A sensible discussion about current drugs policy.

[Hairyloon]

I've come up with a self financing proposal that would teach these abusers a bett and more responsible approach to life.

I missed that proposal. You think they should give up drugs and take up gambling instead?

Interesting proposal. Tell me more.

[MrMondo]

I'm only interested in the drugs that cause addiction and health problems that cost the tax payer to put right

 

 

 

Nobody (other than me) has toted the idea of a self funding project so do stop with the childishness.

 

 

 

 

None of the posts address the problem most are just shove it under the carpet with another do-gooder scheme whereas I've come up with a self financing proposal that would teach these abusers a bett and more responsible approach to life.

 

ignoreing my post again?? tut tut

[Halibut]

 

Nobody (other than me) has toted the idea of a self funding project so do stop with the childishness.

None of the posts address the problem most are just shove it under the carpet with another do-gooder scheme whereas I've come up with a self financing proposal that would teach these abusers a bett and more responsible approach to life.

 

Oh, so you have a really great idea do you?

How exactly does that work? You never said. How exactly are you going to get the addicts to earn enough money to fund their accommadation and treatment programme?

[discodown]

I'm only interested in the drugs that cause addiction and health problems that cost the tax payer to put right

So that would include legal drugs the likes of which you were prescribed?

 

So what about non-addictive illegal drugs? MDMA for instance, thats non addictive and while it has some side effects it causes few social problems, certainly less than alcohol or tobacco. Should its legal status be changed?

[hard2miss]

Am I wrong in thinking that we have 18 pages of debate with just 1 bloke ?

 

It seems to me that everyone else has shown sense on this issue bar 1 stubborn, may I say old, geezer.

 

You have as much chance in getting the the Titanic to New York than get Bassman62 to see the light.

[Hairyloon]

Am I wrong in thinking that we have 18 pages of debate with just 1 bloke ?

I couldn't say. I skipped most of the middle.

You have as much chance in getting the the Titanic to New York than get Bassman62 to see the light.

I like a challenge.

But if he simply won't engage, then that fits the definition of a troll in my book.

[*_ash_*]

And what about the many many children who've been subjected to Autosugestion on a grand scale they end up agreeing to what has been implanted by these people due to the pressure they're put under.

I even stopped cleaning my grandaughter when she started toilet training due to things that have happened to innocent people.

 

Only people with an agenda will find it offensive

I think that this post was a continuation of this discussion that is not being even at least partially 'sensible' as the title suggests. At least the previous 16 pages had some substance. Some of the nonsensical drivel that has been spouted in the last couple of pages beggars belief.

 

-

 

 

Or maybe we are getting somewhere? Or were you using a sentence that could be swapped and changed for your argument... for example...

I'm only interested in the drugs that cause addiction and health problems that cost the tax payer to put right

 

 

So you would agree to legalising cannabis and Ecstasy then? Or, will you change the argument ....

I'm only interested in the drugs that cause addiction and health problems that cost the tax payer to put right

Cannabis and Ecstasy cost the tax payers a huge amount in incarcerating people who take these drugs or sell them.

 

Which is it?

 

-

 

None of the posts address the problem most are just shove it under the carpet with another do-gooder scheme whereas I've come up with a self financing proposal that would teach these abusers a bett and more responsible approach to life.

Since no one other than Liza is agreeing with you, then perhaps the 'do-gooders' scheme uses reason and logic. And people are becoming more educated in this principle. You might have come up with some self financing crap, but can you post any evidence to anything that suggests that your current method ideology is working? There are countless ones that have been posted with evidence, that counter your argument.

 

Just be honest and say that this is YOUR ideology.

Am I wrong in thinking that we have 18 pages of debate with just 1 bloke ?

 

It seems to me that everyone else has shown sense on this issue bar 1 stubborn, may I say old, geezer.

 

You have as much chance in getting the the Titanic to New York than get Bassman62 to see the light.

You must be a do-gooder too.

[liza D]

Am I wrong in thinking that we have 18 pages of debate with just 1 bloke ?

 

It seems to me that everyone else has shown sense on this issue bar 1 stubborn, may I say old, geezer.

 

You have as much chance in getting the the Titanic to New York than get Bassman62 to see the light.

 

 

I don't agree with everything that Bassman62 has said on this thread, but it does not mean he has no right to his/her own opinion. After all correct me if i'm wrong , but is this not a discussion forum?

 

 

I too do not agree that drugs should be legalised. In my opinion (and i'm sure it aint everyones) there are no safe drugs. If people on here think there are could you please name them and we could discuss how you think they are in a civilised manner that doesn't get the thread closed.

[liza D]

What on earth are you on about.

It is an established fact that 70%+ of prostitutes stem from being abused as a child.

Here have a read of this lads research into the recruitment process for prostitution.

http://alexiskennedy0.tripod.com/lab/id21.html

Majority of prostitutes are only there because they were tampered with as children, making them easy targets for pimps.

Child abuse is not something that can be dismissed as just a social workers way of making customers.

I find your perception of child abuse utterly disgraceful, you should be ashamed.

 

Up to 80% of prostitutes are groomed from an age where they have little control over what the world does around them and to them.

 

 

http://www.darkness2light.org/knowabout/statistics_2.asp

 

 

Digsy, this thread isn't about prostitution or for that matter child abuse.

 

It's irrelevant why people say they take drugs. The fact is they do. What do the gov etc do to stop it. Legalising it won't stop it.

 

It's like you and most on this thread are saying it's okay to take drugs as long as they are legal.

[Digsy]

Digsy, this thread isn't about prostitution or for that matter child abuse.

 

So it's about the none abused children that don't turn into prostitutes who work to fund the drug habits that pimps get them hooked on.

Why should these folk be excluded from any sensible debate.

 

It's irrelevant why people say they take drugs. The fact is they do. What do the gov etc do to stop it. Legalising it won't stop it.

 

Neither does keeping them illegal, but the cost of keeping them illegal far outweighs the cost of decriminalising.

It has already been covered that those countries that have relaxed the laws have found a drop in users.

 

"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."

 

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz0ySMTkaEZ

 

It's like you and most on this thread are saying it's okay to take drugs as long as they are legal.

 

I aint saying it's ok to take drugs, in my ideal world drugs would not exist full stop, but this aint my utopia, drugs do exist, keeping them illegal funds crime and death.