What is more ludicrous is the UK government hiring an expert in the field (David Nutt) as drug advisor, not listening to a word he says, and then firing him for making his views public.
I thought that this was not just disgusting but also that it proved to anyone with a brain that David Nutt was right and the government was stopping his "expert" evidence and point of view from coming out - most importantly it got a huge amount of press in the UK which is exactly what should have happened a long time ago, this brings me back to my original point - only if there are enough people interested and the taboo's have been pushed aside can we have a public debate about this matter that the government refuses to discuss (not just this government, all of them for decades).
Ah well, at least things can't get any worse. Oh wait, a Tory government you say? Shit...
Not on topic, please do not discuss at all.
im of the opinion that if someone makes an informed decision, then it's their weight to bear. the regulation of these choices should be limited to public areas. i dont care if someone gets trashed every weekend at home, but i dont want to deal with them on the road, or in a public place like a park or something.
This first part of your sentence is abhorrent from any governments point of view, the rest of your sentence makes total sense to the average person and in general I agree with you so long as you take into account "harm to the non-drug users" (partners, children, parents, household members, pets, and working colleagues) which was in a link about half way down showed the 2 common legal drugs (alcohol and tobacco) are ahead of most for "harm to the non-drug users"
i think the best way to actually get people to make good choices is with education. nothing is more dangerous than human ignorance. with a real education on the effects of various substances on the human body, i really do believe that people will make better choices.
Well said - my point in other words. If the governing laws are bullshit how can education make any sense without going against the grain of the government and its laws........
i think portugal has taken an interesting approach. i believe they've decriminalized most if not all drugs; however you can still be picked up for doing them in public(public consumption of anything is discouraged iirc, i might be misremembering things). you dont get tossed in jail though, youre sent to a seminar or little lecture about the effects and possible dangers of the drug you were using. they make sure that you know what youre getting yourself into, give you help if you decide you want to stop, or just let you leave if you decide not to care.
if someone wants to do drugs, they're going to do drugs - damn what the government says. if they were more informed about what the actual side effects were though, i think some people might stop, or switch to a less damaging substance.http://www.erowid.org/
has a lot of info on various things.
This is far less mentioned than the cannabis shops of Amsterdam and is not as well documented overall - but is does seem to be working by most measures - the main problem with both examples of Holland and Portugal is that they will get "drug tourism" which skews everything more than you would think it would in measuring the real effects of the change amongsth many others including the economy boom/bust local/glabal trends and so on - the only real test must be a long term test - say 10-years.