to bulk it out.

Weed is herbal canabis. It is the buds that grow on the plant, the ones that produce the resin collected and allowed to dry out so they can be smoked.

Fad

Jay P wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure what Hash is, but it's something to do with the root of the cannabis plant. It's generally brown, and looks quite like an oxo cube. Weed is the leaves of the cannabis plant, but dried. As they're leaves, it's green.

Hash is Cannabis Resin, made from the leaves (Nowt to do with the roots), weed is just the dried leaves.

Hash is more concentrated than regular weed.

Edit: Strobe wins!

Konata

As I was growing up, I always promised myself I'd never touch drugs. However, that didn't really last very long and I got rather self - destructive I smoked hash for the first time when I was 17 and proceeded to take it 3 or 4 more times before I realised it was doing nothing to me and was wasting my time. Whilst in Amsterdam last Summer, I tried one of their infamous space cakes - fúcking scary experience. I had terrible pains in my chest afterwards, but took half a hash brownie the next day. More chest pains - scared the shít out of me and I swore away from cannabis of all and every type. I've also abused prescription drugs a fair bit and taken LSD once.

I am not, in any way, proud of any drugs I've taken and none of them were worth it either. I've been tempted to try coke and heroin at one point, purely for the self destruction factor though. Luckily, I've gained a bit of cop in the last few months and I don't plan on touching any more drugs in the future.

Fad wrote: »

If people are supplied PURE drugs and are told what dosage levels to follow, everything would probably be much safer. If people ignore those levels, that's their call.

This is my opinion exactly. Take alcohol for example - we're constantly fed information about how many standard drinks is healthy for us, what's considered a binge, the risks of excessive drinking etc. It's down to the individual themselves to make a decision on how much to drink based on all this information. If they drink responsibly - great! If not, then they can suffer the consequences and have no one to blame but themselves.

I believe it should be the same for drugs. If people still choose to abuse them, that's their fault. It would get rid of a lot of crime in this country.

There is, however, one drug which I don't believe should ever be legalised and this is heroin. I've spent a lot of time researching heroin and it is the most addictive of all drugs - most users are addicted from their first use. Heroin will never be a safe drug to have in society - it's too much to expect people to be able to not abuse it.

Richard Cranium

Richard Cranium wrote: »

Blah blah blah... They aren't banned for the craic, like.

God I'm crap at trying to explain myself! What I was trying to say was that I'm inclined to trust the doctors and all the other experts in the field, who know just what these drugs do to the human body. If they are of the opinion that a certain drug is too dangerous to be legal, then I'll trust their educated conclusion on that matter. I'm sure most doctors will say that, physically and mentally, it will be okay to give your 16 year old son a glass of wine with his dinner the odd time. They'll also say that giving your 16 year old son unrestricted access to alcohol will put him, and his still-developing liver in particular, at risk of serious health problems in the short and long term.
Most doctors I've heard talk about illegal drugs say that they are dangerous and really shouldn't be messed with. Smoking a joint or two won't be the end of the world, but really you should probably just leave them alone. Personally, I'm not going to second guess the experts.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Richard Cranium wrote: »

On the flip side of that, it can and should be argued that it is wrong and immoral (or just plain selfish) to drink, smoke or eat yourself to death for a number of reasons. It's not a victimless non-crime.

Yup, I'd agree it's equally as immoral to drink smoke or eat yourself to death as it is to drug yourself to death. I do not agree that it's equally immoral to smoke a couple of joints a month or occasionally enjoy some stronger recreational drugs, and I would like to see this reflected in the law.

Drug use/abuse is dangerous and does do serious harm to people a lot of the time. Not just physically either, it seriously messes with people's heads. As far as I know there is a proven link between cannabis (or whatever you want to call it) and psychosis, and in a country that already has such an obscenely high suicide rate (not to mention awful mental health services), decriminalisation would be completely illogical and indefensible.

As far as I recall, cannabis can exacerbate symptoms in those already pre-disposed to phsychosis, which when you look at the number of people who smoke and the number of people with that pre-disposition works out at less than half a percent of the population. Maybe all the revenue from taxing it could go towards improving our woeful mental health services, and maybe if people weren't afraid of being treated like criminals they'd be more likely to admit to smoking if they were asked by a mental health professional, or to present in the first place. Also the double standard comes up again, with suicide rates and mental health services in such a sorry state, why is not illogical and indefensible to have alcohol legal? A psychiatrist I know says that in cases of attempted suicide she's dealt with, abuse of spirits comes up almost half the time as a contributing factor (not saying we should criminalise alcohol, just pointing it out).

Have I got the right to drive my car like a lunatic and then crash and kill myself in front of all my family and friends? I don't think so.
Should I have that right? Almost certainly not.

You probably do actually, don't though

Ginja Ninja

Hugh Shy Gumbo wrote: »

You probably do actually, don't though

You don't actually[someone with a better connection can google this if you want] but as far as I know Suicide is illegal in Ireland.I can't see how you can arrest someone for it[what with them dying and all] but hypothetically charges could be brought against someone who attempted to kill themselvs[no judge would prosecute it,but it's in the law]


oh and drugs are bad kids,mmmmmkay? People make drugs dangerous