It wasn't disputing that it doesn't happen, merely that I've not encountered yet. It doesn't surprise me, especially given the binge drinking culture in this, and and number of other countries.
That should've been 'overdosing'. How much cigarette do you need to smoke to kill someone, say, overnight. I am obviously not referring to long terms effect everyone knows about.
No more absurd in my view than the notion that it's only done to preserve the job of charity workers, police and prison guards.
Last edited by TooNice; 13-09-2009 at 06:45 PM.
That's interesting. You say everyone knows the long term effects of smoking, but we still allow people to make the choice whether or not to smoke. Many people choose to smoke, but you don't want to outlaw that. Why are other drugs different?
For the average person, a lethal dose of alcohol would cost about £8. One bottle of spirits will cause a healthy adult to die of alcohol poisoning. A lethal dose of paracetamol would leave you change out of £2. Whereas there is no lethal dosage established for cannabis. Nobody has ever died, anywhere in the world, from a cannabis overdose. People very occasionally die after taking ecstasy, though not strictly from overdoses. However they do so much less frequently than people are killed angling or horse riding (and we let kids do those activities )
Do you think then that current legislation has anything at all to do with the actual risk of sudden death?
And the main reason we have sudden deaths due to use of harder drugs such as heroin, is that due to prohibition a user never knows who made his drug, what batch it belongs to, how pure it is, or what other substances are added to it. If opiates were made under pharmaceutical conditions by reputable companies then overdoses would drop to nearer the level of unintentional paracetamol overdoses (there's always the occasional person who doesn't read the label).
So do you really want to reduce deaths due to overdoses? If so, how do you reconcile that with your support for prohibition?
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
Trust me, I wouldn't mind. It's even less feasible to control drugs though, given that it's legal in most other countries, and a large amount of population already smoke. I can't imagine the scale of the protests if that were to ever happen. Yes, I did say earlier "Not that I would miss it if it was banned - except maybe for the loss of tax which may need to come from other places.", but I neglected to add that I am not unsure as to how much tax are being paid in via cigarette tax (significant I am sure) versus how much paid out to treat illness caused by smoking. And even if the government make money from smokers, would the same hold true with drugs?
As a non-drug taker, with no interest to start, or know anyone who take hard drugs, you are going to have to educate me on this one: how easy is it to accidentally take too much when it comes to hard drugs, when one is already under the influence of the substance?
In the case of paracetamol, I reckon that you would really need to have the intention to kill yourself to take enough to do so (well, aside from those who do not read the label). Alcohol, that's trickier. I never understood why people here can enjoy drinking so much where they start puking, let alone suffer from a lethal case of alcohol poisoning.
Still, do you think that the average person under the influence of a hard drug can make decisions as well (or shall I say, less bad) than someone under the influence of alcohol? i.e. Are they both equally as incapable, or even, is the drug user better at making informed decisions of, say "I better stop now"?
How about as a percentage? [This is a question - but am I mistaken to think that there are probably more horse riders than people taking ecstasy?]
I've heard that argument before, it's seems credible, though I've not verified it. Still, are there any credible research on the impact of hard drug on: one's ability to make informed decision of at least when to stop, and one's ability to carry on with one's productive life (i.e. work)? The two criteria on top of my head for the later is 'does it screw with your mind' (like alcohol - meaning that it's inappropriate to take during break at work) and 'is it so addictive that the average person, once hooked, can't resist while they are at work' (like cigarettes - and I am also aware of alcoholics - but you wouldn't want more population suffering as such). If the answer is yes to both, then the government has every reason to be worried about hard drugs.
As to why it is hard to sell politically, you've made the point that we are letting worse thing through. Aside from the points made by other posters (i.e. the government has spent years convincing the public to stay away), do you think that "Since it is debatable as to whether drugs are worse than what is legally available, we are going to make it legal" is a particularly attractive message? It's basically selling something that's not particularly good, on basis that there are worse. No matter how convincing, I can't imagine how it can be anything but hard to sell politically. The average voters are probably more likely going to be swayed by promises of lower employments, better healthcare and better education and so on (whether it is delivered or not).
Last edited by TooNice; 14-09-2009 at 04:06 AM.
Depends on the person, the drug and how much has been taken.
I would say though that given a high dosage, the person under the influence of drugs would be able to make an informed decision much better then the person under the influence of alcohol....at least in the vast majority of cases.
Go and hang out at 3am by a dance club that's kicking out, notice how wrecked certain people look and how they are acting.....now do the same at a drinking hole.....you will see a noticable difference in behavior.
Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive
I am always aware of the dangers posed by drugs such as Crystal meth and PCP, as opposed to those of relatively softer drugs like heroin and cocaine. Keith Richards was a heroin addict for many years and says that he enjoyed better health as an addict than after giving up. One of my childhood friends has been a regular user of heroin for 30 years. He has a wife and kids, a nice job with an advertising agency and looks and smells like a pillar of society. He can do this because he can afford decent drugs from a trusted supplier, and doesn't need to go to a 'real' criminal in order to get his supplies.
I would be OK with legalising cannabis, de-criminalising heroin, MDMA, coke and LSD among others, but I really wouldn't like to see an increase in the numbers of meth or PCP users.
PCP Horror stories
No-one can tell me that society would be enriched by legalising or de-criminalising PCP or it's equally cheap to make buddy, crystal meth.Originally Posted by Wikipedia
On the other hand, I have worked in Amsterdam and found the recreational use of cannabis kind of sweet, once I was used to it. I used to go out to dinner with colleagues, we would have a bottle of wine with dinner and then drop off for a pipe and then go and sit in a bar having a chat and a beer. It is all very civilised.
Last edited by Brucelles; 15-09-2009 at 03:00 PM.
(Thanks Evilmunky)
Eagles may soar, but weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.
It is a shameful thing, but when I am in Amsterdam I speak French most of the time, so that other brits think I am a foreigner, and ignore me. Poor Amsterdam seems to have become the must-go-to place for hen parties, stag parties and general badly-behaved drunkenness parties for the British chav.
(Thanks Evilmunky)
Eagles may soar, but weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.
Did anyone read Will Self's thoughts on this subject in the paper yesterday?
basically he stated that he and quite a lot of others are all for a reform of the current laws.
At the moment all the people going "no,no,no" to reforms are wet between the ears MP's and young police. The people saying that the "war on drugs" and current prohibition laws are not working are the older, higher ranking police who are advising that the current system is not working and needs a radical rehaul but the government are just dismissing this advice straight away.
He also stated that regulation and taxation on this might also bring additional income to the government, and we all know that they could do with the cash at the moment
I guess the problem is that there is no real ethical way of testing this in a more scientific manner. If someone else claims otherwise, it'll just be your words against theirs.
See, the majority of people who go clubbing that I know of do not consume any substances other than alcohol. And I can't tell people who've been drinking, from people who've been taking pills as they walk out of the club.
It might be that at least some of the people who go to bar and clubs depending on evenings end up more trashed if they spend more time in a bar. But that could just be that you spend more time drinking in a bar than you would do in a club (not practical to dance with a drink).
the problem with drugs of any kind is addicts.
and the problem with addicts is they are not all the same, It would be hard to even simply try and create some classicifcation groups.
some people would gourge themselfs on all they are given, this apparently is seen in the medical grade herrion trails, where people after getting their state supply look to the illegal market afterwards because they want more.
yet you hear stories of sucsessful actors/businessmen who where using herion for years without anyone ever knowing, with their addiction well under control.
If you open the floodgates, you can't say for certain what the result will be.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)