David Cameron

[blueprint]

I'm finding it really anoying how all these MPs actually CARE if Cameron has done drugs in the past!
And also, why is Cameron not answering the question? Does he really think it matters?

Why does everyone care so much if he's had some joints in the past or whatever it be, it's not going to effect his integrity in terms of being prime minister! He is allowed to have a life prior to politics! He can't be a COMPLETE square!

Does anyone here really care if their potential prime minister did drugs?

[Taz]

I do. Working in your chippie whilst being a junkie may be acceptable but running our country?

Doing drugs is a sign of a weak mind. I'm sorry but i've got very strong views about drug abuse as I personally know a few people that have had their lives completely destroyed by drugs. They lost their relationships, their houses, their cars and their health.

Drugs also fund organised crime including forced prositution and people trafficking. That simple joint bought off a dealer in your local pub has repercusions further up the chain for some poor, vulnerable soul.

Again, sorry for my strong views but I am very much against drug abuse as you can probably tell but each to their own I guess.

[Stewart]

I do. Working in your chippie whilst being a junkie may be acceptable but running our country?

If you think David Cameron is a junkie, or anything within a million miles of that, then you might want to have a quick re-read of the facts of this non-story; rumours that he may have experimented with drugs, possibly class A (few lines of coke).

Doing drugs is a sign of a weak mind.

I doubt you can (with any credibility, at least) simply say all drug users are of a weak mind. Ciggies are a drug, alcohol is a drug; every drinker and smoker is a weak minded person? Hardly. As for illegal drugs, I think you'll probably find, that like most things, people do them because they like doing them. The vast majority of people who smoke the odd spiff, snort the odd line, drop a few pills in a club of a weekend, are not junkies, not selling their TV to fund their habit, and could certainly not all be called weak minded based on this one vice.

I'm not some self-appointed guardian of drug users, but let’s be fair, any catch-all statement like that is going to attract disagreement.

I'm sorry but i've got very strong views about drug abuse as I personally know a few people that have had their lives completely destroyed by drugs. They lost their relationships, their houses, their cars and their health.

Alas, it seems it also destroyed your judgment, and led you to dump the casual users, occasional users and every other sort of user in with the cast of Trainspotting.

I'm sure we all know someone who's had problems on drugs, or someone who's had a drink problem; the key is not to confuse the exception with the rule.

If everyone who knew someone who hits the bottle a bit hard, decided that anyone who drinks is a raving alchy, intent on self-destruction, then we'd end up with a lot of mass generalisations like your 'weak mind' statement.

I'm sure for every person you know who couldn't handle whatever they were on and lost everything, there's someone on these forums who knows someone who has the odd spiff at a weekend to chill, and has done for the last 20 years, without ever feeling the need to leave their wife, sell their fridge and go and score some heroin.

One swallow does not make a summer, on either side of the argument.

Drugs also fund organised crime including forced prositution and people trafficking. That simple joint bought off a dealer in your local pub has repercusions further up the chain for some poor, vulnerable soul.

Buying a pair of Nike trainers continues the cycle of some third world sweat shop, buying non fair trade products continues to short change farmers from poor nations. You could argue that simply depositing money in some of the major British banks strengthens companies that were set up, or at least profited massively from the slave trade. Lots of them have links to insuring the cargo of slave ships - the slaves themselves, and went from strength to strength on this. The growth of the British economy was, for a time, based very much on this.

Everything can be considered morally wrong if you view it from a certain perspective, but a bag of weed from some bloke in a pub, a pair of new Nike Shocks, or a Barclays Savings account don't personally make me feel like Adolph Eichmann.

It’s a valid point in general terms, but it’s not a great argument for stopping people who want to have a drag on a spiff.

Again, sorry for my strong views but I am very much against drug abuse as you can probably tell but each to their own I guess.

Your views are perfectly sound, so long as you don't generalise. Recognise the difference between drug use and drug abuse, and you'd be spot on. Drugs can (and do) ruin lives, but making the jump from that to - all drug users are weak minded and all drug use is wrong, is simply not correct. In my opinion, anyway.

As for David Cameron:

1) A politician who, when asked a question like this refuses to comment, is saying, without actually saying it, that he did take drugs. He probably experimented years ago, as posh boys tend to do.

2) It doesn't matter in the slightest if he did or did not; every politician has done something wrong, something illegal or something morally questionable, as has everyone else, in every profession. Do we want politicians to be robots, or real people, who live in the real world? We expect them to govern in the real world, so actually having lived in it should be considered an advantage.

3) He will not be drawn on the matter, for the reasons above - he has already as good as said he did, and it doesn't matter if he did or not. Incidentally, the Cameron camp are saying far from damaging Cameron’s chances of winning the Tory leadership this may have strengthened his case. It has certainly raised his profile anyway, and he is now favourite to win the leadership race.

A young, hungry politician, with at bit of personality who comes across as a real person will attract votes. Personally I think he will win and I hope he does.

Just trying to show the flip side of the coin mate. Keep smiling.

Stewart.

[Nick]

To be perfectly honest, I couldn't care less if he's had a quick puff of Silk Cut Extra Low or if he mainlines smack every hour and keeps topped up with rock in between times...

The main point is all this bickeing WITHIN the party once again serves to demonstrate that nearly all politicians are out of touch with reality.

I find it a continuing disgrace that these people a) turn on each other so readily rather than constructively debate issues and b) run the country according to what they say is the 'will of the people' when it's quite clearly their own wishes and agendas they're following.

The only time they can truly call what happens as being the will of the population is at a general election when we all vote for one party or another... the rest of the time these people who we pay for are so out of touch with general feeling that, if they were my employees, I'd sack them on the spot.

Sod whether the guy takes drugs, has taken drugs or will ever take drugs, let's just hope that whoever the Tories vote in, he has a better idea of what people actually WANT than any of their other leaders since, and including, Thatcher. Then we MIGHT see some actual effective government and not just live in Tony's Rose Tinted Britain.

[shiato storm]

what i can't get at is if he's the obvious favourite it takes the p* why they're all fighting each other to stop him. its utterly ridiculous. doesn't make me what to vote for any of the others to be honest! all I care about is:

Then we MIGHT see some actual effective government and not just live in Tony's Rose Tinted Britain.

which can only be good!

[EvilMunky]

I gotta read the newspapers man. Not only have i not heard about this drug taking, but i havent a damned clue who this guy is.

[Taz]

Point taken, Stewart. I need to chill out a bit...any recommendations?

[mp3c]

I gotta read the newspapers man. Not only have i not heard about this drug taking, but i havent a damned clue who this guy is.

same i don't read the paper or know who he is

[mike_w]

I personally don't really mind if he's 'experimented' a couple of times in the past. What is more worrying to me is the way he doesn't give a straight answer...

[Theo]

Drugs also fund organised crime including forced prositution and people trafficking. That simple joint bought off a dealer in your local pub has repercusions further up the chain for some poor, vulnerable soul.

There is always going to be a market for drugs. Two of the most dangerous, addictive drugs are widely available for everyone to consume. If drugs fund organised crime, would it not be better to legalize and regulate ALL of them?

[oralpain]

I'm not british, so who the next prime minster will be is of (comparitively) little concern to me.

Regardless, I don't see why illicit, past or current, is, in of it self, of any relivance, except for showing a willingness to disregard the laws of the country he will effectively lead.

There are weak, incompetent people who would never use any non-mdeically precribed drug and there are strong willed, very able people who are daily users of any one of a number of illicit drugs.

As long as the person is capable of doing the job, nothing else would matter to me.

There is always going to be a market for drugs. Two of the most dangerous, addictive drugs are widely available for everyone to consume. If drugs fund organised crime, would it not be better to legalize and regulate ALL of them?

I've always considered governments to be the pinnacle of organized crime.

[FatBoab]

I personally don't care one way or the other, but it is funny to watch the Tory party head off into self-destruct mode again...

What will be interesting is his stance on drugs policy if he gets elected. I reckon most of the country don't care whether he took drugs or not, but one thing people do care about is hypocrisy in their politicians -- it'll be difficult for Cameron to preside over any 'zero tolerance' type policies if everyone thinks he was snorting lines at his public school.

[Konan555]

I'd be more concerned about the fact he was closely involved when the government ended up withdrawing the pound from the ERM.

[blueprint]

Yeah its an important point to make that its important that Cameron is not a robot. He was young once, and thats a rare quality shown with MPs I think.
At least he won't be one of the those MPs who pass laws on drugs and preach about how bad drugs are with no real knowledge or experience of them.
I think we need someone as 'in tune' as Cameron.

I've always considered governments to be the pinnacle of organized crime.

Right on!!