Tackling the drugs problem

[Cyclone]

The government said they are not prepared to go down that route. My opinion is that it would just make things much worse and that the only people who want that scenario are likely to be druggies themselves.

 

You're demonstrably wrong in your opinion then, I want that scenario and I've never used any illegal drugs.

 

It's harder to demonstrate that you're wrong about it making things worse, but not much, for example look at Portugal.

[Cyclone]

This wont stop acquisitive crime will it? the only thing that will do that is if drugs are given to people for free.

 

Given that highly addictive drugs will be free (at the point of prescription) it will massively reduce the theft that they generate.

Other drugs will be cheaper (and/or legal to grow yourself) again reducing the quantity of theft.

[Mecky]

You're demonstrably wrong in your opinion then, I want that scenario and I've never used any illegal drugs.

It's harder to demonstrate that you're wrong about it making things worse, but not much, for example look at Portugal.

 

Or least not admit to it on a public forum. Did I say you had anyway? When I was teaching, I remember students trying to do assignments without reading the brief.

[Cyclone]

Shoot all users of illegal drugs.

 

After you've killed 40% of the population (or numbers in that range), what do you think you'll have achieved?

[Cyclone]

Or least not admit to it on a public forum. Did I say you had anyway?

 

It demonstrates that you're wrong though because I do want that situation.

 

the only people who want that scenario are likely to be druggies themselves.

In reality only those who are reasonably intelligent and open to actually solving the problem want this scenario.

[HeadingNorth]

It demonstrates that you're wrong though because I do want that situation.

 

But you can't prove that you don't use drugs. You know you don't, and I know you don't, but if it suits Mecky's purposes to claim that you are just pretending not to - you cannot prove him wrong. This is exactly the sort of thing that people mean when they say "you can't prove a negative."

 

In the real world of logical thinking, it is up to Mecky to prove you a liar when you say that you do not use drugs. I suspect, though, that he will just continue to say "only people who use drugs and refuse to admit to it on Sheffield Forum, would support such an idea."

[Mecky]

It demonstrates that you're wrong though because I do want that situation.

 

 

In reality only those who are reasonably intelligent and open to actually solving the problem want this scenario.

 

What does the word "Likely" mean?

[Cyclone]

That's 10% of the population. You'll need 6 million immigrants to replace them.

 

If you include all those who've ever tried them it's significantly higher I believe.

[Cyclone]

What does the word "Likely" mean?

 

What does the word "Only" mean.

 

Maybe you should try not to be ambiguous.

[Cyclone]

But you can't prove that you don't use drugs. You know you don't, and I know you don't, but if it suits Mecky's purposes to claim that you are just pretending not to - you cannot prove him wrong. This is exactly the sort of thing that people mean when they say "you can't prove a negative."

Obviously, but since I know it's true my statements about his opinion being proven wrong will be based on that.

He was ambiguous though, using "only" and "likely" in the same sentence.

 

In the real world of logical thinking, it is up to Mecky to prove you a liar when you say that you do not use drugs. I suspect, though, that he will just continue to say "only people who use drugs and refuse to admit to it on Sheffield Forum, would support such an idea."

That's up to him, I don't really care.

 

What we really need to establish is why he wants the war on drug to cost more and to continue to fail.