[Football] Police call for cocaine users to be banned from football after Euros mayhem

[Neville's Breakfast]

So why not take the trade out of the hands of criminal networks?

How would that reduce crime committed by addicts to pay for drugs ? Or are you advocating ‘free’ drugs paid for by the taxpayer ?

 

[Stumpy Tim]

It's not just the war on drugs, it's war between rival drug cartels and murders up and down the supply chain. And deaths and murders caused by crime on the streets to pay for the habit.

Yes, but if it was legal that wouldn't happen. They would be legal corporations and simply wouldn't be able to work as they do now. Look at the violence in America during prohibition and what we have now

 

[Wardy's twin]

But there is a drug problem in Singapore? A quick google will come up with many articles about it.

The articles I have seen still indicate it has the lowest rates of drug use and little crime associated with it. I might be reading the wrong stuff of course but it certainly seems to have reduced drug use from the 70s....

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

The articles I have seen still indicate it has the lowest rates of drug use and little crime associated with it. I might be reading the wrong stuff of course but it certainly seems to have reduced drug use from the 70s....

Yep, we were told that in the ‘60s there were addicts lying sprawled out in fields around Geylang and violence between drug gangs. Current drug laws are a reaction to the crime associated with those times. It works. Strict enforcement has never even been tried in the UK so I find the notions of a ‘war on drugs’ and ‘prohibition’ a bit laughable.

 

[Stat Brother]

Yep, we were told that in the ‘60s there were addicts lying sprawled out in fields around Geylang and violence between drug gangs. Current drug laws are a reaction to the crime associated with those times. It works. Strict enforcement has never even been tried in the UK so I find the notions of a ‘war on drugs’ and ‘prohibition’ a bit laughable.

The many many references on this thread about our 'war on drugs' does seem a little odd, unless of course we all moved to America and nobody told us.

 

[dazzer6666]

I’m talking about late at night, often weekends, “I suggest we meet up further to discuss this, PAL” type posts or someone coming online all guns blazing about midnight (I can remember one such poster, it was unlike him) picking fights with everyone in incoherent language.

Not your ‘day to day’ racist/anti semitic shit. They’re racists drunk, stoned or sober.

….or just watched Match of the Day

 

[stewardxxx]

I messed about with it quite a lot in the past but hate it now (I'm 37 and only drink and have an occasional drag on a joint if the scene is right) - was out with my mates for multiple games throughout the Euro's and 80% of them I was the only one not sticking powder up my nose. It's bloody embarrassing to see balding and overweight blokes chewing their faces off, talking shit and trying to chat up young women.

a couple of us have daughters around the ages of 11 - 14 and I said that in 4-7 years they will be out and about and how would they react as fathers to seeing similar blokes to them chatting the girls up or even worse, for your kids to know why your jaw is all over the show. (I was obviously just a party pooper though...)

 

[Questions]

So if you are caught having a sniff at a sporting event then you are banned from watching that sport live ?
Is that what they are saying ?

Or is it just football ?

 

[Wardy's twin]

Yep, we were told that in the ‘60s there were addicts lying sprawled out in fields around Geylang and violence between drug gangs. Current drug laws are a reaction to the crime associated with those times. It works. Strict enforcement has never even been tried in the UK so I find the notions of a ‘war on drugs’ and ‘prohibition’ a bit laughable.

You and I have disagreed on a few things but I agree with you the enforcement is laughable but that is true of much crime. I would say I am a pretty tolerant, free thinking person who is happy for people to do their own thing but only when that does not impact on other people. My politics are left of centre but putting money into the police, making the police more efficient and dare i say putting more people in prison (certainly repeat offenders) would serve us well.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

You and I have disagreed on a few things but I agree with you the enforcement is laughable but that is true of much crime. I would say I am a pretty tolerant, free thinking person who is happy for people to do their own thing but only when that does not impact on other people. My politics are left of centre but putting money into the police, making the police more efficient and dare i say putting more people in prison (certainly repeat offenders) would serve us well.

I was thinking much the same

 

[Gun shot]

Using cocaine lowers the immune system considerably. It's stamped on with plenty of other different shit as well. If Covid-19 is looking at infecting adults, coke users would be near the top I reckon, but I feel for the victims that work in hospitals, police or supermarket workers that just go about their job and look after themselves.

 

[Justice]

It’s interesting there is thread on NSC about people’a alcohol consumption habits. It contains none of the ‘ I can’t believe this is happening ‘ or ‘ people are idiots why do they drink ‘ I just find it interesting how one drug is deemed as the devil and another isn’t amongst parts of the same community. Someone posts a tail about ‘ I know someone who’s lost everything to cocaine ‘ and for some reason it seems more shocking than losing everything to alcohol. Maybe because there is a unscrupulous dealer involved and not the local off license?

Millions of people are addicted to something me included just to get through the day. What does that tell us about living in this country is it really that shit we all need a little something to survive it? Or is it the world in general

 

[Sheebo]

I do wonder if the more snobby simple black and white comments come from those who have lived the most sheltered life with their heads in the sand. I guess it comes with the territory of an internet message board but why does everyone have to have an outlandish massive opinion on everything. Honestly, live and let live sometimes - got mates with all sorts of different lifestyles and vices and don’t feel the need to give an opinion to them on everything they do as long as they’re half sensible and happy

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I do wonder if the more snobby simple black and white comments come from those who have lived the most sheltered life with their heads in the sand. I guess it comes with the territory of an internet message board but why does everyone have to have an outlandish massive opinion on everything. Honestly, live and let live sometimes - got mates with all sorts of different lifestyles and vices and don’t feel the need to give an opinion to them on everything they do as long as they’re half sensible and happy

Because we have kids to bring up and also a stake in society. It’s not all about individuals and their rights because the actions of druggies affect other people. Not looking for an argument, I’m just explaining why I have an opinion.

 

[Sheebo]

Everything depends on moderation - alcohol / other drugs / gambling etc - none particularly good for you but if used sparingly can be ok. A lot of examples that come out are often extreme addicts. There’s a whole spectrum on absolutely everything in my opinion - I like to let people make their own decisions and not judge tbh.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

HWT is often the recipient.

To be honest, it has rarely happened.

Given that, by words alone, I have reduced certain posters to a metaphorical naked skinniny boy, drenched through by the sort of rain (you can guess the rest), and whimpering for his mother, I am unlikely to repond well to an invitation to have the villain's shame redressed by punching me about a bit.

Actually, there is one poster who did invite all and sundry to give me a slap and was given a ban for his troubles.

How sad. Never mind.

I hope you enjoyed the sun today, Westy. And you [MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION].

 

[Sheebo]

Because we have kids to bring up and also a stake in society. It’s not all about individuals and their rights because the actions of druggies affect other people. Not looking for an argument, I’m just explaining why I have an opinion.

‘Druggies’ Does that cover anyone who’s ever used a drug? The drug alcohol? Barry who has a spliff once a month when he visits his mate and plays poker? Such a generalisation there. I have kids to bring up too and can’t ever say someone’s vice has affected them once so far

It’s not just this subject is it though. Covid is a great one. Nobody knows the full facts - especially the vaccine - yet there’s people protesting about a ‘death jab’ - literally without knowing anything for sure - society seems to have to have strong opinions and a platform to voice them on literally everything - and I’m sure social media etc platforms make this possible / worse.

 

[Springal]

Using cocaine lowers the immune system considerably. It's stamped on with plenty of other different shit as well. If Covid-19 is looking at infecting adults, coke users would be near the top I reckon, but I feel for the victims that work in hospitals, police or supermarket workers that just go about their job and look after themselves.

Do you have anything to back that up? Or just some wild guess? FYI purity levels are at the highest ever recorded

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I am amazed that anyone would argue for the status quo with our drug laws. There is no argument to be had, the war on drugs is utterly lost. Drugs whether people like it or not are everywhere and prohibition is doing no more than making bad people rich. If we carry on doing what we are now where do people think we will be in 20 years? This is not going to go away, neither are the Police going to be able to even effect the street price of drugs much less prevent availability. Even the police I know think its a waste of time. Some form of legality is necessary and if we are going to go down that road then surely legalisation, regulation and taxation are the best way forward?
We need treatment centres, new sources of funding for hard pressed public services and especially healthcare, he is a golden opportunity to create a tax worth potentially billions?

When something like Cocaine is half the price it was 35 years ago and everywhere you turn I don't think anyone can pretend that illegality is having any positive effect at all? Time to cut the hypocrisy, accept the inevitable and at least try and take some of the criminality out of it.

Same could be said for a lot of things. I'll let everyone's lurid imagination fill in the gaps. *cough* Glitter *cough*

No, the argument has to be based on risk benefit analysis.

The tide towards legalisation of cannabis is unlikely to turn (it will be legalized). Even the Isle of man has given up birching homosexuals.

But what will be next, if anything?

There is no such thing as the pejoritive entity 'drugs', though. Chemicals we ingest are drugs. I am a pharmacologist so I know of what I speak.

'War on drugs'

I think the 'drug culture' is exaggerated, though. Yes 95% of certain demographics are into it, balls deep, and in their echo chamber it will feel like everone is at it. But in other echo chambers there is equal certainty about resurrection, homosexuality and abortion being abominations, and drugs unavailable (even if they wanted some); take your pick.

I can tell you that in the pharmacology community there is total disinterest in legalising this or that. We see even pure drugs as risky. Why make clean heroin available? Have you never read Naked Lunch?

I would take more seriously the arguments of the pro legalization lobby if they weren't so nakedly 'me me me'. As a lapsed toofer, what's in it for me?

(and I'm looking at you, Swanny )

 

[Weststander]

Same could be said for a lot of things. I'll let everyon'es lurid imagination fill in the gaps. *cough* Glitter *cough*

No, the argument has to be based on risk benefit analysis.

The tide towards legalisation of cannabis is unlikely to turn. Even the Isle of man has given up birching homosexuals. But what next?

There is no such thing as the pejoritive entity 'drugs', though. Chemicals we ingest are drugs. I am a pharmacologist so I know of what I speak.

'War on drugs'

I think the 'drug culture' is exaggerated, though. Yes 95% of certain demographics are into it, balls deep, and in their echo chamber it will feel like everone is at it. But in other echo chambers there is equal certainty about resurrection, homosexuality and abortion being abominations, and drugs unavailable (even if they wanted some); take your pick.

I can tell you that in the pharmacology community there is total disinterest in legalising this or that. We see even pure drugs as risky. Why make clean heroin available? Have you never read Naked Lunch?

I would take more seriously the arguments of the pro legalization lobby if they weren't so nakedly 'me me me'. As a lapsed toofer, what's in it for me?

(and I'm looking at you, Swanny )

Shorthand for Professor David Nutt?