f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

I think the point is that instead of slamming people in prison and just banning things even when you have no idea what they are is a stupid idea. What is needed is education and awareness as to what taking things like this could entail. It's not hard to grasp the logic of that even for someone like you dbp

dpb

Whilst on subject , how about a nice dessert island somewhere

You probably wont feel snooped on there


Obviously with NO internet

dpb

Thats not a bad idea, teach the young ones some degree level chemistry and what substances to keep clear of, yes I like it.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Ice cream sundae or sponge pudding and custard?

If you are going to try and be a smart **** it's best to actually be smart to start with.

dpb

Can't be arsed

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Good, stop stalking me then

dpb

Ha , that's funny

gary77

iTrader: (1)

im not sure how it works but i would guess that there would be a recognised company that would certify that there were no known harmfull substances in a new drug that would go onto be put on the shelves in shops , it would be down to the manufacturer of the new drug to et them tested and passed before being able to sell them

and you point of the fact drugs are ilegal making them more appealing, well that fits perfectly with my opinion of legalising drugs in general

gary77

iTrader: (1)

it appears it is

gazzawrx

iTrader: (11)

Indirectly cannabis is taxed, over the years ive been nicked for having cannabis on me 4 times, the first time was a slap on the wrist the other 3 times have resulted in court appearances and ended with me receiving a fine, generally its 50 quid but i suppose that all depends on the amounts of cannabis found. Theoretically they still make money from cannabis but not from the sale of it etc as i reckon they dont want to be seen as encouraging it.

stilover

And quite right too banning these so called legal high's.


If you need drugs to have a good time, then you're a boring **** to start with.

gary77

iTrader: (1)

i take it you are refering to people that go to the pub for a pint as well?

and are you saying that boring ***** should be criminalised ? is that the point you are making ?

and should alcahol be banned in your opinion as well then ? and because it means they are boring ***** and have no right to do as they please ?

and some of the most interesting people i have met were tripping on acid , they were not boring at all

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

In the context of a criminal justice landscape where known, existing narcotics are all already illegal, it's hard to see what other choice any government would have than to bring in a ban of this kind. Yes, it may well be true that without criminalization of those conventional narcotics there'd effectively be no or very little market at all for what gets sold as legal highs now, but conversely, it's quite a stretch to believe that if people started inventing legal highs in an imaginary world where conventional narcotics had never existed, the practice wouldn't very soon be banned then also.

ScoobyWon't

I think it's a stupid idea to take substances that you don't know what is in it or what it will do to you.

There are plenty of examples of illegal drugs being cut with other chemicals or poisons to bulk out the product, for greed. There's nothing to say that an unregulated 'legal' high doesn't contain arsenic for example. Would you risk taking this stuff that has come from China without any testing?

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Post 31

dpb

He's happy for the public to do the testing Scoobywont

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Listen up you snidy little ****, how about you stop trying to tell people what I think, you're not bright enough to tie your own shoe laces so trying to second guess me is a definite non starter for you!

dpb

Post 12

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Says nothing about testing FFS. If you can't grasp what is being said STFU!

dpb

Its all there , for everyone to read

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

EFA! Hope that helps fcukface!

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

The government can (and does) stop unregulated shops from selling counterfeit and potentially noxious alcohol and tobacco products at knock-down prices to anyone regardless of age. If they didn't, it would only encourage more of the least-responsible people in society to consume tobacco and alcohol products in even more irresponsible amounts. Are you saying that would be a good thing?

dpb

You're coming across quite aggressive F1 , maybe you should have a spliff .

It does have me wondering , I know youre always quite vehement but


Are you liable to lose out financially if this goes ahead

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

If an adult wants to get high then let them! Educate people and let them make their own decisions! That's how it is supposed to work with alcohol and tobacco, but it seems to a be a different set of rules for anything that the government haven't worked out how to tax.

Oh and don't kid yourself that government are on some altruistic mission when they seize so called counterfeit tobacco and alcohol.... they are losing money that is why they do it... plain and simple!

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Are you accusing me of profiting financially from the sale of drugs? Yes or No answer please.

dpb

Really can't see its an accusation. !!!?

You seem have a lot time to spare , maybe you run place on the highstreet where you can get this stuff. ( for all I know )



There's certainly a number in Brighton here , in fact the national news were in this last week .

Opinions were divided

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

You can't? Come on, don't try and wriggle now. You said this:

What else could you possibly mean? Anyway I asked for a yes or no answer so which is it?

Yes you think I deal drugs (legal or otherwise). Or... no you don't?

As I asked earlier why don't you stop trying to second guess me. You know nothing about me or what I do and I wouldn't post the same hypothesising about you... mainly as I couldn't give a f**k what you do!

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

In an ideal world, consenting adults would be allowed to intoxicate themselves with anything they like, so long as it causes no harm or inconvenience to others, that I don't disagree with. Unfortunately though we're not living in one, and pretty much as a direct result of that the legal highs industry has developed and expanded at a far greater pace and scope than it ever would have if we were, and because of that, right now the authorities are completely powerless to stop anyone from making a fast buck selling the stuff to anyone including school-kids. You can add to the mix also the fact that due to the very nature of that industry, the substances being peddled are to a great extent unknown quantities, and it's therefore a technical impossibility for anyone to educate themselves properly on their effects.

Bottom-line, just because the better solution to the problem overall would undoubtedly be to decriminalize and regulate conventional/traditional narcotics, that doesn't mean the next-best option is to sit back and do nothing about it at all, if the former isn't on the table.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Why isn't the former on the table though?

PS Education - I meant in the more general sense, not specific drug by drug

dpb

It could of course be a result of poverty and desperation but in Bucharest the druggies were "happily" shooting up with the cheaper synthetic heroin substitute, 7 times as often as the real thing . More readily available