psynuk Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Alcohol and tobaco are both legal yet there is also a substantial amount of criminal activity sounding them. They are smuggled, forged, sold illegally. My original point was countering an argument that offering for free reduces consumption, no mention at all about control, rehab, restricting supply. So yet again you have failed to demonstrate that my point was incorrect, you can twist as much as you like but the fact remains that offering something for free will increase consumption. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 15:04 ---------- It is not a well established fact. Not applicable to the point I made and the statement it countered. I do not need to prove that increasing supply will increase consumption, its just common sense, offer people free cars, free bread, free fags, free booze, and consumption of them all will increase, if you think it will not then you will have to prove it. heroin is not cars, bread, or booze and is not comparable. It is an established fact that giving heroin to addicts for free reduces consumption. The potential user base for heroin is actually quite small it requires a certain sort of person to take it up in the 1st place. It's given to people who are already using heroin. You wouldn't be increasing supply, why do you think that? There is a substantial amount of criminality surrounding almost everything. The point here -which you seem completely unable to grasp- is that when the nhs gives heroin to addicts, the criminal interest deteriorates rapidly. No ifs no buts, they simply leave the area where heroin is being proscribed. The nhs wouldn't make any money, but they would save a fortune, likewise the police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anfisa Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 heroin is not cars, bread, or booze and is not comparable. It is only different in that it is addictive, if it was freely available at no cost then the number of addicts would increase as well as the amount consumed. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 15:46 ---------- It is an established fact that giving heroin to addicts for free reduces consumption. The statement that I countered said nothing about only giving it to addicts and said nothing about controlling the amount, so your point is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psynuk Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) if you like to think so. I'm really not sure why the startlingly obvious needs pointing out. Like I said earlier your not actually talking about the subject, your simply trying to score debate points by splitting hairs and being intentionally narrow in your posts. The statement you countered was still correct because you are talking about heroin. If you offered heroin(for free) to every single person in meadowhall right now do you really think they'd jump at the chance because it was free? Of course not. My point being, if your going to remove the statement from the context and topic and try and hold it aloft as an error that somehow negates the point, your still wrong because it is context related and all the nit picking in the world won't help. Giving away heroin isn't going to entice people who wouldn't be predisposed to taking it. it's got a very limited scope of appeal in the first place, which is already catered to by dealers. Edited January 8, 2015 by psynuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anfisa Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) if you like to think so. I'm really not sure why the startlingly obvious needs pointing out. Like I said earlier your not actually talking about the subject, your simply trying to score debate points by splitting hairs and being intentionally narrow in your posts. On the contrary, I countered a post a few pages back and from that point on some of you have been desperately trying to prove me wrong by twisting what I said and introducing things I have not said. If you offered heroin(for free) to every single person in meadowhall right now do you really think they'd jump at the chance because it was free? Of course not. Some would and that would result in increased consumption of heroin in meadowhall. My point being, if your going to remove the statement from the context and topic and try and hold it aloft as an error that somehow negates the point, your still wrong because it is context related and all the nit picking in the world won't help. The context of the topic is making drugs legal, legal drugs offered for free would have to be offered to everyone with no limits and no clauses. Giving away heroin isn't going to entice people who wouldn't be predisposed to taking it. it's got a very limited scope of appeal in the first place, which is already catered to by dealers. Legalising it and offering it for free would very much encourage some people to try it that otherwise would not have touched it. Edited January 8, 2015 by anfisa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The rest of your post is not relevant to the point I made and your failure to answer the questions tells me that you can not demonstrate that the point I made was inaccurate. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 08:38 ---------- Non of which is relevant to the point I made which you claimed was incorrect. No Not when it is offered for free. Not as easy as it would be if it was offered for free at every pharmacy. You're winding me up. Either that or you can't read! Show me where I said cannabis would be available for free. Show me where I said heroin would be available for free to anyone that wants it. If you can point those posts out to me, I'll admit delete. If you can't, I want an apology please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 ...The context of the topic is making drugs legal, legal drugs offered for free would have to be offered to everyone with no limits and no clauses. You appear to be the only one making any such claim. Everyone else is aware that heroin should only be offered free to registered addicts. Still, I expect nothing else from you Smithy. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The context of the topic is making drugs legal, legal drugs offered for free would have to be offered to everyone with no limits and no clauses. No they wouldn't. What an asinine thing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 you are quite clearly just posting your taught thoughts based on your career. I very much doubt it. Your post was an excellent counter though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anfisa Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I haven't had to twist at all, I answered and refuted your statements. Why you made them is irrelevant. it is a well established fact, demonstrating your ignorance doesn't make your point stronger. Your assertion, it's down to you to provide evidence for it. The fact that you consider it to be "common sense" is not evidence. Did anyone actually suggest offering drugs for free (or as you've now said 'increasing supply')? Or is this all a straw man? No it is not, you can not demonstrate that offering something for free will reduce consumption, what you have shown is that controlling its use and offering help to users can lower consumption, and I have at no time disputed this. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 17:36 ---------- You're winding me up. Either that or you can't read! Show me where I said cannabis would be available for free. Show me where I said heroin would be available for free to anyone that wants it. If you can point those posts out to me, I'll admit delete. If you can't, I want an apology please. Show me were I said that you said cannabis would be available for free. Show me were I said that you said heroin would be available for free. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 17:37 ---------- You appear to be the only one making any such claim. Everyone else is aware that heroin should only be offered free to registered addicts. Still, I expect nothing else from you Smithy. jb The post I answered was not even talking about heroin. ---------- Post added 08-01-2015 at 17:37 ---------- No they wouldn't. What an asinine thing to say. If it was not offered to everyone how would it be defined as legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Show me were I said that you said cannabis would be available for free. Show me were I said that you said heroin would be available for free. Ok #123 I asked would legalising cannabis generated tax revenue. You answered "Not when it is offered for free." I I asked if heroin is currently easy to get hold of. You answered "Not as easy as it would be if it was offered for free at every pharmacy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now