English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What is he smoking? Now if he said outlaw drugs and seriously cracks down on hard drugs he would get my vote

This idiot even wants Herion on the NHS, where will he stop? will you be able to get a supply of cigarretees and alcohol as well? after all these are recognised addictions.

Lets hope he resigns before he ruins what is left of our Country and NHS

2007-10-15 06:34:51 · 22 answers · asked by Tapsy 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

22 answers

Prohibition laws don't work to erradicate the banned substances, but they make a lot of money and power for organized crime. Legalizing would be better.

2007-10-15 06:46:56 · answer #1 · answered by sudonym x 6 · 2 0

I think this is a good idea to a certain extent. The public are always up in arms about the amount of crime which is caused by drugs and the need to feed 'the habit'. Wouldn't it be better if some of these drugs were legal like they are in Amsterdam where the use and distribution can be monitored by the government and police?
I myself don't use drugs but I know what it is like to have a problem so why not help these people by trying not to lock them up at the first opportunity? I know this answer will not be met with approval and I have strong views on the subject which could be better explained another time, but for the moment this is my view. Sorry if you feel offended, xx.

2007-10-15 06:50:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Many, very intelligent people have advocated an end to the war on drugs. There have been conservatives like William F. Buckley Jr., many liberals and many libertarians as well. The Cato Institute has done a great deal of research on this topic and I have linked their site here. I would suggest you look at the issue objectively. Also, you may want to ask yourself why the prohibition against alcohol was lifted. There are many, many parallels.

2007-10-15 06:52:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Legalizing drugs is not the same as having the govt provide drugs for free -- it just means that you make it no longer a criminal action for someone to voluntarily choose to put a particular substance in their body.

The rationale is very simple -- if someone wants to take a particular substance, why should the govt get involved and decide that some substances are acceptable for adults to take and some are not?

The bottom line is that drug use and drug possession -- by themselves -- are victimless crimes. While drug users may commit other crimes, those other crimes can still be prosecuted directly -- regardless of whether drugs are legal or illegal.

Currently, attempting to prosecute drug-related crimes imposes a huge burden on police -- which prevents them from being able to respond as effectively to prevent violent crimes against people and property (where there is a victim) -- and drug related imprisonment fills prisons -- which reduces their ability to hold violent criminals.

So, there are many practical reasons that the police should stop wasting their time worrying about what someone chooses to put in their own body -- and instead to concentrate their efforts on stopping and punishing people who are actually a threat to someone else.

2007-10-15 06:47:53 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3 1

No, legalise drugs say one senior police man, which is not the same thing!


I've not read his comments, but years ago when I was a woodentop at Hendon, similar ideas were mooted for discussion. The logic ran thusly; There is a large market for recreational drugs. With all our efforts, we are not controlling the drugs trade. The illegal nature of drugs fuels a multi-billion pound illicit industry. If drugs were available legitimately, users would be easier to control, and the source of revenue for criminal organisations would be cut overnight. Plus, the government would have a new tax revenue!

I'm not saying I agree, but there was a sense to it and it lead to interesting debates!

2007-10-15 06:43:19 · answer #5 · answered by Avondrow 7 · 0 0

Erectile Dysfunction can be devastating to men, and unfortunately, millions of men suffer from the condition. Learn how to cure erectile dysfunction https://tr.im/QSIJU

If you go to the doctor to talk about the issue, you’re likely to get put on one or more of the popular medications used to treat the condition. While they can be effective (temporarily), these medications come with a raft of side effects, some of which are decidedly unpleasant. Even worse, these medications aren’t really a cure, they’re more like a temporary workaround.

Worst of all, they tend to be really expensive. Month after month, you’re having to pay to work around your condition. That’s what the Big Pharmaceutical companies want.

2016-02-16 06:45:48 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

They never learn. Prohibition of alcohol created a windfall of profit for the Mafia. We should have learned that if there is a market for it, someone will fill the need, legally or not. If drugs were legalized and controlled you get the criminals out of the business and you get to collect the Taxes on the product. AS we have learned from Alcohol.

2007-10-15 06:50:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

i agree with legalising drugs... think about it, people still continue taking drugs even if they're illegal and all that money on drugs is given to gangs and criminals. Plus... you don't know what those drug dealers will be selling you so at least if u get it from the NHS, u can actually know what's inside.
thirdly, teenagers who want to act 'cool' about taking drugs won't take it as much cos it's not illegal. They want to be rebels!!
so i say yes to legalising drugs! not that i take them or anything! i don't even smoke so ye...

2007-10-15 07:05:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

This was the same conclusion drawn all the way back in the Nixon era and also once again in the Reagan era by commissions they themselves started to get an opinion on illegal drugs! Answer: Legalize and regulate was the conclusion but of course it was ignored

2007-10-15 06:41:41 · answer #9 · answered by TyranusXX 6 · 3 0

your having a laugh! what a bunch of twats! jesus! have they not seen/heard all the people dying due to taking drugs and stuff?? heroin on the NHS! dont want to swear on here or ill prob get reported but beeeep beeeep beeep beep beeeeepp! have u heard that theres a new law about passport photo's? you have to have your hair swept right out of the way of your face and if you were glasses and you get a glare from them then they will send back the flipping application! WTF is going on?? i mean come on are people really gonna walk into the airports with their hair swept back from their faces? NO! id love to get my hands round the throats of whoever invents these ridiculous flippin stupid laws etc id squeeze til blood comes out theyre ears! sorry to be so narky bout this but theyre ruining the good name of our country with all this ****

2007-10-15 06:43:11 · answer #10 · answered by Crissie 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers