Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yeah, cocaine is the hole in my argument which i haven't resolved yet. Too many nights out in Soho with colleagues talking and behaving like proper plums have prejudiced my view somewhat. I suppose if it was legal it would help to sort out the ethically dubious supply chain.


Obviously, police will have to divert resources to stop incidents silly dancing and rubbish talking.

Personally I think it's time that hallucinogens come back into fashion.


Bring back:

http://www.me.ngb.army.mil/ddr/LSD%20pics/lsd6.gif

http://www.talktofrank.com/uploadedImages/Drugs/LARGE%20PHOTOS_lsd.jpg

http://www.hypereall.com/images/acid/lsd_blotter_ap_plastikman.jpg


Maybe New Year's Eve at the neighbours house.



Charlie

So let us recap here.


Alcohol, Ecstasy, Cannabis and Cocaine. All of these drugs have at least one of the following effects on you.


1 ? Make you dance like an idiot.

2 ? Make you raid the fridge and eat strange combinations of food.

3 ? Make you loud, opinionated and arrogant.


Only one however does all three.

Charlie - you said

" Amanda, your first post said "I think all drugs should be legalised". "


but you forgot to include "with some form of licensing" so I would now like you to point out where I deviated from this opinion please seeing as how you have said on more than one occasion that I have changed my mind and I am confused as to how you could have reached that conclusion!

Sorry Amanda, I thought you'd started this thread by saying that you thought all drugs should be legalised. And ended by saying prohibition isn't working, we need a rethink.


Did I make a mistake? They're not the same things.


I think everybody would agree that there are areas of drug control that don't work. But not many people seem to want all drugs to be legalised, even with a degree of licensing.



Charlie

Wow, interesting stuff, and great to see a debate stay civil over 4 pages!! Bravo.


A couple of scattershot points from me.

Acid hasn't had fatalities but can result in acute and/or chronic psychosis, I ended up with a couple of months of anxiety attacks after overdoing it in my youth.


*Bob* I 'got it' back in 1990, and it was an amazing time, though I think that vibe (eek, horrible word) died very quickly as alcohol and cocaine seeped then flooded back into the scene. I haven't been near those little pills in 15 years now.

But again harmless they ain't. Apart from the techno anoraks and house muic bores, I also saw friends become horrible weekenders, some of whom ended up spiralling into severe depression as your serotonin depletion gets you all over the shop and one of whom keeled over into his sunday lunch at his mum's, dead as a doornail, his heart just gave up; might have been a year of taking 10-20 pills over a weekend, might have been entirely unrelated.


And just as a point for discussion, there are NO drugs here in Singapore. Severe penalties for possession and death for smuggling.

It might be prohibition working, it might be that policing the borders of an island city state is much easier. Plus next to no crime nor violence. Nor democracy nor police, apart from the hordes of secret ones.

Illiberal place, but it certainly functions.

Freedom?


Freedom to:

Walk home late at night without fear of being mugged by some crack head?

Know my kids will not be offered drugs outside the school gates?

Know that my wife can wear what she wants with out fear of harrasment or worse?

To protect my home without first considering my family's attackers human rights?

Let my kids play on the street without fear of them being violently separated from their possessions?


I think I could handle a ban on chewing gum and a tougher stance on drug related crime.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • TBH if people don't see what is sectarian in the materials linked to above when they read about them, then I don't think me going on about it will help. They speak for themselves.  I don't know how the Greens can justify promising to be a strong voice for one particular religion. Will that pledge hold when it comes to campaigning in East Dulwich (which is majority atheist)? https://censusdata.uk/e02000836-east-dulwich/ts030-religion
    • Saying one thing so everyone can understand, and something different that only select people can understand is not inclusive, it’s dangerous.  
    • I'm not deliberately swerving anything. What exactly have they said in their communications in languages other than English that you object to? Why would they put those communications in other languages when the whole point was to connect with a specific group of people? Apologies if I've missed your point.
    • The point (which you're swerving) is not that the Greens spread their message in a language other than English - it's what they have said, and why they're shy about saying the same thing in other languages, including English. If a party in Northern Ireland circulates leaflets in Ulster Scots only that tells voters to elect them so they can be a strong Protestant voice, and has videos in Ulster Scots only that seek to discredit the First Minister by showing (a propos of nothing) images of them meeting the Pope - is that inclusivity or sectarianism?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...