Cannabis (almost) decriminalised!



  • Reply 41 of 47
    haraldharald Posts: 2,152member
    [quote]Originally posted by MarcUK:


    You may If you can see through your purple haze notice that I specifically bracketed out the types of people that would go to their doctor for thier fix. Which happen to be very close to your approximation.<hr></blockquote></strong>

    The people who aren't doing robberies and selling themselves aren't a drain. They can afford their gear.

    [quote]<strong>But do you really think that the people who take E's at the weekend, do coke on thier business trips etc etc are going to go to their doctor to get it? <hr></blockquote></strong>

    No, these people aren't going to go to the doctor to get their free drugs. They don't need to. E and cocaine aren't drugs of poverty (drugs to make a shitty life feel better). E is also less addictive by a factor of a million. These fools can pay for their drugs, and they can afford it. They are not a drain on society.

    [quote]<strong>I put it to you, that if you read AND understand what I am saying, and still dismiss it, then YOU must be on drugs, right about now i'd guess<hr></blockquote></strong>

    No, you're just factually incorrect.

    Regarding your rant above, the drain on society is robbery, healthcare, billions on police / legal system and billions gone on the black economy. Bigger drain then no-markup pharmaceutical smack (which is all I'm talking about) from your GP, probably by over a billion pounds a year. Sources in an earlier post if you want to check my maths.
  • Reply 42 of 47
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    I forgot I was posting in this thread!

    Ive got the undeniable answer.

    How about we allow doctors to give free drugs to everybody.

    Problem solved
  • Reply 43 of 47
    Why not have some kind of licensing system. Your GP registers you for a program, perhaps with follow-up visits but in between your drugs are available from registered pharmacies such as 'Boots'? People wouldn't have to hassle their GP's every time that they wanted an 'e' and they could have some kind of pre-test to see if they are one of the few people to have an adverse reaction, drugs would be consistant so less accidents.

    Harald.. [quote] Meaning: I can smoke spliffs on the streets of London town and The Man isn't going to do diddly.<hr></blockquote> you do know that's not true right?

    Unfortunately our spineless Govt hasn't the balls for that kind of legislation and they're creating a nightmare situation where it's still illegal but 'the man' (that's so cute) has had some options taken away. Picture the scenario... you wander along some leafy street sucking back on an enormous reefer, 'morning officer' you say.... he thinks 'piss taking shit I'll show him'. you have committed an offence and because the narked off officer no longer believes you when you give your details you are arrestable unders section 25 of the Police & Criminal Evidence act.

    The lines are blurred and a lot of people are gonna get in trouble thinking cannabis is now okay. I can't see what Blair hopes to acheive.
  • Reply 44 of 47
    Imagine all the lawsuits from government provided heroin and the doctors that prescribe poison to their patients.

    Hey Hassan i-Sabbah? I was going to rob you to pay for my new powerbook. I guess the government should just tax people and use the moeny to buy me one right? The money winds up in the same place in the end. So pay up mother ****ers!
  • Reply 45 of 47
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    That's actually a good point. What if someone overdoses on their pure government allotted heroin and dies. Then their family sues the government (tax payers) for $10 million. Sounds fair to me. The gov gave them poison to begin with, those rotten bastards.

    Arguably the government already is poisoning us by keeping tobacco smoking legal and letting us drive CO & CO2 factories. Why be even more overt about it?
  • Reply 46 of 47
    [quote]According to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, in 1999 an estimated 14.8 million Americans (see the chart) were current illicit drug users, meaning they had used some illicit drug during the month prior to the survey. [...]

    In 1999, more than 4 million of the drug using population were hardcore users [...] While casual use of illicit drugs, and cocaine in particular, has fallen dramatically (see the chart) since the early 1980s, the number of hard-core users of cocaine and heroin has remained virtually unchanged.<hr></blockquote>

    from <a href=""; target="_blank"></a>;

    Let's not kid ourselves?
  • Reply 47 of 47
    [quote]Originally posted by scott_h_phd:


    Hey Hassan i-Sabbah? I was going to rob you to pay for my new powerbook. I guess the government should just tax people and use the moeny to buy me one right? The money winds up in the same place in the end. So pay up mother ****ers! </strong><hr></blockquote>

    This is a good point, Scott. Sadly, we will always have addicts; sadly, too, we will also have greedy bastards.

    Of the two, only addiction is treatable. Were there treatment for being a greedy bastard, I wouldn't mind reallocating some of my taxes to that end for the good of society and the public purse.

    Ai, me.

    Hassan i-Sabbah


    [ 07-14-2002: Message edited by: Hassan i-Sabbah ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.