Jump to content

Government ignores advice of Drugs Committee.


Recommended Posts

 

The drugs advisory council also consider social issues. The government are following a non evidence based policy.

 

You don't know they're following a non evidence based policy. That might be an assumption based on another assumption that the advice of the advisory board is their only source for decision making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So once again for the hard of thinking.

 

It is illegal in the rest of the civilised world.

 

Do you people understand that?

 

It was not illegal here.

 

It has a very limited shelf life.

 

So for the entire civilised worlds supply it was flown into the uk by BA, then mixed up with legitimate cargo by somalian gangsters located in our homeland and smuggled to the rest of the civilised world from here.

 

Can any of you people give me a good reason why this was a good idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So once again for the hard of thinking.

 

It is illegal in the rest of the civilised world.

mmkkk, your point is?

Do you people understand that?

rodger.

It was not illegal here.

MMkkk again

It has a very limited shelf life.

yep its like avegtable or a fruit or whatever,

 

So for the entire civilised worlds supply it was flown into the uk by BA, then mixed up with legitimate cargo by somalian gangsters(you sure it was gangsters and not khat growers?) located in our homeland and smuggled to the rest of the civilised world from here.

okay..still not sure of your point

Can any of you people give me a good reason why this was a good idea?

 

 

because they weren't paying taxes...and now they will, oh wait, thats starbucks gangsters... err cos the governments advisory panel said its not worth banning. so we didn't oh wait up again we did..

 

If we could smuggle it out of the uk to places it was banned from how are we expected to stop it coming into the uk cos we've banned it..

Seriously for the hard of thinking..

WE BAN LOTS OF DRUGS, WE DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING.

got that.

we could at least have monitored and regulated and studied not to mention taxed it We could have made it a social faux pas to spit it out like drunk driving has become.

Nah we'll just ban it then spend millions of pounds locking up people who choose to chew khat..

its like groundhog day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

because they weren't paying taxes...and now they will, oh wait, thats starbucks gangsters... err cos the governments advisory panel said its not worth banning. so we didn't oh wait up again we did..

 

If we could smuggle it out of the uk to places it was banned from how are we expected to stop it coming into the uk cos we've banned it..

Seriously for the hard of thinking..

WE BAN LOTS OF DRUGS, WE DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING.

got that.

we could at least have monitored and regulated and studied not to mention taxed it We could have made it a social faux pas to spit it out like drunk driving has become.

Nah we'll just ban it then spend millions of pounds locking up people who choose to chew khat..

its like groundhog day.

 

So khat, which is illegal in a lot of other countries isn't already being run organised criminal gangs because its legal here. Have I got that right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't know they're following a non evidence based policy. That might be an assumption based on another assumption that the advice of the advisory board is their only source for decision making.

 

oh they're follwing evidence thats for sure the quality and sensibillity of the evidence they choose to follow is the problem.

 

As an aside,

Cannabis, used for 1000's years, safe, no known deaths blah blah blah

In more rcent years cannabis and more specifcally 'skunk'(its not skunk but thats a diff subject) has been held responsible for 'growing psychosis' issues and what not, more blah.

There has been a trend over recent years for growers who sell, to produce skunk which is a strongish form of cannabis and that is now the most common form available, not the only but the most common. Which is by no means the most suitable type of cannabis to be taking on a regular basis for all people. however its not like the average guy has a wide variety of strengths and types of cannabis to choose from. which goes against the evidence and also against simple logical reasoning.

When you ban something you remove all control you might or might not have had. You also remove a lot of the saftey nets that consumer choice creates by simply showing a prefrence. I'll not go into the spraying of sand onto plants.. molten throat anyone

 

There's a reason people drink more tea than beer and they drink more vodka than absenthe.

 

So there's evidence and then theres what you want to hear to support your decisions.

 

---------- Post added 05-07-2013 at 00:27 ----------

 

So khat, which is illegal in a lot of other countries isn't already being run organised criminal gangs because its legal here. Have I got that right?

 

and thats the bit you chose to question....

 

Well they wern't criminal gangs in that respect untill they were iyswim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So khat, which is illegal in a lot of other countries isn't already being run organised criminal gangs because its legal here. Have I got that right?

 

Importers of Khat to the UK weren't criminals, it was legitimate, and there was no need for gangs.

 

Now of course anyone who tries to import it will be a criminal, and so then you can call them a gang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Importers of Khat to the UK weren't criminals, it was legitimate, and there was no need for gangs.

 

Now of course anyone who tries to import it will be a criminal, and so then you can call them a gang.

 

But if those people are then moving it to say the Netherlands that would be illegal. Maybe I've got it wrong and khat production is a harmless cottage industry in the uk and its only when it crosses borders it moves to criminal gangs, who have no connection to the uk khat importers. That would make it a far different business model to say, cannabis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if those people are then moving it to say the Netherlands that would be illegal. Maybe I've got it wrong and khat production is a harmless cottage industry in the uk and its only when it crosses borders it moves to criminal gangs, who have no connection to the uk khat importers. That would make it a far different business model to say, cannabis.

here its legal so the distribution and checks go like anything else imported legally, in dutchland its illegal so the only people who import it are criminal gangs

once its illegal here it'll be the same, only in the hands of criminal gangs, but it won't be stopped, it'll just move underground

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here its legal so the distribution and checks go like anything else imported legally, in dutchland its illegal so the only people who import it are criminal gangs

once its illegal here it'll be the same, only in the hands of criminal gangs, but it won't be stopped, it'll just move underground

 

Is it not illegal to participate in the sending of a substance known to be banned in the recipients country?

 

 

 

May I also guide people to the Home Secretary's statement on the government decision.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/khat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.