In the light of the recent shooting something interesting...is this the solution?:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/fe...ohol.davidrose
Yes
No
Not Sure
.....your time is coming
In the light of the recent shooting something interesting...is this the solution?:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/fe...ohol.davidrose
Den tha thriamvéf̱sei páno̱
Myself, I'd like to see the research and hard facts, not an article.
I couldnt base a decision on anything but...
But.... 85% of inmates are alcohol and/or drug dependant, quite clearly there is an issue out there, yes we know the stuff is accessible inside, it's quite likely there's an endless cycle.
However what I also know for a fact, is that there is minimal rehabilitation resources available...
I know the Govt are looking into rehabilitation options, because we have so many drug and alcohol fueled problems in our society
There's a myriad of lower level "stories" that don't make the media - for
obvious reasons.
To quote something in this article...
"This is a social problem, not a criminal one, and the whole of society has to tackle it - not leave it to the police on their own".
No and Know, are indeed two different roads to take.
Anyone know what's happened to the state in Aus that has regulated cannibas, with an allowance for growing plants for personal usage?
The argument here becomes, does pot lead to harder drugs, and by regulating it, will it lead all kids straight to harder drugs? Would it reduce drug related crime and harm?
What is the actual impact on society? We know the current impact as it now stands in our society.
ter·ra in·cog·ni·taAchievement is not always success while reputed failure often is. It is honest endeavor, persistent effort to do the best possible under any and all circumstances.
Orison Swett Marden
Forum whore
Originally Posted by Grahameeboy
On what basis should we legalise (or otherwise condone) something that may cause harm to others?
mini meeeeeee
I'm not sure that just letting it be "society's problem" to deal with is any better an option. In fact it could be considerably worse. If drugs were no longer on the police agenda then yes, their workload would be a lot lighter, but would that make our country a safer place to live in? I think not.
I'd much rather it be a police matter to deal with. Allowing society to be responsible for dealing with drug issues would most likely lead to vigilante enforcers. Then the police would be going after citizens who were dealing inappropriately with dealers, users, manufacturers etc.
Holland has a plethora of social and criminal issues to deal with and I for one am not convinced that the liberal Dutch offer any better solution to the drug culture....
My 2c worth
I lahk to moove eet moove eet...
Katman to steveb64
.....your time is coming
Guess we won't know unless we try it...who knows...does the fact that it is illegal make it more of a temptation? Would it just become a social activity like smoking or drinking is...taxable like smoking...smokers argue that they are entitled to health care because their taxes go towards health....so could the same apply to drug users...I mean nicotine is one of the most addictive drugs around and causes more deaths than drugs do yet smoking is legal...so does "harm".
Sometimes I think society is a hypocrite to itself..
You can but cigarettes even though it has a Govt. health warning saying "smoking kills"...the Govt allows you to buy a motorbike capable of exceeding the speed limit but you get fined for breaking the speed limit because "speed kills"...you can buy a gun which "can kill".......but you cannot buy drugs because it harms your health "drugs kill"...
Strange society if you ask me.
Double shot!!
The shooting being related to weed is unfortunate. The reality is more like, the bloke was a ticking time bomb well before weed was an issue.
I think there is a big difference between responsible and occasional users of weed, and regular users of hard drugs. I doubt that any person can have a normal life after one time on heroin, yet a few tokes with other activities has little or no short or long term consequences.
I think home users with a plant or three should be ignored. Thats enough weed for them to share a J or three on the weekends. That removes them from the criminally dangerous side of the drugs scene, and makes regulating its' use their own problem, just as it would be with alcohol or overeating.
But hard drugs - I think thats a different thing. Leave it heavily outlawed.
Steve
"I am a licenced motorcycle instructor, I agree with dangerousbastard, no point in repeating what he said."
"read what Steve says. He's right."
"What Steve said pretty much summed it up."
"I did axactly as you said and it worked...!!"
"Wow, Great advise there DB."
WTB: Hyosung bikes or going or not.
Forum whore
In NZ no one cares until it affects them personally.
Anyone who offers to help anyone else is a softcock and the "victim" should just harden up.
In NZ anything that deviates from an arbitray social "norm" is feared and persecuted.
Drink yourself into a coma. That's cool.
Smoke a bit of weed and fall asleep in the corner. Oh NO! That soul is headed for "hard drug use".
The argument and counter argument invariably end up so circular and emotive (Bit like religion really. No, a LOT like religion) that personal choice and responsibility end up being removed from the individual, either by legislation or modification of socially acceptable behaviour. 25 years ago, a smoker would have laughed in your face, probably expelling a cloud of blue smoke directly into your mug in the process if you'd said they'd be standing outside to smoke a fag at morning tea time.
No one has any answers. There are no right ones. I'm fairly certain that I'll still be alive when trans fats and processed sugar are illegal and Fiji will be doing a stonking trade in illegal pork crackling and sugar cane. I know at some point my driver's license will be permanently removed. The attitude that road deaths are an acceptable part of a working economy is slowly changing.
Drug use is much less of a problem than the average Kiwi's diet, and addiction to gadgets that require the use of metals like tantalum. There's a 6 year old at the bottom of an unstabilised open cast mine in Central Africa digging up the stuff they make the capacitors for your cellphone from.
That's a "social" problem that can be fixed easily. You don't need an iPod, and iPhone, any electronic gadget really. You need a washing machine, a stove, insulation for your house, and heating.
Drugs are a tiny problem compared to the socially isolated "society" we've constructed, based on "privacy" and "liberty". We have neither of those things and little respect for each as a result, hence our propensity for publicly denouncing other people's perceived shortcomings, "shortcomings" based on a narrow set of legislation derived from a couple of Millenia of the most rapacious culture in history.
The divisive HD vs Everything else mindset displayed from time to time on KB as an example of that. If you can own a GSXR1000 and ride it as meant, then the next week ride an FXDC as meant and enjoy both equally, then you're the sort of mentally flexible person who can prosper in any society.
The "war" on drugs is as destined to fail as the "war" on HD, simply because of the essentially mutable human condition. Things change.
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
Forum whore
The interesting thing I have noticed, (having spent reasonable time in both these parts of Europe) Is, like the article mentions, the problem of drugs seems to be worse in England.
My opinion is the major difference in the two countries society seems to be education.
Some of the most uneducated people I have met in my life where in England, whereas, the Dutch (infact most all of the Central Europeans (Dutch, French, German) seemed to be extremely well educated in comparison.
Most people from central Europe speak several languages....and their education systems are really "hard core"
Now, I am not saying that is the reason that the drugs are a bigger problem in England, (they are a problem everywhere), but it just makes me wonder if some countries paying so much attention to education (particularly the Socialist countries) has a much broader social effect than you would expect.
Just a thought.
Forum whore
Yeah, the argument that something bad being legal justifies something else bad doesn't really hold water does it? Perhaps the answer should be to ban all "bad" things instead.
And what of say kiddie porn? Clearly the majority of society think that is bad, but there are those who believe it is acceptable - they must as if they didn't no one would produce this stuff and/or be caught with it. So should we legalise this also?
Clearly a rhetorical question, however legalising something just because some in society want, yearn for or crave something doesn't make sense - to me. As it doesn't make sense changing the argument to one of tobacco or alcohol.
NOT saying it wont work, not arguing against drugs, but I really would like to know the criteria for condoning something that apparently has little or no benefit to society AND often causes significant harm.
salty dog
few differences between poms and clogs....
Wooden footwear vs wooden headgear one of the more obvious ones....
Opinions are like arseholes: Everybody has got one, but that doesn't mean you got to air it in public all the time....
BogOff-Cant you see I'm busy?
It sounds like whay you are saying here is that society will always have a drug dependent community of some kind. If you legitimise this community it will be easier to monitor and control it.
I don't agree with this at all. I have many friends whom are dependent upon Canabis and other soft drugs. Some have no issues with Canabis and it is purely recreational, others have strong mood swings and cannot manage without.
To legalise something that can have unpredictable side effects is very dangerous and I would be totally against it.
Forum whore
mmmmmmpf - Alcohol, "Prozac", amitriptyline
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
Forum whore
The difference between Holland and England is simple. Most of the strong English stock left to set-up the States, Aussie, NZ etc.
Only retards left there now!
Loud and Uncouth
And imports from the near and middle east....
Winding up drongos, foil hat wearers and over sensitive KBers for over 14,000 posts...........
" Life is not a rehearsal, it's as happy or miserable as you want to make it"
Forum whore
I reckon the place retards people. They even got Madonna. She said she wanted to be more British.
1. She's a Solo Mum.
2. She's been divorced twice.
3. She has 3 kids with different fathers.
4. One of the kids is black.
Job done! Retarded British Solo Mum.
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks