Do you reckon this fat mess deserves do die?

ballysmate

upperoilcan wrote:

I would gladly pull the trigger on the old bag....

This wasn'nt her first rodeo,I hope they make a shining example of her.

Or would it be poetic to shoot her up with an overdose of her own product. :twisted:

vitesse169

upperoilcan wrote:

I would gladly pull the trigger on the old bag....

This wasn'nt her first rodeo,I hope they make a shining example of her.

Apparantly, the street in Cheltenham where they live are glad she's gone - made everyones life there a misery for many reasons...

Giraffoto

Ben6899 wrote:

The addicts represent the misery of drugs; they don't help contribute to it.

Depends whether you count having your house burgled as part of the misery of drugs. Anyone who's done that to feed a habit has definitely made someone miserable

nathancom wrote:

Drugs don't kill people. Drug laws kill people

I'm pretty sure when someone ODs on heroin, the legal process doesn't come into it.

Eleven pounds of anything is a bit big to claim you didn't know it was in your luggage. I'm guessing the stuff is roughly as dense as flour or icing sugar - five big bags. She certainly deserves naming and shaming for her monumental stupidity in thinking she can sneak that lot past the customs

sungod

the supply chain relies on greed, trust and fear, that has to be disrupted, if i were dictator i'd put a bounty on the chain...

user gets choice of mandatory prison three months solitary with no methadone/whatever, or free plus reward* for giving solid evidence allowing prosecution of dealer (* the reward is to fund them to find another dealer to turn in)

dealer gets choice of death or give solid evidence allowing prosecution of distributor

all the way up the chain - choice of death or inform

controlling cartel/gang heads, seize all assets and just off 'em

Bustacapp

Frank the tank wrote:

OP says drug dealing isn't in the same catagory as murderers, How many have been killed just in drug "turf wars" that's without counting those who actually die from the drugs themselves.

This has basically been my point. A dealer who doesn't give a fig about the indirect consequences of his actions and the knock on effect it has is not the same creature as someone who can directly cause physical harm to another human being.

A murderer/rapist makes a conscious decision to do evil.

ballysmate

Bustacapp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

OP says drug dealing isn't in the same catagory as murderers, How many have been killed just in drug "turf wars" that's without counting those who actually die from the drugs themselves.

This has basically been my point. A dealer who doesn't give a fig about the indirect consequences of his actions and the knock on effect it has is not the same creature as someone who can directly cause physical harm to another human being.

A murderer/rapist makes a conscious decision to do evil.

If I choose to sell heroin to others, knowing the misery and the physical harm it will do, surely I am making a conscious decision to do evil?

Frank the tank

Bustacapp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

OP says drug dealing isn't in the same catagory as murderers, How many have been killed just in drug "turf wars" that's without counting those who actually die from the drugs themselves.

This has basically been my point. A dealer who doesn't give a fig about the indirect consequences of his actions and the knock on effect it has is not the same creature as someone who can directly cause physical harm to another human being.

A murderer/rapist makes a conscious decision to do evil.

Never mind the misery and death the drugs cause, drug dealers DO murder people who cross them.

Mikey23

Which is the point I was making. Surely there are not degrees of evil. Wrong is wrong and it has consequences. If you pedal hard drugs then you know full well the effect it has on people then it makes no real difference IMO whether you plunge the knife in yourself or not

finchy

I'd agree that drug dealers are generally evil especially the really big fish, but I don't think that drugs should be illegal in the first place. Why is it that I am allowed to drink alcohol, whereas others aren't allowed to snort a line of coke or take ecstasy? I've never done any illegal drugs myself, but I can't see why others should be denied their hit when I'm allowed to get mine.

Wirral_paul

nweststeyn wrote:

I must have been informed that any possession of drugs would be punishable by death at least 20 times.

Thats a lot of times for them to kill you!! Personally - i recon you'd have learned your lesson after the first 2 or 3 times!!

As for the OP - no sympathy for her at all!! If "she" had been a "he" - would it have been quite so news-worthy?? There's a fair few Brits on death row in the States too - but dont see them geting the same headlines.

ballysmate

johnfinch wrote:

I'd agree that drug dealers are generally evil especially the really big fish, but I don't think that drugs should be illegal in the first place. Why is it that I am allowed to drink alcohol, whereas others aren't allowed to snort a line of coke or take ecstasy? I've never done any illegal drugs myself, but I can't see why others should be denied their hit when I'm allowed to get mine.

How do you think drug dealers are evil but think their product should be legaised?

finchy

Well, if it's legal then it could be dispensed by pharmacies on prescription, so the addicts wouldn't go to the drug dealers any more, the drug trade would be undercut and any money spent on providing addicts with drugs (and treatment) would probably be saved elsewhere by a reduction in crime.

ballysmate

In your post you allude to how addictive and destructive hard drugs are, so why would any Government or doctor wish to supply them?
At present, doctors prescribe methodone etc to try to wean addicts off the drugs, but why prescribe hard drugs to Joe Soap, creating more addicts?

finchy

I wasn't thinking of supplying them to people who aren't addicted, just to existing addicts. You'd supply them as the lesser of 2 evils - clean needles, you know what's going into it, less theft to pay for drugs. Prohibition doesn't work.

ballysmate

johnfinch wrote:

I wasn't thinking of supplying them to people who aren't addicted, just to existing addicts. You'd supply them as the lesser of 2 evils - clean needles, you know what's going into it, less theft to pay for drugs. Prohibition doesn't work.

If you aren't supplying them to anyone but existing addicts, you ARE prohibiting them.

finchy

Fair point, but what I mean is that if you can undercut the dealers, there might not be a new generation of addicts. Besides, for the sake of consistency, if you're going to ban drugs x, y and z, then ban alcohol as well.

ballysmate

johnfinch wrote:

Fair point, but what I mean is that if you can undercut the dealers, there might not be a new generation of addicts. Besides, for the sake of consistency, if you're going to ban drugs x, y and z, then ban alcohol as well.

Yes it would be consistent but the trouble is, anyone with a supply of sugar, yeast and a warm place can produce alcohol. Besides, US tried it once, it didn't work. Made organised crime a lot of money though.

finchy

I'm not suggesting that alcohol should be banned.

ballysmate

johnfinch wrote:

I'm not suggesting that alcohol should be banned.

Phew! You had me worried then.

team47b

About 5 years ago Portugal decriminalised taking of ALL drugs. It is still illegal to sell, but you won't get a criminal record if you possess/take drugs. You will get help to stop taking the drug. A different approach to the usual way of only trying to cut off the supply, ie reduce the size of the customer base.

Ben6899

johnfinch wrote:

Fair point, but what I mean is that if you can undercut the dealers, there might not be a new generation of addicts. Besides, for the sake of consistency, if you're going to ban drugs x, y and z, then ban alcohol as well.

No, don't do that!

Bustacapp

Frank the tank wrote:

Never mind the misery and death the drugs cause, drug dealers DO murder people who cross them.

No, you're talking about a murderer who deals drugs.

Bustacapp

Ballysmate wrote:

If I choose to sell heroin to others, knowing the misery and the physical harm it will do, surely I am making a conscious decision to do evil?

Not at all because the drug dealer is not forcing the drug down the addicts vein. The addicts are doing it to themselves and must take ultimate responsibility for their own actions. A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless.

I'm sorry but the blame lies with the addict themselves and I'm sick of them going blameless. If they were not brain dead and stupid enough to take illegal drugs in the first place then none of the murderous cartels would exist.

The only answer I can see is to legalise all drugs.

Ben6899

Bustacapp wrote:

Not at all because the drug dealer is not forcing the drug down the addicts vein. The addicts are doing it to themselves and must take ultimate responsibility for their own actions. A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless.

Agreed

Bustacapp wrote:

I'm sorry but the blame lies with the addict themselves and I'm sick of them going blameless. If they were not brain dead and stupid enough to take illegal drugs in the first place then none of the murderous cartels would exist.

This misses the point on at least more than one level.

Bustacapp wrote:

The only answer I can see is to legalise all drugs.

My jury is still out on this one, to be honest.

ballysmate

Bustacapp wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

If I choose to sell heroin to others, knowing the misery and the physical harm it will do, surely I am making a conscious decision to do evil?

Not at all because the drug dealer is not forcing the drug down the addicts vein. The addicts are doing it to themselves and must take ultimate responsibility for their own actions. A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless.

I'm sorry but the blame lies with the addict themselves and I'm sick of them going blameless. If they were not brain dead and stupid enough to take illegal drugs in the first place then none of the murderous cartels would exist.

The only answer I can see is to legalise all drugs.

I concur that the buck finally stops with the drug taker. If any adult starts taking drugs, they get no sympathy from me. Everyone knows the score. (Sorry). Any pushers who target kids are vermin.
To legalise drugs just creates more addicts, and surely you don't want that, do you? And by legalising drugs the dealer will still be peddling misery and as you say, 'A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless'

Frank the tank

Bustacapp wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

If I choose to sell heroin to others, knowing the misery and the physical harm it will do, surely I am making a conscious decision to do evil?

Not at all because the drug dealer is not forcing the drug down the addicts vein. The addicts are doing it to themselves and must take ultimate responsibility for their own actions. A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless.

I'm sorry but the blame lies with the addict themselves and I'm sick of them going blameless. If they were not brain dead and stupid enough to take illegal drugs in the first place then none of the murderous cartels would exist.

The only answer I can see is to legalise all drugs.

Or alternatively,

String all parties up, Smuggler,dealer,user. all of em. I'd start with a few high profile celebs, sportsmen etc just to show no one is above the law. People would eventually twig on drugs are not good.

Certainly put an end to those glorifying headlines you see in Sunday papers "Star xyz, my five day cocaine and sex bender".

Bustacapp

Ballysmate wrote:

To legalise drugs just creates more addicts, and surely you don't want that, do you? And by legalising drugs the dealer will still be peddling misery and as you say, 'A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless'

I don't think it would create more addicts though. Once the glamour and mystique of illicit drugs is removed then I honestly think less young people will be attracted to them. Perhaps only the hardcore will remain. After all, people can go out to B&Q today and buy some glue to get high but who even thinks about that?

ballysmate

Frank the tank wrote:

Bustacapp wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

If I choose to sell heroin to others, knowing the misery and the physical harm it will do, surely I am making a conscious decision to do evil?

Not at all because the drug dealer is not forcing the drug down the addicts vein. The addicts are doing it to themselves and must take ultimate responsibility for their own actions. A drug dealer is merely a greedy, selfish person taking an opportunity to make money supplying a drug to someone who will get it from somewhere regardless.

I'm sorry but the blame lies with the addict themselves and I'm sick of them going blameless. If they were not brain dead and stupid enough to take illegal drugs in the first place then none of the murderous cartels would exist.

The only answer I can see is to legalise all drugs.

Or alternatively,

String all parties up, Smuggler,dealer,user. all of em. I'd start with a few high profile celebs, sportsmen etc just to show no one is above the law. People would eventually twig on drugs are not good.

Certainly put an end to those glorifying headlines you see in Sunday papers "Star xyz, my five day cocaine and sex bender".

I'm with you Frank. Hang 'em high! It has become trendy to admit to having 'dabbled'. It has to stop.

thegreatdivide

Just popped in to see how BR's Far Right were doing. Yip, still the same...

Giraffoto

thegreatdivide wrote:

Just popped in to see how BR's Far Right were doing. Yip, still the same...

Hey, I just said she was unbelievably stupid. Comrade.