Drugs

[Andrew]

I think i see where you are coming from but regulating something and then putting it into the hands of governments and/or private companies may reduce/ remove the drug being contaminated with detergents, weedkiller and all manner of toxic substances but at the same time may turn it into a 'profit driven business' where use is encouraged.

 

The destructive properties of tobacco and alcohol are well documented but the breweries, distilleries, tobacco companies etc all still advertise and encourage the use of their products all with clear consciences.

I went to an event where the speaker was the head of one of scotland's biggest brewers and whilst he seemed to support the minimum pricing he was totally against lowering the drink drive limit, his reasoning seemed to be that it would criminalise regular people who just wanted a wee drink during the week only to get pulled over on the commute to work the next day. When asked if this view was in any way influenced by his profits being hit he turned on the politician mode.

Seems these companies (along with the casinos and bookies) are perfectly happy to profit from misery and its all ok as long as they put 'please drink responsibly' or 'when the fun stops, stop! on their adverts.

How long would it take for 'please inject/ snort responsibly to appear on posters?

 

The above system might not be perfect but is it better that criminals gain the profits? You have to look for the least bad option and creating a profit driven regulated market is that.

 

One of the problems with getting to the stage of legalisation is media coverage of drug use is completely out of step with reality. The vast vast majority of drug users are normal functional people who use drugs they same way as many people would take alcohol. Legalisation is not going to create a country full of junkies.

[makembounce]

I take more drugs than I should. It's gotten so bad I now have to search my jap's eye for a vein.