Drug prohibition costs lives

[gimp27]

THis is what I was saying earlier, when a liverpool gp surgery was giving out heroin, the dealers simply left the area. I know they moved to the next area and that there responsible for creating the problem in the first place but it did remove the incentive from that particular area to deal heroin there.

 

that surely isn't be a bad thing, can it?

 

Absolutely not a bad thing at all. They are, as you say responsible for the supply, but the needs of an addict are pretty intense, and if heroin was not available legally then these dealers would remain, and probably start a price war with Lloyds on the price of their softer drugs.

Its all a mess:|

[Bonzo77]

There is a lot of pros and cons, and until some sort of practice is put in place, we can only speculate. Im not a great cinema buff, but a quick wiki shows many films that have, to some extent, glamourised drug use.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drug_films.

 

I dont believe that we should use wiki or google as if it were coming from our own mouths, but you see the point im trying to say. If there were no more media images or visuals of drug use, but a whole range of public information platforms, would this message finally start to hit home?

 

That's just a list of films with drugs in them.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2015 at 22:10 ----------

 

Stopping it at the ports would be a start, and more people are currently killed by prescription pain killers than are killed by illegal heroin and cocaine combined.

 

Stopping them at ports?! Why has no one thought of that before?!

 

Prescribed drugs can be taken home, at volume. Simply provide the heroin addict with enough for 1 hit. Or, even better, don't allow them to use the drug without leaving the building. Some countries are doing this already (not providing the drug, but providing the shooting gallery).

Edited January 9, 2015 by Bonzo77

[anfisa]

That's just a list of films with drugs in them.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2015 at 22:10 ----------

 

 

Stopping them at ports?! Why has no one thought of that before?!

 

Prescribed drugs can be taken home, at volume. Simply provide the heroin addict with enough for 1 hit. Or, even better, don't allow them to use the drug without leaving the building. Some countries are doing this already (not providing the drug, but providing the shooting gallery).

 

Drug detection methods are getting better but can be improved with more funding, making it harder to get drugs into the UK, the number of heroin and crack cocaine users in England is falling and is now below 300,000 for the first time.

 

Britain is winning the war against heroin and crack cocaine so why mess with the system we have.

[psynuk]

Drug detection methods are getting better but can be improved with more funding, making it harder to get drugs into the UK, the number of heroin and crack cocaine users in England is falling and is now below 300,000 for the first time.

 

Britain is winning the war against heroin and crack cocaine so why mess with the system we have.

 

It's been below 300,000 before. way below.

It's simply impossible to stop drugs coming into the country, they've been coming in for centuries no matter how much money is spent there will never be the political will to throw enough.

You'd have to search every single person, ship, plane and package. that is just not going to happen. It's been imported on submarines before.

 

If you can't keep drugs out of prisons, how would you ever expect them to be kept out of a country with 10,000 miles of -unguarded- coastline?

 

The cost so far is estimated to over £1.5 trillion that's just the uk, and you think 300,000 current heroin users is some kind of winning?

a more telling line from that article was,

 

"The figure for heroin users who have successfully completed their treatment and not since returned has gone up from 2,637 in 2005-06 to 13,589 in 2011-12"

 

Although that is good news

So, if no-one else were to take up the habit for 23 years we'd be free of heroin users at the current rate.

Only there'd still be no real reason for people to stop peddling as the market would still exist. The only way your ever going to stop the dealers attempting to get new customers is to price them out by undercutting

 

That would make it about 70 years from creating a law to saying it's being complied with, thats not 'winning' in my eyes.

 

Not to mention the heartache and lives ruined in the meantime by doggedly pursuing it as a criminal matter.

[onenerveleft]

We should have followed the americans by now. Its a shame we have not, despite the EU billing us for it.

[Cyclone]

There are several factors as to why some move onto heroin, and the people affected are from all walks of life. Stress, marital breakdown, loss of employment, bankrupcy. The list is pretty broad. What is confusing is the reasons behind heroin use in the under 25 bracket. There is no clear definition as to why they may choose to take it, but what is apparent is that a huge percentage of this group have used softer drugs beforehand. To get reasons and explainations from users is a difficult path, that can take several months to achieve, but in the main a typical user is not what you would think. Yes, kids like to experiment, but because the expected "high" is what people see day to day in the media, and that "high" that is expected by a first time user enevitably ends up as a need, thus casuing the addiction.

Again its down to education, and trying to inform people that the kick that is seen as a cool experience is actually the first step to becoming an addict.

 

I don't know what kind of science background you have, but tell me, what % have used "h20" or water, before?

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 01:36 ----------

 

It would make a change from arguing with you under your multiple identities.

 

Ironic, from you.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 01:41 ----------

 

Ive no doubt that the older users will have had or used something in their lifetimes, and I see your point about how diificult it would be for a user to obtain heroin from a regulated source, and that is why I still believe that the backstreet dealers will never go away should these substances be made legal.

Surely the only feasable way forward would be in the education and non-glamourisation of drugs in the first place. We see it, day in day out on our TV,s and in the cinema, and in my humble opinion I believe that the temptation to experiment is there for ALL to see, like some sort of normal practice, yet the next step of addiction is in no way as paramount, but is the sad realisation of the result?

 

So the back street dealers will deal to every customer once, maybe twice, who will then go to the doctor, get a prescription and get it for free...

 

That just doesn't make any sense.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 01:41 ----------

 

Stopping it at the ports would be a start, and more people are currently killed by prescription pain killers than are killed by illegal heroin and cocaine combined.

 

Do you even comprehend what "prohibition has failed" means?

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 01:44 ----------

 

THis is what I was saying earlier, when a liverpool gp surgery was giving out heroin, the dealers simply left the area. I know they moved to the next area and that there responsible for creating the problem in the first place but it did remove the incentive from that particular area to deal heroin there.

 

that surely isn't be a bad thing, can it?

 

And when the area is the entire UK?

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 01:46 ----------

 

Absolutely not a bad thing at all. They are, as you say responsible for the supply, but the needs of an addict are pretty intense, and if heroin was not available legally then these dealers would remain, and probably start a price war with Lloyds on the price of their softer drugs.

Its all a mess:|

 

It's not a mess... It's a mess because of prohibition.

 

Softer drugs are not actually a problem, let people use them. Safely. From Lloyds, or Boots. There won't be a price war, illegal dealers can't be cheaper. Hell, let people grow it themselves, it's free.

And for the really addictive, bad stuff, provide it under license for free.

 

Usage goes down, more importantly, harm goes down.

[*_ash_*]

More sniffer dogs at the ports should help with that one.

 

Stopping them at ports?! Why has no one thought of that before?!

 

 

-

 

More sniffer dogs at the ports should help with that one.

 

You do know we are on an island right?

 

Heroin:

 

The problem though with this answer is that, say, 40 years ago, dealers brought their stuff through themselves. Then after a couple of people caught, it seemed better to pay someone else to do it. Street price goes up as a consequence.

 

The harder it is to get in, then the higher the price gets (for BOTH the carrier, his/her price) and the price on the street.

 

If it was £20k to bring a nice big batch in, I wouldn't take the risk personally, but there will be plenty who will.

 

More dogs, more security, higher prices, more addicts having to burgle to fund the higher price. It doesn't work! and it's easy to see every day. Have you been burgled? Is that why you can't see it? If a heroin addict burgled my house, I'd probably have been saying the same, shoot them all! As it happens, the problem could be completely eradicated in one easy move.

 

People are paying £15 quid for a single hit*, for something that costs 12p to produce.

 

*guess

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 02:13 ----------

 

Cannabis is easy to grow, dogs in ports won't stop growers here. In fact they probably encourage it.

[anfisa]

It's been below 300,000 before. way below.

It's simply impossible to stop drugs coming into the country, they've been coming in for centuries no matter how much money is spent there will never be the political will to throw enough.

 

Yes it has been coming in for centuries and the authorities are getting better at detecting it and stopping it, and it is not imposible to stop if enough resources are in place.

 

 

You'd have to search every single person, ship, plane and package. that is just not going to happen. It's been imported on submarines before.

 

No you do not.

 

If you can't keep drugs out of prisons, how would you ever expect them to be kept out of a country with 10,000 miles of -unguarded- coastline?

 

Drugs could be kept out of prisons if the resources were in place and how would offering heroin on prescription stop all the other drugs coming into the country.

 

 

The cost so far is estimated to over £1.5 trillion that's just the uk, and you think 300,000 current heroin users is some kind of winning?

a more telling line from that article was,

 

 

"The figure for heroin users who have successfully completed their treatment and not since returned has gone up from 2,637 in 2005-06 to 13,589 in 2011-12"

 

Winning means we are getting better at detecting it, stopping it and reducing the number of users, so yes we are winning but we have not won yet.

 

Although that is good news

So, if no-one else were to take up the habit for 23 years we'd be free of heroin users at the current rate.

 

If you can not stop it getting into the country how are you going to stop new addicts.

 

 

 

Only there'd still be no real reason for people to stop peddling as the market would still exist. The only way your ever going to stop the dealers attempting to get new customers is to price them out by undercutting

Are you proposing selling cheap drugs of all kinds to anyone that wants them?

Criminals will just look for a new source of income, but it will come from criminal activity.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 07:41 ----------

 

Are you illiterate or something. If you say "and I agree that" you are agreeing with something that has been said, or you're a retard.

 

I agree that the earth orbits the sun.

 

Did you say that the earth orbits the sun or is it something someone else maybe said and I am agree with them.

 

And lets assume for one moment that may English skills are not perfect and that your English skills are perfect, does that give you the right to call me a Retard.

 

I happen to agree that my English skills are not perfect, I know that there are people with far superior skills, I know that my English skills are superior to the skills of other people, the difference between me and you is that I do not call people retards for not having the skills that I have, I just put more effort in to understanding what they are trying to say, and if it is not clear I ask without feeling the need to act all superior and abusive towards them.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 07:48 ----------

 

 

Do you even comprehend what "prohibition has failed" means?

 

It did not fail so there is nothing to comprehend, it lowered consumption and lowered alcohol related deaths, it was not a perfect policy, it could have been police better but it did work.

Edited January 10, 2015 by anfisa

[Snapshot]

I also don't think heroin is ever glamorised on TV or in films.

 

Have you not seen Pulp Fiction?

 

One of the most popular films currently on Netflix, and voted the 5th best film of all time on IMDb.

[Bonzo77]

Have you not seen Pulp Fiction?

 

One of the most popular films currently on Netflix, and voted the 5th best film of all time on IMDb.

 

The film where Mia Wallace sniffs too much heroin and is found half dead with puke on her face, driven to a dealers house and has to have a shot of adrenaline injected straight into her heart by a smack head?

 

So glamorous!

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 09:18 ----------

 

Yes it has been coming in for centuries and the authorities are getting better at detecting it and stopping it, and it is not imposible to stop if enough resources are in place.

 

 

 

 

No you do not.

 

 

 

Drugs could be kept out of prisons if the resources were in place and how would offering heroin on prescription stop all the other drugs coming into the country.

 

 

 

 

Winning means we are getting better at detecting it, stopping it and reducing the number of users, so yes we are winning but we have not won yet.

 

If you can not stop it getting into the country how are you going to stop new addicts.

 

 

 

Are you proposing selling cheap drugs of all kinds to anyone that wants them?

Criminals will just look for a new source of income, but it will come from criminal activity.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 07:41 ----------

 

 

I agree that the earth orbits the sun.

 

Did you say that the earth orbits the sun or is it something someone else maybe said and I am agree with them.

 

And lets assume for one moment that may English skills are not perfect and that your English skills are perfect, does that give you the right to call me a Retard.

 

I happen to agree that my English skills are not perfect, I know that there are people with far superior skills, I know that my English skills are superior to the skills of other people, the difference between me and you is that I do not call people retards for not having the skills that I have, I just put more effort in to understanding what they are trying to say, and if it is not clear I ask without feeling the need to act all superior and abusive towards them.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2015 at 07:48 ----------

 

 

It did not fail so there is nothing to comprehend, it lowered consumption and lowered alcohol related deaths, it was not a perfect policy, it could have been police better but it did work.

 

You could spend as much money on security and drugs would still get through the border. It's a tried and tested failure!