Peaches Geldof RIP
Comments
-
That's fine if you want to run around pretending your name is John Rambo, but if you want to prevent organised crime continuing to make billions from drugs I think that policy might be a little ineffectual.Ballysmate wrote:nathancom wrote:
They are already legalising cannabis in Colorado and no doubt this will extend to other states and countries. I heard that haribo are a gateway to Ben&Jerry's.Mr Goo wrote:The legalisation of class A drugs would be like opening Pandora's box (behave Arran). It is well know that cannabis is a gateway drug, therefore to have open access to harder substances could lead to epidemic levels of addiction.
As we have already seen in the last 20-30 years with the increase in confectionery and fast food, which when I was a kid were a treat but are now for many the norm. Whilst I am not comparing, the mere fact that drugs are illegal is a barrier to their use for the majority.
All criminalisation has done is provide organised crime with a great product line. I would love to hear a description of how the war on drugs has improved the lives of people around the world, especially along the Mexican-US border. I would highly recommend this short video http://www.cultivatedwit.com/projects/mexican-drug-cartels-video/
Having watched the video, I fail to see how the UK abolishing any drug control and increasing the cartels customer base would have anything but a beneficial effect on their business model.
I know it will probably label me as chief kunt on the step, but I would be more interested in a video advocating the napalming of the bastards that supply this sh1t and peddle misery.
The point I am trying to make is that in an imperfect world, the war against drugs does more harm than good. Humans have chosen for millennia to imbibe a wide variety of intoxicating substances. Better that governments support them doing this in as safe a manner as possible rather than handing over responsibility for supply to the worst elements in society. It seems some politicians just prefer playing whack-a-mole with organised crime instead since it lets them spend lots of tax dollars on police, big guns and big ships.0 -
How does the UK legalising drugs have a detrimental effect on the cartels in Mexico? They still grow the crops, fight and kill over its control and the Mexican government still has the same problems.
Furthermore, I don't see the solution to organised crime as being to make their activities legal.0 -
This is a difficult and emotive subject. For all those who said "Good riddance" to Peaches, good for you and I hope that is never your daughter (or loved one).
Fuck**g about with any substance is easy, and maybe loads of us do it. I am not here to compare beer or whisky with paracetamol or heroin.
Many substances are harmful, and there but for the Grace of God go I.
Respect please those who have lost loved ones to sh*t that got the better of them and let's get on with the rest of our lives.
Sorry, need a Hippy emoticon. Peace and love.Ecrasez l’infame0 -
Also love the way BR changed the above to fark**g. God save us from proper swearing, eh :roll:Ecrasez l’infame0
-
In the same way that legalising cannabis in US is allowing legitimate growers to start producing instead of organised crime.Ballysmate wrote:How does the UK legalising drugs have a detrimental effect on the cartels in Mexico? They still grow the crops, fight and kill over its control and the Mexican government still has the same problems.
Furthermore, I don't see the solution to organised crime as being to make their activities legal.
Most people would choose to get drugs from regulated and legal suppliers if they could. They don't actively want to go to dealers. This is no different to alcohol distribution during prohibition.0 -
Making a drug legal does not put the criminal gangs out of business however it does open the market up to people who don't believe in killing and maiming their opposition in the business world. I would imagine that you would be able to get from grower to final product sale in less than 3 transactions. In the current model a drug dealer buys a crop has to transport it with all the risks of getting caught and losing the shipment and then this is probably handled at least 5 times before it gets to your average junkie. All of those steps will feature a much higher profit than 10% which is pretty common in business as you need to pay bribes and protection and occasionally get some nasty shit done to protect your business model. Quite often there are innocents and family members including young children caught up in violence. This is due to sending people with limited training, intelligence and compassion out into the world with weapons.
I don't actually agree with decriminalising hard drugs as I don't think it benefits society but merely reduces some of the above bad deeds. I can see easily how a regulated industry is better than a load to tools running round with guns capping each other off. Living in the sticks I am unlikely to get involved in gang warfare so this is more of an issue for your inner city kids.0 -
Has anyone here ever been to California ?
Better still, Calistoga in Napa Valley ?
I went there with the wife who everyday said that she could smell Canabis, and I could smell the same but thought it was something else. Only when I got back did I find out that they have millions of hectares of legalised canabis plantations in and around the wine regions. You can even get permits to "grow your own" which probably explains a lot
Im not sure how we would really fix drug use but I do think that being criminal causes more harm than good.
When I was a kid my mom would let me have a port at xmas and if I wanted a small lager or cider she would let me. None of my family are drinkers and I think that was down to the fact that there was no taboo over the subject. I have given my kids a teaspoon of cider every now and then and I doubt they will become drinkers.
I do think that kids/teenagers crave things more when they shouldn't have them.Living MY dream.0 -
VTech - you have a PM0
-
I once knew a Chief Constable a fair few years ago and he was very sure decriminalising recreational drugs was the only solution and would have to happen eventually. He said the reduction in both petty and organised crime would be massive as addicts wouldn't be committing crimes to get money and production, distribution etc could all be legitimised, taxed and controlled.
I also recall a drug treatment expert from Liverpool saying decriminalisation and state control would make drug use so boring and un-glamorous it would help enormously.
Feel sorry for her kids having a drug user for a mum though.0 -
Lucan2 wrote:VTech - you have a PM
Hi,
I can't access it, I know I have a pm but when I hit it, the link goes to a dead page.
email me at jason@zeusflash.com and i can reply right away.Living MY dream.0 -
Sent0
-
wishitwasallflat wrote:I once knew a Chief Constable a fair few years ago and he was very sure decriminalising recreational drugs was the only solution and would have to happen eventually. He said the reduction in both petty and organised crime would be massive as addicts wouldn't be committing crimes to get money and production, distribution etc could all be legitimised, taxed and controlled.
I also recall a drug treatment expert from Liverpool saying decriminalisation and state control would make drug use so boring and un-glamorous it would help enormously.
Feel sorry for her kids having a drug user for a mum though.
I feel sorry that her kids haven't got a mum anymore.
As for decriminalisation, given the pathetic sentences handed out for procession (class A) and low level dealing, it may as well be - the co op guy gets a £500 fine...apparently he is of "good character"
If the punishment fitted the crime, then maybe the problems society has with drugs would diminish and this woman would still be alive.0 -
Bring back hanging - locking them up is too good for them. Maybe a bit of arm lopping or general mutilation would discourage people from ingesting whatever they feel like ingesting.
What right do you have to tell people what they can or can't eat/drink/smoke/insufflate/inject? And why should you be criminalised on the same basis.0 -
nathancom wrote:Bring back hanging - locking them up is too good for them. Maybe a bit of arm lopping or general mutilation would discourage people from ingesting whatever they feel like ingesting.
What right do you have to tell people what they can or can't eat/drink/smoke/insufflate/inject? And why should you be criminalised on the same basis.
yeah right, lets just pick an chose the laws we want to obey or not and stuff the consequences, pretty much what Peaches did, so that's alright then.
Governments are elected and they make the laws, unfortunate for opposing views but that's the way it is, unlike Iran, they have a host of other issues aside from drug abuse.
You sound like the sort of guy who wants continued 24hr licensing, high streets full of betting shops, payday loans and Mcdonalds on the menu of every school canteen, why not? its not the states job to tell us what to do, eat or drink.0 -
mamba80 wrote:yeah right, lets just pick an chose the laws we want to obey or not and stuff the consequences, pretty much what Peaches did, so that's alright then. Governments are elected and they make the laws, unfortunate for opposing views but that's the way it is, unlike Iran, they have a host of other issues aside from drug abuse.
That's not what nathancom was saying. He was saying (as are many others) that drugs shouldn't be criminalised in the first place. I've never taken any illegal drugs, but I do sometimes drink alcohol. Why is it that I should be allowed to have a pint of cider, but another person shouldn't be allowed to take an ecstasy pill or smoke cannabis?"mamba8o wrote:You sound like the sort of guy who wants continued 24hr licensing, high streets full of betting shops, payday loans and Mcdonalds on the menu of every school canteen, why not? its not the states job to tell us what to do, eat or drink.
Legalisation is not incompatible with regulation.0 -
Here is a thought ?
How about we legalise OEM drugs, of natural occurrence and criminalise chemically enhanced drugs (pharmaceuticals) ?
Not that this would happen but I am sure it would help ?Living MY dream.0 -
Alcohol is regulated as is tobacco, both ruin lives and kill 1000s do we really want to add to this? you don't take heroin/crack/crystal meth once a week with the lads over a game of pool.
Just as drink driving has been made socially unacceptable mainly via v harsh penalties, so drug taking could be, its just that the finance and political will isn't there.0 -
mamba80 wrote:I feel sorry that her kids haven't got a mum anymore.
If the punishment fitted the crime, then maybe the problems society has with drugs would diminish and this woman would still be alive.
Peaches Geldof was a disturbed young woman because of the way her mother died and the way she was subsequently brought up. Her personality seemed to be a lot like her mother's.
Whether the drugs were legal or not was irrelevent IMO.0 -
Not even remotely a reasonable analogy. Since when did cannabis smokers risk the lives of others.mamba80 wrote:Just as drink driving has been made socially unacceptable mainly via v harsh penalties, so drug taking could be, its just that the finance and political will isn't there.
Personally I think being right wing is far more injurious to the welfare of other people than recreational drug taking. Look at Ian Duncan Smith.0 -
nathancom wrote:
Not even remotely a reasonable analogy. Since when did cannabis smokers risk the lives of others.mamba80 wrote:Just as drink driving has been made socially unacceptable mainly via v harsh penalties, so drug taking could be, its just that the finance and political will isn't there.
Personally I think being right wing is far more injurious to the welfare of other people than recreational drug taking. Look at Ian Duncan Smith.
Must be doing something right if the loony left are upset.0 -
nathancom wrote:
Not even remotely a reasonable analogy. Since when did cannabis smokers risk the lives of others.mamba80 wrote:Just as drink driving has been made socially unacceptable mainly via v harsh penalties, so drug taking could be, its just that the finance and political will isn't there.
Since when was cannabis the only drug available? I'm pretty sure being stoned and driving isn't a good idea, anyway.0 -
So the offence is driving under the influence, not simply being under the influence. Where did I say it was OK to drive whilst stoned?coriordan wrote:nathancom wrote:
Not even remotely a reasonable analogy. Since when did cannabis smokers risk the lives of others.mamba80 wrote:Just as drink driving has been made socially unacceptable mainly via v harsh penalties, so drug taking could be, its just that the finance and political will isn't there.
Since when was cannabis the only drug available? I'm pretty sure being stoned and driving isn't a good idea, anyway.
What I am saying is that suggesting drug taking is as equivalently harmful to others as driving under the influence is simply wrong and a specious analogy.0 -
you are missing the point, society has enough ills without adding to them - why does anyone want to legalise crack or heroin abuse? these are nt socially accepted means of relaxing, say like having a drink with friends is.
you should read a book called "Dark Heart" there is a bit more to the title, which I cant remember but it shows the power of addiction and depths to which people will go to in order to score.
Legalising them could have disastrous effects and would be very difficult to reverse, take the mess that 24hr drinking has done to our town centres, hardly the café culture that was predicted!0 -
but what if it was a socially acceptable way of relaxing to smoke a joint? It is in Holland? It's a case of changing the norms, which takes generations.0
-
I get the arguments for legalisation of all drugs (both pragmatic and philosophical) and there clearly is a case to suggest that you WOULD stop deaths like Peaches Geldof's because you could regulate the purity of heroin, etc. more effectively.
I dont think I buy the analogies with alcohol though - the idea that in this new world people pop down the opium den with their mates for a quick syringe or two doesnt quite work for me.0 -
Paulie W wrote:I get the arguments for legalisation of all drugs (both pragmatic and philosophical) and there clearly is a case to suggest that you WOULD stop deaths like Peaches Geldof's because you could regulate the purity of heroin, etc. more effectively.
I dont think I buy the analogies with alcohol though - the idea that in this new world people pop down the opium den with their mates for a quick syringe or two doesnt quite work for me.
Makes perfect sense to me.
I hardly drink, never smoked and forgo the urge for crack.
Having said that, I do have other addictions that may or may not be worse depending on your view.
I think we all have vices.Living MY dream.0 -
I think some illicit drugs are very dangerous, Cannabis is in itself is pretty harmless, just a pretty good demotivater, Opiods are ok if clean and pharmaceutical grade, Methamphetamine (P) is seriously dangerous, to have a drug which gives the Brain such an outpouring of Dopamine that the person taking P will do anything to have more and only have an interest having more is hardly OK to have legalised. Alcohol is a pretty awful drug for some... Cigarettes will kill you. On average take 11 years off your life.0
