Headshops

flash1080 wrote: »

I know that some people grow their own, but I'm specifically talking about people who choose to support organised crime.



Drugs are necessities, they are luxuries, so people who choose to support organised crime deserve criticism.

Don't accuse me of supporting child or slave labour.

TVs computers and most things in life aren't necessities either. Very little that comes out of China and India and all the other 3rd world countries are necessities and if you don't want me to bring up all the child and slave labour that's used to provide all the fancy gadgets in your house don't accuse me of supporting criminals it's the exact same thing.

If drugs where legal there would only be an addiction problem which we know how to fix but very little would stop the labour practices used to put a TV in your house.

flash1080 wrote: »

No. Fighting in general.

I don't think fighting in general has a whole lot of benefits, if your not physically trained to do it you could easily injure yourself fighting someone. Overall the benefits you mention don't apply unless your doing a martial art. Just getting in fights is of no benefit to anybody especially the one getting in the fights.

flash1080 wrote: »

Those benefits do apply to fighting in general.

Ok, go on then explain.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Less informed times allowed the legalisation of cigs.

Look at the different attitude to them now compared to even 15 years ago.

I had occasion to be very personally involved with three so called 'headshops' in my area .The owners were less than trustworthy and the clientele were by and large total wasters who never had or ever will be able to hold down a job in their lives.

Career dependents on state assistance,currently a drain on resources and in the future practically guaranteed to need huge and expensive interventions and all paid for by John Q Taxpayer.

that's my experience, I would be very naive to expect that every other headshop was totally different.

Good riddance ,I say.

Have you even read my post? Or read all the evidence brought forward by doctors and reliable sources in my earlier post. Or read your own post, and the article that you actually told me to read?

All of them were in favor of headshops/legalization of weed, just under regulation. I highly doubt that these people will all need interventions later. Where is your evidence for this? Also like i have said before alcohol does this already, is it your opinion that it should be treated differently or are you in favor of making it illegal also. Do you drink personally? If so, its a bit hypocritical there.

The people who were getting drugs in headshops with there dole money are getting drugs anyway now with them gone, the difference is that because headshops are closed they are now getting them off criminals. Now this causes a lot of problems.

1. No tax to the government.

2. These criminals unlike headshops will sell on "tick" now say johnny cant afford to pay said dealer later. He will a)get his legs broke(hospital trip on cost to tax payer or b) have to do jobs for the dealer(adding to crime rates, again at cost to tax payer)

3. This guy might only want a bit of smoke, but criminals are pushers who will gradually attempt to get these guys hooked on stronger and stronger stuff. They do this buy giving them "free samples" or else by giving them somthing like meth even when they payed for and only wanted weed. This again will cause much bigger problems down the line(at cost to the tax payer).

IT IS TIME TO STOP BURYING OUR HEADS. Closing headshops accomplished nothing except that it gave the criminals back there business. We could quite easily set up a head shop system similar to the netherlands, or at the very least like the pubs here in Ireland which could stop all this from happening. However as we were programmed since we were born to think that all drugs are evil, people are still thinking closing these shops down is the best option when it clearly isnt.

Criminals were BURNING THESE SHOPS DOWN because they were so afraid of there profits being cut for christ sake. Does that not show you anything?

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If you have a point to make in relation to this thread, go ahead and make it.

I have nothing against weedheads or potheads. As far as I am concerned they can smoke their heads off.Stew their brains if they want to.

Just don't waste my hard earned tax bucks getting your head put together down at the hospital or psychiatric unit pal.

I ain't paying to straighten you out and neither are most normal people.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Absolutely, but these guys don't care about that nurse,that's someone elses problem paid for by the taxpayer.

The 'headshop owner doesn't give a bollix about that, he/she has his wedge in his pocket and John Q taxpayer will pick up the pieces.

This man speaks sense and there is absolutely no use denying it.

The benzo pellets,bath salts, bong,pipe, and blow merchants can mush their brains all the like, just don't block up the emergency units of a weekend and put more of a burden on John Q Taxpayer.

Sort yourselves out, there must be a potion for that.

If you go into A&E most of the time it's full of p!ss heads. You get the occasional person who has a bad reaction to head shop drugs and very few stoners have issues that need A&E. Some users of weed may develop mental health issues, but they may have already had underlying health issues as there is no proof either way. The majority of issues with the harder drugs isn't the actual drug itself, which if managed correctly doesn't cause the social destruction associated with them, but the crap that dealers cut it with to increase their profits.

People who take illegal drugs also pay taxes on their wages, VAT etc and would rather not have their tax money wasted on all the trouble that drunks cause.

The vast majority of illegal drug takers would much rather pay taxes for good quality produce then get poisoned by unscrupulous dealers, but same as with drink and cigs some will still want to avoid paying paying tax and buy off dodgy sellers.

A dealer will never ask for ID. The head shops had an 18s policy which was as well enforced as the 18s law for drink in this country.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Surely you are not seriously trying to promulgate the view that 'headshops' were run by responsible adults with a serious social conscience and a desire to improve the lives of their customers?

Surely not!

There is no evidence to the contrary AFAIK.

Can't tar them all with the same brush though.