keg Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 In the 1990s, the Chief Constable of West Yorks said 75% of domestic burglary was to feed drug habits... I'm trying to find the current stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Most of them deal exclusively in cannabis because they know as a class B drug the penalties for being caught with it are considerably less than being caught dealing class A drugs. If they do sell anything alongside it it will only be in small amounts and will most likely be a bit of coke or speed or perhaps a few ecstasy pills. Spot the contradiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 In the 1990s, the Chief Constable of West Yorks said 75% of domestic burglary was to feed drug habits... I'm trying to find the current stats. It may well be, but that is pretty much always related to class a drugs such as heroin or crack. Of course people will nick stuff for cannabis too, as they would to buy a bottle of vodka or to get a few quid to throw in the slot machine, buy fags, etc. I don't think anybody has suggested there are not issues with some drugs and drug users, to the contrary there are massive societal problems with people who abuse narcotics, but that also includes alcohol, tobacco and prescription drugs. There is a very clear difference between a bit of puff and heroin, crack & meth. Did you know that alcoholics in Glasgow used to steal shoe polish as it was alcohol based? They would melt it down and drink the liquid residue, they would also steal things like hairspray and mix that with lemonade as it was also alcohol based. The point of that ramble is that anybody who is desperate enough to feed their particular addiction will do all sorts of stuff. Once again though cannabis is proven that it does not create a chemical addiction in the body, it may well be habitual just like some people picking their nose, but the physiology is not adjusted the same as it is with nicotine, tobacco, caffeine and or some other drugs, both legal and illegal. The big exception is that on the developing brain, so in juveniles it can be damaging, especially in males. Once again it is about context and differentiation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Cannabis can mess with your mind you'd hope so or it would be pointless smoking it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) In the 1990s, the Chief Constable of West Yorks said 75% of domestic burglary was to feed drug habits... I'm trying to find the current stats. it hasn't done richard branson any harm he's hardly signing on or on the thieve in fact to counter the argument that all drug users are worthless and drinkers are all jolly good chaps i would just point out that it seems many of the most creative people of the 20th century have often used drugs of one kind or another many of whom have knighthoods now Edited June 1, 2015 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 I thought you had bowed out of bickering, but then again - consistency isn't your strong suit. Feel free to have the last word, as I have said my last on the subject. I won't post further. Spot the contradiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) in fact to counter the argument that all drug users are worthless and drinkers are all jolly good chaps i would just point out that it seems many of the most creative people of the 20th century have often used drugs of one kind or another many of whom have knighthoods now “You see, I think drugs have done some good things for us. I really do. And if you don't believe drugs have done good things for us, do me a favor. Go home tonight. Take all your albums, all your tapes and all your CDs and burn them. 'Cause you know what, the musicians that made all that great music that's enhanced your lives throughout the years were rrreal ******* high on drugs. The Beatles were so ******* high they let Ringo sing a few tunes.” ― Bill Hicks Edited June 1, 2015 by Danger-Mouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Danger- Mouse - I know that you aren't very bright, so I left some bait. I reasoned that only a fool would take it. I was correct. Perhaps you should read Vince Geen's posts - one of the very few posters who deals in reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Danger- Mouse - I know that you aren't very bright, so I left some bait. I reasoned that only a fool would take it. I was correct. You sure outsmarted him there ! I bet he feels silly now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 It doesn't take a lot and he probably felt silly a long time ago. Bickering with less than bright people aside, can I ask why no-one is taking on Vince Green's view? He has a better handle on reality than the "drugs are harmless" brigade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLuke Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) It doesn't take a lot and he probably felt silly a long time ago. Bickering with less than bright people aside, can I ask why no-one is taking on Vince Green's view? He has a better handle on reality than the "drugs are harmless" brigade. . Edited June 1, 2015 by LondonLuke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 It doesn't take a lot and he probably felt silly a long time ago. Bickering with less than bright people aside, can I ask why no-one is taking on Vince Green's view? He has a better handle on reality than the "drugs are harmless" brigade. Vince normally makes reasoned posts, but on this occasion I think that a few of them have just been over generalised and don't really add anything to the debate. More than happy to have a debate about why I think that too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) The random driver drug testing in Yorkshire was an eye opener - half the people randomly stopped had had a drug of some description. There were similar numbers from other authorities. The history of prohibition and drug criminalisation shows that banning anything doesn't work and just makes those involved in the illegal sales process very rich. The current drug regime isn't working and I think that's evidenced by the recent random roadside drug testing. Indeed, I if you tested people on the bus or the train the numbers would probably be higher. I reckon we'll see cannabis legalised and taxed like the Colorado model sooner rather than later, and the recent introduction of road side drug testing is the start and a dry run - if half the people in Yorkshire are having a puff and a drive then I doubt legalisation of canabis will alter that underlying usage figure. Edited June 1, 2015 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 The random driver drug testing in Yorkshire was an eye opener - half the people randomly stopped had had a drug of some description. There were similar numbers from other authorities. The history of prohibition and drug criminalisation shows that banning anything doesn't work and just makes those involved in the illegal sales process very rich. The current drug regime isn't working and I think that's evidenced by the recent random roadside drug testing. Indeed, I if you tested people on the bus or the train the numbers would probably be higher. I reckon we'll see cannabis legalised and taxed like the Colorado model sooner rather than later, and the recent introduction of road side drug testing is the start and a dry run - if half the people in Yorkshire are having a puff and a drive then I doubt legalisation of canabis will alter that underlying usage figure. I too believe that we will see decriminalisation of cannabis in the relative short term and probably some sort of licensed scheme for medicinal use/home growing and I think that would be a sensible move. I guess one of the problems any government would have is that after demonising something for so long that to make a u turn on that loses a lot of face. I also believe that is why no government has taken sensible steps around cannabis as it would clearly demonstrate rank hypocrisy in the drugs policy of the last 30 years in particular. From memory I think it is 10 or 11 states in the US have moved toward some sort of licensing approach for cannabis and it is nearly all positive. The majority of Canada has a similar approach too. Just for clarity given the blanket approach to 'drugs' in this thread, I absolutely separate cannabis from most other controlled drugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenduri Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 What I think is being missed is that booze can be bought in Tesco, as much as I hate booze that makes it a known substance, not something made in a back room in some squat, and the checkout girl is not likely to have a criminal record and be carrying a knife. I am also not likely to end up in debt to the checkout girl who then makes me deal the stuff myself to cover the debt. For conventional drugs yes but Ironically the people buying legal highs from what i've seen tend to be employed, reasonably presentable (aside from the drug taking) or come from a background which isn't a stereotypical working class background. All these kids burning out on legal highs are often kids of reasonable and financially stable families with disposable income, Same can be said for cocaine users to be honest but the misconception of who takes legal highs is very strong. I am in no way condoning legal highs and i think they all need banning but these are my observations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpringDon Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Think I'm getting the hang of this now.... I think the post was erudite and well reasoned = I agree with you. You're not very bright and probably support mainlining crack into kittens eyeballs = I don't agree with you. Almost the definition of entrenched positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenduri Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 "Its not so much that cannabis is a gateway drug as the fact that the people you probably get it from are keen to lead you / trick you down the path to heavier and more expensive substances. Often handing out freebies etc to reel you in." I`m sorry but you`ve been reading too many sensasionalist newspaper articles or you`re still believing what you saw on Grange Hill as a kid. The majority of dealers who sell cannabis are smokers themselves.They buy a few ounces, sell smaller amounts at a slightly inflated price and after they`ve made their money back or maybe a small profit they have enough weed left for themselves to smoke until the next time they buy. Most of them deal exclusively in cannabis because they know as a class B drug the penalties for being caught with it are considerably less than being caught dealing class A drugs. If they do sell anything alongside it it will only be in small amounts and will most likely be a bit of coke or speed or perhaps a few ecstasy pills. I`ve never known anyone deal in cannabis and heroin or crack at the same time. And I`ve never known a dealer to hand out free samples, other than offering to share a spliff whilst you`re there. The people you describe arent drug dealers they are smokers who sell a bit to supplement their own smoke. These are not Drug dealers in any sense. When you meet a proper drug dealer you will know...... In my Uni youth I've met a few of both types (note i wasn't participating in drug use or buying/selling), the proper drug dealers will dish out samples if they see there is a potential new customer for another drug. Cannabis is by far from a gateway drug but the problem is it can end up dealing with people who are pushing other drugs and that can in some instances lead to further use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 I too believe that we will see decriminalisation of cannabis in the relative short term and probably some sort of licensed scheme for medicinal use/home growing and I think that would be a sensible move. I guess one of the problems any government would have is that after demonising something for so long that to make a u turn on that loses a lot of face. I also believe that is why no government has taken sensible steps around cannabis as it would clearly demonstrate rank hypocrisy in the drugs policy of the last 30 years in particular. From memory I think it is 10 or 11 states in the US have moved toward some sort of licensing approach for cannabis and it is nearly all positive. The majority of Canada has a similar approach too. Just for clarity given the blanket approach to 'drugs' in this thread, I absolutely separate cannabis from most other controlled drugs. cant see it the torys want to "keep control" and aren't to radical in their thinking at the best of times. no i think they will carry on trying to stamp it out and fail miserably as the successive governments before them have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 For conventional drugs yes but Ironically the people buying legal highs from what i've seen tend to be employed, reasonably presentable (aside from the drug taking) or come from a background which isn't a stereotypical working class background. All these kids burning out on legal highs are often kids of reasonable and financially stable families with disposable income, Same can be said for cocaine users to be honest but the misconception of who takes legal highs is very strong. I am in no way condoning legal highs and i think they all need banning but these are my observations. legal highs sound awful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Danger- Mouse - I know that you aren't very bright, so I left some bait. I reasoned that only a fool would take it. I was correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenduri Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 legal highs sound awful They're primarily made in China and imported to Europe before being sold on. One site I'm aware of which my previous work colleague used before cleaning himself up, offers a vast array and markets them as research chemicals with effects "like" cocaine etc. Often people have no idea whats in them and they are pure so people run into problems with them and get messed up or worse die. Street coke is cut so much with other agents that there is often something like less than 20% cocaine for the average buy. It's often cut with things like baby formulae, pain killers and Novocaine to simulate coke. The legal highs are pure and are pretty much identical to their intended copy of the illegal form.This is what makes them so dangerous and such a problem, the unknown makeup and the strength. Having seen people get severely messed up on legal highs it's not a pretty sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Danger- Mouse - so you can cut and paste. Perhaps you need a little more education, as you do seem to be lacking. Now cut out the sniping and tell me why Vince Green is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 They're primarily made in China and imported to Europe before being sold on. One site I'm aware of which my previous work colleague used before cleaning himself up, offers a vast array and markets them as research chemicals with effects "like" cocaine etc. Often people have no idea whats in them and they are pure so people run into problems with them and get messed up or worse die. Street coke is cut so much with other agents that there is often something like less than 20% cocaine for the average buy. It's often cut with things like baby formulae, pain killers and Novocaine to simulate coke. The legal highs are pure and are pretty much identical to their intended copy of the illegal form.This is what makes them so dangerous and such a problem, the unknown makeup and the strength. Having seen people get severely messed up on legal highs it's not a pretty sight. I absolutely support improved legislation around synthesised legal highs, what we have now is clearly unfit for purpose although in truth the same can be said about most drugs legislation. I look forward to seeing how any new legislation is constructed and how effective it will be. cant see it the torys want to "keep control" and aren't to radical in their thinking at the best of times. no i think they will carry on trying to stamp it out and fail miserably as the successive governments before them have It may not happen under the current government, although I would not be overly surprised if there were attempts to do something a bit different towards the end of this current term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Danger- Mouse - so you can cut and paste. Perhaps you need a little more education, as you do seem to be lacking. Now cut out the sniping and tell me why Vince Green is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 This has the potential of becoming a little bit pathetic, we do seem to have an overwhelming capacity to turn what could be a decent discussion into something juvenile. It is an emotive subject but I would have thought that grown ups could understand that folks may have a different point of view and try to understand why that might be, but that really isn't the strength of PW at times. It is such a shame as one of the great things about this forum is the diversity of discussion topics. Definitely my last contribution to this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.