Joe Duffy and Mob Rule

xzanti · 20-01-2010 03:53PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

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?

It was because it was being opened in the middle of a residential area afaik..

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 03:55PM

starbelgrade wrote: »

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.

What do you mean?

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 03:57PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

What do you mean?

If you read the whole post, you'd know what I mean.

AnonoBoy · 20-01-2010 03:58PM

OutlawPete wrote: »

You tell us..

Hah! Nah, I knew a lad who worked in the bar there and that's it. Honest.

xzanti wrote: »

It was because it was being opened in the middle of a residential area afaik..

That would make a bit of sense alright. It was up near Parnell Street was it?

xzanti · 20-01-2010 04:03PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

That would make a bit of sense alright. It was up near Parnell Street was it?

Yep, near a load of inner city flats.. a noody bar would have really ruined the futures of the kids in the area..

OutlawPete · 20-01-2010 04:04PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Hah! Nah, I knew a lad who worked in the bar there and that's it. Honest.

I was p*ssed off when the place opened as they closed down Shooters, I loved that place

Hooters and I'd have been happy though.

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 04:10PM

starbelgrade wrote: »

If you read the whole post, you'd know what I mean.

I read the whole post and clearly I didn't.

geeky · 20-01-2010 04:11PM

Duck's hoop wrote: »

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?

Jeeeeeesus Joe, you're right, it's bleedin' awful.............

Seriously, though, if politicians get the finger out and ban these places, it'll be because they think there's a public outcry about it. Joe pushes people's buttons, for sure, but he can't snap his fingers and get something banned, or manufacture outrage out of nothing. He's not a respected journalist who can change policy making in his own right - in fact, has he ever managed to get one thing banned in this country.

Joe Duffy and his show wreck the head, but it's almost always a different storm in a different teacup every afternoon - rather like After Hours. You're ascribing way too much power to him.

The_Minister · 20-01-2010 04:12PM

starbelgrade wrote: »

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.

But at the time shrooms were only allowed to be sold due to a loophole regarding scientific research.
Technically they were already illegal, but there was a loophole which everyone ignored - once attention was called to it by the unfortunate death of a young man, it had to be closed.
The alternative would have been to legalise it, which wasn't a viable option politically at the time (McDowell was bringing in tougher legislation against drug lords etc).

Demeyes · 20-01-2010 04:12PM

The arguments on the radio kind of annoyed me. Very one sided and it was all fully against the head shops. Most people who would have real first hand experience of the head shops wouldn't listen to Joe Duffy at all so they didn't get much info from them. The people on it sounded like the kind of folk who would campaign against anything they aren't familiar with.
Obviously some more regulation of the headshops wouldn't go astray but the way they were talking on the show was very much for getting rid of them altogether.

OutlawPete · 20-01-2010 04:14PM

I seen two majestic stick people dancing in harmony Xzanti

Pushtrak · 20-01-2010 04:15PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

I read the whole post and clearly I didn't.

To pinpoint the important bit:

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.

xzanti · 20-01-2010 04:18PM

OutlawPete wrote: »

I seen two majestic stick people dancing in harmony Xzanti

Wow you're gay quick, I deleted that cause I thought the link wasn't working..

OutlawPete · 20-01-2010 04:20PM

xzanti wrote: »

Wow you're gay quick, I deleted that cause I thought the link wasn't working..

I made it work - anything for boobies

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 04:25PM

Pushtrak wrote: »

To pinpoint the important bit: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.

And that's what people were doing before the legal highs came along. But quietly and out of sight. Joe Duffy will shrug his shoulders.

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 04:32PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

I read the whole post and clearly I didn't.

OK - my basic point is that people will buy drugs regardless of the fact that they are legal or not. At present, we have headshops which sell legal & much less dangerous alternatives to street drugs. Many people choose to buy them from these shops as they are legal & safer.

Should the headshops be closed down, these people will end up going back to dealers & street dealers to buy stuff that they've no idea what's in them - and what is in a lot of street drugs can be very nasty stuff indeed, ranging from weed sprayed with glass particles to bulk it out, hash made from anything from car tyres, to glue, to dog sh*t, ecstacy laced with heroin, coke laced with cleaning products, etc etc.

Add to this, that almost all illegal drugs are brought into the country by criminal gangs, who have killed & will continue to kill other gang members over turf wars, who have killed & will continue to kill dealers & junkies who owe them money and then you have a much worse situation than you do now.

The headshops at least, can be controlled & regulated and whilst they may be seen by the general public as an "evil", they are a much lesser evil than the other alternative.

Quite simply, prohibition doesn't work - let's say that you ban the sale of alcohol tomorrow as they did in the States in the 1900's. It did little to stop the sale of alcohol - instead "moonshining" became a huge industry, with people brewing & selling alcohol left, right & centre. It also caused huge health problems as alcohol which is not properly distilled can cause all types of illnesses & even death.

Pat Sheen · 20-01-2010 05:17PM

starbelgrade wrote: »

Quite simply, prohibition doesn't work - let's say that you ban the sale of alcohol tomorrow as they did in the States in the 1900's. It did little to stop the sale of alcohol - instead "moonshining" became a huge industry, with people brewing & selling alcohol left, right & centre. It also caused huge health problems as alcohol which is not properly distilled can cause all types of illnesses & even death.

Quite simply, prohibition doesn't work - let's say that you ban the sale of drugs tomorrow as they did in the States in the 1900's. It did little to stop the sale of drugs - instead "legal highs" became a huge industry, with people importing & selling legal highs left, right & centre. It also caused huge health problems as legal high which are not properly tested can cause all types of illnesses & even death.

That's cheeky I suppose, but the point you made twice, that legal highs are safer and much less dangerous than illegal drugs, cannot be backed up with evidence because it doesn't exist, the tests have not been done. And the anecdotal negative stories are mounting up.

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 05:42PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

That's cheeky I suppose, but the point you made twice, that legal highs are safer and much less dangerous than illegal drugs, cannot be backed up with evidence because it doesn't exist, the tests have not been done. And the anecdotal negative stories are mounting up.

Some tests have been done - which is why the sale of products containing BZP were recently outlawed. I agree though, that testing is the way forward, but I also know for a fact, that the stuff sold in headshops is also not laced with all the nasty stuff you get in street drugs.

major bill · 20-01-2010 05:45PM

another bit of evidence that the nanny state hasnt gone away.:rolleyes:

RedPlanet · 20-01-2010 05:54PM

Pat Sheen wrote: »

That's cheeky I suppose, but the point you made twice, that legal highs are safer and much less dangerous than illegal drugs, cannot be backed up with evidence because it doesn't exist, the tests have not been done. And the anecdotal negative stories are mounting up.

Tbh i think the onus is on the Joe Duffy side to backup their claims with stats.
These stories are coming from sensationalized media.

The claims don't make much sense, Joe Duffy constantly tells us that the headshops are doing great business, but if loads of their customers were having bad experiences then they wouldn't be repeat customers. Their reports would also put their friends off so i would expect less business, nor more.

Pushtrak · 20-01-2010 06:00PM

RedPlanet wrote: »

Tbh i think the onus is on the Joe Duffy side to backup their claims with stats.

Thats the thing with a mob mentality. Doesn't necessarily need stats or those pesky fact things.

Rev. Kitchen · 20-01-2010 06:04PM

I had to laugh the other day when a doctor rang up saying how dangerous these drugs are and that the woman selling them and her ilk should be shut down. Ignoring the fact that literally hundred of people die each year from taking fully legal prescribed drugs that doctors have given them.

But i feel those shops need to be shut down untill we can reduce the number of idiots in Ireland we cant have things like this because for every 1 person that takes 1 of these pills every 5 or 6 months you have 10 idiots that take 10 a day and wonder why they have such a negative effect on them !!.

I rember seeing huge headline from 1 guy about how they ruined his life. Then as you read on it turns out he was taking 18 of the old BZP pills every day !! for 3 months. That would be like drinking 5 bottles of vodka a day for 3 months and then saying pubs need to be shut down.

Another guy rang up Joe saying his son was obsessed with Columbine high school shootings had swords and pellet guns under his bed had a map of the school on his wall. And when he took a pill it turned him phyco :eek:.
Sorry there sir but your son isnt very well rounded in the first place

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 06:05PM

http://anacarlo.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/father-ted-careful-now.jpg

Kradock · 20-01-2010 06:05PM

RedPlanet wrote: »

Tbh i think the onus is on the Joe Duffy side to backup their claims with stats.
These stories are coming from sensationalized media.

I can't stand Joe Duffy , he is Irelands Jeremy Kyle imo , but the stories are coming from worried parents not sensationalised media. Parents who are trying to keep their kids from illegal drugs and now have these shops to deal with. I don't know the ends and outs of their products but I do know that their intention is to circumvent loopholes in the law to provide customised concoctions to achieve the sensation of an illegal drug. This can't be good.

starbelgrade · 20-01-2010 06:12PM

Kradock wrote: »

RedPlanet wrote: »

Tbh i think the onus is on the Joe Duffy side to backup their claims with stats.
These stories are coming from sensationalized media.

I can't stand Joe Duffy , he is Irelands Jeremy Kyle imo , but the stories are coming from worried parents not sensationalised media. Parents who are trying to keep their kids from illegal drugs and now have these shops to deal with. I don't know the ends and outs of their products but I do know that their intention is to circumvent loopholes in the law to provide customised concoctions to achieve the sensation of an illegal drug. This can't be good.

Unfortunately, as is often the case, these stories originally came from a small number of "concerned" citizens, which were then sensationalised in the Sunday papers not long ago, which led us to the current frenzy which is now being fuelled by a national broadcaster.

I've been in headshops & seen many a youngster being asked for I-D and those who don't produce it, don't get served. They operate a stricter policy on I-D than most off licences or pubs.

They may be circumventing legal loopholes, or they may not - but statements to the effect that they are doing so, without any facts to back it up, really don't help the discussion.

And I return to the point, that I'd rather take a pill from a headshop that I know for certain doesn't contain jaw chewing skag in it, innit.

Alessandra · 20-01-2010 06:42PM

I love the way people react to things in this country. We have a country run by greedy fools and everyone sits back and whinges away doing nothing and then people become "outraged" by shops that sell cigarette papers and nothing else that's not readily available in the rest of Europe. People are weird.

hooradiation · 20-01-2010 06:42PM

starbelgrade wrote: »

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.

We live in a representative democracy, not a direct one, so your claim that it's not democratic is nonsense.
We elect people to make these decisions for us, it's shitty that they can be swayed by small but vocal groups, but the alternative of everybody voting on every issue is far worse.

Likewise, the Joe Duffy brigade are essentially lobbyists (though what the lobby for changes from day to day) and they will probably be listened to as there is no counter to them. If people object to this "war on headshops" even just on pure ethical terms they would be better served lobbying back to show that support for this ill-advised ban is not universal.

SocioAnthropy · 21-01-2010 01:20AM

How can people attempt to justify their arguments against head shops when they dutifully acknowledge the sale of cigarettes, alcohol & lotto tickets/scratchcards nationwide?

:pac: I know it's an old argument but that really doesn't mean there is a lack of validity to the present situation.

I'll ask a few questions that the mob should be considering in regards to this issue, hopefully other's will follow with better arguments because the only way to actually get past such nonsense is to confront it and find any validity in the other argument - if it exists...

1: In our age of medical & psychiatrical knowledge how can we tacitly assume that the product sold by the head shop caused his hallucinations. I read on another board that there was no evidence in the slightest given as to a link.
Correlation does not necessitate causation,
Because a lot of red trucks brang milk from the country during the whole foot-and-mouth era doesn't mean that red trucks were the cause, you get me?

Also, there are people who cannot watch movies due to epileptic fits, there are people who react to certain kinds of medicine in a bad way. There are people who spontaneously combust ffs... These things happen. Instead of book burning and witch hunts why not stage an intelligent quest to find out the pro's and con's of using these substances & their effects as opposed to blindly blacklisting something.

2: Why isn't there public outcry over the sale of cigarette's to under 18's, or the sale of alcohol to under 18's? Or the sale of alcohol and tobacco to over 18's?
Why hasn't there been a rant by Joe Duffy or the next radio-joe over the huge numbers of road accidents & the huge percentage factor that alcohol has in relation to these huge figures? Why not go ape over the fact that a lot of women beat men when they are drunk, and vice-versa?

3: How can people ignore the fact that every other person they know has tried drugs & a considerable portion do socially, let alone people snorting bath salts or whatever... To claim otherwise is to claim ignorance to a substantial majority of the population. Another shameful fact is that in all countries where drugs are legal there is less of every crime, death etc... that we and similar countries face. You can assume all you like but the figures don't lie, do some research.

4: What is it about society that drives people to use such substances? Why is it that such a huge proportion of people need the satiation that only these un-taxed & apparently amoral substances give?

I've read around a bit online and it seems that this is a long term witch hunt by Joe Duffy. It's a complete waste of time & life but when someone is actively seeking to restrict aspects of social life & trying to tell others how to live based on his personal "bs" assumptions I think it's worth fighting against.

Please reserve the ad hominem insults for the real world, thank you, and have a nice day all the same

Zombrex · 21-01-2010 02:16AM

Rev. Kitchen wrote: »

I had to laugh the other day when a doctor rang up saying how dangerous these drugs are and that the woman selling them and her ilk should be shut down. Ignoring the fact that literally hundred of people die each year from taking fully legal prescribed drugs that doctors have given them.

I don't think any doctor ignores the dangers of drugs they prescribe. Which is why there is a prescription system in the first place.

I don't think anyone would object to what is in effect a powerful drug, being given to a patient under the care of a doctor, if it serves a medical purpose. You get far more powerful drugs in hospital than you would ever find in a head shop.

But last time I checked head shops tend not to have a qualified doctor assessing the medical suitability of anyone buying a drug from them.

The issue then becomes powerful drugs being given by non-medical professionals to people without requiring medical history or check ups for non-medical purposes.

starbelgrade · 21-01-2010 02:34AM

Wicknight wrote: »

I

The issue then becomes powerful drugs being given by non-medical professionals to people without requiring medical history or check ups for non-medical purposes.

You could say the same about publicans - when was the last time anyone ordered a pint & was asked by the barman if they ever had a history of alcohol dependency in their life or family.

When it comes down to it, all drug use or mis-use is & always will be a matter of personal choice & drugs will be found, either through doctors, headshops or dealers.

Joe Duffy and Mob Rule

Comments