Phanerothyme Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 The thing is, no laws would need to be made or repealed for maintenance therapy to be offered to heroin addicts, so it's all a bit OT. ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 19:13 ---------- Blimey, who butchered the thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Prisoners should have the right to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWOODS Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Prisoners should have the right to vote. Depends on the crime committed. Definitely not paedos,rapists or murderers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Ecstasy and heroin are both class A. Both easy to obtain. There is a reason hundreds of thousands of people take ecstasy on a regular basis but wouldn't touch heroin and it's nothing to do with legality. I don't think any legalisation advocates are saying "let's just make everything legal and see what happens", education about drugs is the key. jb I thought Ecstasy was a class B? ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 21:53 ---------- No but thousands of young people, easily led, impressionable and trend following would. Do you doubt the number of addicts would go up? Addicts are entitled at the moment, though most would vote against that. Do you think people would be agreeable to the numbers quadrupling? Increasing ten fold? The savings from the war on drugs could be spent on so many better things than treating fools. This is just all opinion, based on zero facts!! Making Heroin legal wouldn't make it available to children. What about if it was only supplied to people who already have an addiction, through a visit to a GP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey104 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 All drug prohibition laws need scrapping!! That worked well for Phillip Seymour Hoffman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 What laws in the UK do you feel are wrong on moral grounds? That minor crimes can be dragged up from many years ago. We should have a statute of limitations, we do have this ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitation_Act_1980 but not sure if it covers enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I thought Ecstasy was a class B? ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 21:53 ---------- This is just all opinion, based on zero facts!! Making Heroin legal wouldn't make it available to children. What about if it was only supplied to people who already have an addiction, through a visit to a GP? https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing Class A according to this jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 That worked well for Phillip Seymour Hoffman! Care to explain what you mean here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 That worked well for Phillip Seymour Hoffman! He was operating in a locale where prohibition was very much in effect, so he had no idea of the quality of heroin he was using, he had no medical help or advice and he had to keep his behaviour secret. That's probably why he's dead. Prohibition killed him (Heroin killed him, prohibition contributed). ---------- Post added 06-02-2014 at 08:17 ---------- So if its sold to addicts only then dealers would have to exist to cater to those still wanting to try it from new. The lessening of the stigma would only encourage more people to do this. With regards to heroin it wouldn't be 'sold' at all, the state would supply it on license for diagnosed addicts. There is no money to be made by supplying the very very occasional person who decides to try it new, because as soon as they are addicted the state will supply them. There is also nobody ever pushing the drug (ie trying to upsell someone, so nobody new tries it). You can repeat it as often as you like, but the evidence is very clear. Decriminalising heroin in this way massively reduces the number of users over a relatively short period of time. With reference to less harmful drugs, we'll soon see if the numbers (which are already something like 5%) of users increase by watching the US states that have legalised it. I'd be less concerned if it did increase though, particularly if other drug use (alcohol for example) fell as people switched. Alcohol is far more costly and damaging to society (don't get me wrong, I drink, I just see the bigger picture). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowperil Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 What an idealistic but very unrealistic picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.