Joe Duffy and Mob Rule

Duck's hoop · 20-01-2010 02:57PM #1

Just listening to Liveline and have been for a few days since last week. He's leading a concerted campaign against the 'Headshop' industry.

I have no doubt that he will succeed in closing these shops.

My question to you is; Leaving aside your own opinions on what these places sell, do you think it's right that a reactionary and hugely biased radio show, fuelled by a mob mentality, should be the arbiter of legislative matters in this country?

Or do you find this situation just a little undemocratic and frightening?

4zn76tysfajdxp · 20-01-2010 02:59PM

Think it's fair to say that those questions are fairly "hugely biased" themselves.

dr.bollocko · 20-01-2010 03:02PM

There's probably 100+ headshops in the country now. That's a lot of jobs lost to the "I'm a mother and..." parade of Joe-worshipping morons he usually gets to fill the show.

Bonito · 20-01-2010 03:10PM

Tis a load of BS IMO. They're creating some sort of employment, the ones I know of are pretty heavy with the whole I.D. business unless it's a regular customer entering. I don't have an interest in them myself and they don't bother me so I'm not gonna whinge and pull a tantrum to have them closed. The one in my town has been relocated 3 times, it's now on a back street and off the view of the main street. Everyone knows where it is and you only need to know about it now if you want to buy something from it.

Duck's hoop · 20-01-2010 03:10PM

Augustine Rough Chess wrote: »

Think it's fair to say that those questions are fairly "hugely biased" themselves.

The questions are a fair reflection of how I see this situation. They are not meant as leading questions. You are free to disagree and enlighten me, at your leisure.

The way I see it Joe uses his platform to pursue personal agendas. On a State radio station. I don't think this is 'right'.

yoshytoshy · 20-01-2010 03:10PM

There wouldn't be a problem with these shops ,if they opened up in suitable areas.
Some of them are open in front of schools ffs.

SV · 20-01-2010 03:12PM

yoshytoshy wrote: »

There wouldn't be a problem with these shops ,if they opened up in suitable areas.
Some of them are open in front of schools ffs.

What's a suitable area?

dr.bollocko · 20-01-2010 03:12PM

yoshytoshy wrote: »

There wouldn't be a problem with these shops ,if they opened up in suitable areas.
Some of them are open in front of schools ffs.

Next to off licences and tobacconists are they?

AnonoBoy · 20-01-2010 03:13PM

Personally I think they won't succeed in closing them down. But they might prompt the government to regulate them which would probably be a good thing.

AnonoBoy · 20-01-2010 03:14PM

yoshytoshy wrote: »

There wouldn't be a problem with these shops ,if they opened up in suitable areas.
Some of them are open in front of schools ffs.

Hey man teachers have a right to get high too you know. :mad:

yoshytoshy · 20-01-2010 03:15PM

SV wrote: »

What's a suitable area?

In city areas that are generally busy at night. At the moment they're opening up anywhere they can.
Maybe have strict opening hours aswell.

Buford T Justice · 20-01-2010 03:16PM

Headshop? WTF?

dr.bollocko · 20-01-2010 03:17PM

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Headshop? WTF?

Shops which sell drug paraphernalia such as bongs, papers, and also numerous legal highs, wizard masks and other hippie BS.

Nike_Dude · 20-01-2010 03:19PM

It's the same thing as with the stringfellows place :rolleyes: if they are such a serious concern then people should start lobbying their TDs. Some clown of a radio presenter shouldnt be able to mobilise an army of whingers to start closing down things he personally doesnt like.

Duck's hoop · 20-01-2010 03:21PM

Nike_Dude wrote: »

It's the same thing as with the stringfellows place :rolleyes: if they are such a serious concern then people should start lobbying their TDs. Some clown of a radio presenter shouldnt be able to mobilise an army of whingers to start closing down things he personally doesnt like.

Precisely.

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 03:22PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Personally I think they won't succeed in closing them down. But they might prompt the government to regulate them which would probably be a good thing.

It's more likely they will ban the synthetic cannabinoids using a catch-all and then they'll ban the party pill and bath salt ingredients soon after. Meph is raising eyebrows Europe wide..it's dead in the water. Synthetic cannabinoids have already been banned in the largest countries in europe

BraziliaNZ · 20-01-2010 03:26PM

the way things are going all the products will be banned, because of whining idiots on Joe Duffy

syklops · 20-01-2010 03:26PM

Nike_Dude wrote: »

It's the same thing as with the stringfellows place :rolleyes: if they are such a serious concern then people should start lobbying their TDs. Some clown of a radio presenter shouldnt be able to mobilise an army of whingers to start closing down things he personally doesnt like.

Decisions are made by those who show up. If enugh people rang liveline up in defence of Headshops then nothing would happen. When the topic came up, a few headshop fans rang up but to be honest they did not really give a good case of defence. Many of them spoke about what effects they experenced which was not the tack to go.

And by the way Stringfellows went because it didn't get enough business. Joe duffy did not ban it with his Ban stick.

SEPT 23 1989 · 20-01-2010 03:28PM

Duffy wants a war with the Head Shops

Duck's hoop · 20-01-2010 03:28PM

Well they ban the products they close the shops.

dsmythy · 20-01-2010 03:30PM

Undemocratic? If the people want it they will get it. If they don't they won't. Undemocratic? Plenty of other undemocratic things in Ireland but this is not one of them.

SV wrote: »

What's a suitable area?

Well away from schools for one.

nice1franko · 20-01-2010 03:33PM

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Headshop? WTF?

WindSock · 20-01-2010 03:33PM

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Headshop? WTF?

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Shops which sell drug paraphernalia such as bongs, papers, and also numerous legal highs, wizard masks and other hippie BS.

Lies!

Duck's hoop · 20-01-2010 03:33PM

syklops wrote: »

Decisions are made by those who show up. If enugh people rang liveline up in defence of Headshops then nothing would happen.

That's the problem I'm trying to get at. Aside from the fact that I'm sure he briefs his researchers to allow on a majority who share his agenda, and the fact that maybe people who use these places don't switch to Liveline religiously every day, my point is that matters of legislation should not be decided by the mob mentality that is the driver behind this show.

AnonoBoy · 20-01-2010 03:37PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

It's more likely they will ban the synthetic cannabinoids using a catch-all and then they'll ban the party pill and bath salt ingredients soon after. Meph is raising eyebrows Europe wide..it's dead in the water. Synthetic cannabinoids have already been banned in the largest countries in europe

They'll ban products sure and more products will be made and they'll be banned etc. etc.

But I don't think they will close the shops down completely, they'll just stop them selling certain products. This is why regulation is the best way forward I think.

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 03:38PM

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Well they ban the products they close the shops.

True. But then everyone can see how it's gone in the uk. I read somewhere half a tonne of meph is ngoing into the UK each week and it's on the street possibly even overtaking coke in some areas. The synthetics make a joke of the cannabis law and now meph especially makes a joke of the coke law. That can't be seen to continue.

Nike_Dude · 20-01-2010 03:39PM

syklops wrote: »

Decisions are made by those who show up. If enugh people rang liveline up in defence of Headshops then nothing would happen. When the topic came up, a few headshop fans rang up but to be honest they did not really give a good case of defence. Many of them spoke about what effects they experenced which was not the tack to go.

And by the way Stringfellows went because it didn't get enough business. Joe duffy did not ban it with his Ban stick.

Joe didnt ban it but he made sure that there was a constant supply of protesting around it. This was despite the fact that you can find any number of hookers pimping their "services" within a 5 min walk from parnell st.

Also people are not going to ring in to support something once Joe's Mob have taken a different view. Personally I don't like the headshops and I think they need to be regulated, but having Joe drum up his usual gang of complainers is not the way to deal with things.

WindSock · 20-01-2010 03:40PM

Little do these petty minded fools know that banning known quantities mean many more unknown quantities spring up to take their place.

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 03:45PM

dsmythy wrote: »

Undemocratic? If the people want it they will get it. If they don't they won't. Undemocratic? Plenty of other undemocratic things in Ireland but this is not one of them.

The sale of magic mushrooms by headshops was banned by Mary Harney in 2006, following the death of one person after taking them. This, despite any real evidence that the death was as a direct result of taking the mushrooms. There was nothing democratic about it either & if headshops are closed, you can guarantee that it will not be put to a public vote.

Tobacco & alcohol cause substantial deaths in this country every year & cost the health service millions of pounds, compared to one alleged death caused by a headshop product, namely a natural occuring fungi that can be picked from most Irish fields every September. If they are to be closed by knee-jerk, tabloid driven hysteria, it wouldn't surprise me.

Whilst I agree that the products sold by headshops should be regulated, closing them altogether will do nothing but drive people to buy their drugs from dealers who we all know are controlled by criminal gangs. When that happens, the Joe Duffy brigade will really have something to complain about.

The problem is that the mob mentality is far too short sighted & cannot see that every action has consequences & they are far too tunnel visioned to realise that this particular action will have far greater consequences than they imagine.

AnonoBoy · 20-01-2010 03:47PM

Nike_Dude wrote: »

Joe didnt ban it but he made sure that there was a constant supply of protesting around it. This was despite the fact that you can find any number of hookers pimping their "services" within a 5 min walk from parnell st.

I don't think the protests went on for that long at all. Stringfellow's problem was that it was too expensive was it not?

And if the Joe Duffy brigade were so up in arms about Stringfellow's (which treated staff fairly well I heard) why aren't they bothered about the other lapdancing places in Dublin?

OutlawPete · 20-01-2010 03:49PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Stringfellow's problem was that it was too expensive was it not?

You tell us..

Joe Duffy and Mob Rule

Comments