Blanket ban on 'Legal highs' enforced today.

[Solomon1]

What seems to me to be a ridiculous idea showing just how stupid the government is, they put a blanket ban on all so called legal highs. I say all but it seems they're not including alcohol.

Have they learned nothing? We know it will do nothing for harm reduction, at least buying from a shop you'd know what you were buying and get advice how to use it safely and what to expect. It created jobs and revenue which will now be driven underground, kids that way inclined will likely use far more dangerous substances to get their kicks. It makes no sense.

 

A tad bizarre, I agree!

 

Knee jerk reaction anyone?

[sutty27]

The addicts that use it already, will still get it, or will get something similar, like class A drugs.

 

Banning something will never be 100% affective but it will lower consumption.

[Cyclone]

Do you just spend all your time being wrong on the internet?

 

---------- Post added 27-05-2016 at 07:26 ----------

 

That you are wrong.

You haven't though.

http://www.denverpost.com/2014/12/26/marijuana-use-increases-in-colorado-according-to-new-federal-survey/

Marijuana use increases in Colorado, according to new federal survey.

 

legalising it increased consumption of it.

 

Use was increasing historically. The rate of increase didn't change.

QED legalisation had no impact on the level of use.

[Halibut]

Banning something will never be 100% affective but it will lower consumption.

 

A false statement.

[Tomjames]

Banning something will never be 100% affective but it will lower consumption.

 

Not necessarily. It creates a black market, still a market.

[Starbud]

I do understand what harm poisonous chemicals can do to the body, and I don't like the idea of something that has the potential to cause instant death being permitted to be sold in a shop like a bag of sweets.

 

If something has the potential to cause instant death at a nornal dose then I agree it shouldn't be sold in shops for recreational use, but they have also banned substances with no risk, or very low risk, its that I have issue with. I'm 47 years old, don't drink, haven't for nearly 20 years, and i don't take any pharmaceutical drugs because I'm aware of the harm they do. I work full time, not had a day off sickness in over four years and have no criminal record. I'm perfectly capable of making choices for myself regarding my own health.

I like to smoke salvia occasionally but now It would make me a criminal, that is wrong.

[Tomjames]

I do understand what harm poisonous chemicals can do to the body, and I don't like the idea of something that has the potential to cause instant death being permitted to be sold in a shop like a bag of sweets.

 

But you are happy with the chemicals in alcohol & processed food & drink & the chemicals in sponsored pharmaceutical that kill millions yearly?

 

[Cyclone]

I do understand what harm poisonous chemicals can do to the body, and I don't like the idea of something that has the potential to cause instant death being permitted to be sold in a shop like a bag of sweets.

 

Peanuts anyone.

[sutty27]

Not necessarily. It creates a black market, still a market.

 

There's a black market for most legal stuff, price creates the black market. Criminals can produce counterfeit stuff cheaply and there are always people ready to buy the cheap crap they sell.

[Eater Sundae]

But you are happy with the chemicals in alcohol & processed food & drink & the chemicals in sponsored pharmaceutical that kill millions yearly?

 

 

There's an enormous difference between

 

1. Foodstuffs and medicines which are tested and where necessary licenced, which have known and measurable benefits and risks, and

 

2. Chemicals which are marketed without any such safeguards.