Reply to: What have the R̶o̶m̶a̶n̶s̶ Taliban ever done for us?

[SueEllen]

Glad you cheered up.

[sadkingbilly]

Thank deity for that, I hate having intellectual arguments with unarmed opponents.

[northernladuk]

Thank deity for that, I hate having intellectual arguments with unarmed opponents.

And Gricer sockies.

[vetran]

Prove it. 'We think you're high so you must have been in possession of weed at some point' isn't how the law works.




Again, I am not asserting what is and isn't a human right.


I'm going to bow out and you seem incapable of actually reading what is being written and fixated in building strawmen.

Thank deity for that, I hate having intellectual arguments with unarmed opponents.

[JustKeepSwimming]

So oh genius, as the charge is possession how precisely do you voluntarily take drugs without possessing them? As the gov site says taking. I think you are confused with possessing class C drugs for personal use is not an offence.

Prove it. 'We think you're high so you must have been in possession of weed at some point' isn't how the law works.

Your reasoning is worse, its against my human rights to insist I comply with the law of the land, its my Yuman rights to smoke pot to find myself.

Again, I am not asserting what is and isn't a human right.


I'm going to bow out and you seem incapable of actually reading what is being written and fixated in building strawmen.

[vetran]

Good job you're not a lawyer. Possession and consuming/taking are not the same. A summary designed for mass consumption of frankly, ignorant people, is not substitute for actual law. Consumption of drugs is only offence when it is in connection with something else, like driving.



Firstly, I said I think exploration of one's consciousness through the use of drugs to be a human right, not that it is.

Secondly, your reasoning is absurd. 'It's not against your human rights because we made a law that says it isn't' is legally nonsensical, in this country.

So oh genius, as the charge is possession how precisely do you voluntarily take drugs without possessing them? As the gov site says taking. I think you are confused with possessing class C drugs for personal use is not an offence.

Being unfit to drive is a separate offence as you say.

Your reasoning is worse, its against my human rights to insist I comply with the law of the land, its my Yuman rights to smoke pot to find myself.

[JustKeepSwimming]

Good job the government disagrees with you.

https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing

Good job you're not a lawyer. Possession and consuming/taking are not the same. A summary designed for mass consumption of frankly, ignorant people, is not substitute for actual law. Consumption of drugs is only offence when it is in connection with something else, like driving.

As it is technically illegal then stopping it happen under medical supervision cannot be against anyone's human rights. do try to make a case for illicit drug taking though. Next stop Islington!

Lets stick to this country shall we? Marrying 9 year olds was legal until recently in Sudan and rape in marriage is legal in many other countries so yes the world is fecked!

Firstly, I said I think exploration of one's consciousness through the use of drugs to be a human right, not that it is.

Secondly, your reasoning is absurd. 'It's not against your human rights because we made a law that says it isn't' is legally nonsensical, in this country.

[vetran]

Taking drugs is not an offense in and off itself.

Being gay is illegal in many countries, that doesn't mean it's not a human right.

Good job the government disagrees with you.

https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing

You can get a fine or prison sentence if you:

• take drugs
• carry drugs
• make drugs
• sell, deal or share drugs (also called ‘supplying’ them)

The penalties depend on the type of drug or substance, the amount you have, and whether you’re also dealing or producing it.

As it is technically illegal then stopping it happen under medical supervision cannot be against anyone's human rights. do try to make a case for illicit drug taking though. Next stop Islington!

Lets stick to this country shall we? Marrying 9 year olds was legal until recently in Sudan and rape in marriage is legal in many other countries so yes the world is fecked!

[JustKeepSwimming]

Obtaining & taking the drugs (especially in prison) is an offence so no human rights issue.Not fixing addiction is a civic requirement, they are ill.

If people are smoking legally obtained cannabis in the privacy of their own home and commit no crime based on it why should I care, in fact pot brownies sound lovely!

Taking drugs is not an offense in and off itself.

Being gay is illegal in many countries, that doesn't mean it's not a human right.

[vetran]

Glad you are willing to put money into the criminal justice system including prisons and drug rehabilitation as the government isn't.

Prison officers - who are hard to recruit and retain - rely on the fact that offenders mostly police themselves including by being off their faces.

indeed its broke, to fix it cleaning up addicts is the way to go.

[SueEllen]

Obtaining & taking the drugs (especially in prison) is an offence so no human rights issue.Not fixing addiction is a civic requirement, they are ill.

Glad you are willing to put money into the criminal justice system including prisons and drug rehabilitation as the government isn't.

Prison officers - who are hard to recruit and retain - rely on the fact that offenders mostly police themselves including by being off their faces.

[vetran]

More than likely. I think people don't appreciate how widespread recreational drug use it amongst otherwise law abiding nice folks. I have a pharmacist mate, super smart with seriously impressive credentials to his name, would never harm a fly, smokes weed regularly but doesn't touch alcohol.

Legalisation would also cripple organised/gang crime and all the issues that come with that, freeing up police/judicial resources.




You might run into human rights issues. Personally I think exploration of the human conscience is a human right, if that includes certain drugs to induce a state then so be it.

However I wouldn't disagree that if someone is a diagnosed addict and that addiction is causing significant issues for society (anti social behaviour, petty crimes etc), then forced detoxication is arguably justifiable under the same rationale as forced treatment for those who are sectioned. However an order like 'You must not consume drugs' is absurd and punishing an addict for breaching that order is beyond absurd and wholly unjust.

If someone just wants to get high all day every and harms no one else? I think that should be their right.

Obtaining & taking the drugs (especially in prison) is an offence so no human rights issue.Not fixing addiction is a civic requirement, they are ill.

If people are smoking legally obtained cannabis in the privacy of their own home and commit no crime based on it why should I care, in fact pot brownies sound lovely!

[JustKeepSwimming]

And I suspect the extra revenue from the latter would pay for the former. win-win-win

More than likely. I think people don't appreciate how widespread recreational drug use it amongst otherwise law abiding nice folks. I have a pharmacist mate, super smart with seriously impressive credentials to his name, would never harm a fly, smokes weed regularly but doesn't touch alcohol.

Legalisation would also cripple organised/gang crime and all the issues that come with that, freeing up police/judicial resources.

Agree its a medical issue. I would make kicking the habit part of the court order and lock up addicts who repeatedly fail with no access to drugs and slow removal of methadone. They may not be willing to quit but if you get them off drugs and support them they may be ready sooner.

You might run into human rights issues. Personally I think exploration of the human conscience is a human right, if that includes certain drugs to induce a state then so be it.

However I wouldn't disagree that if someone is a diagnosed addict and that addiction is causing significant issues for society (anti social behaviour, petty crimes etc), then forced detoxication is arguably justifiable under the same rationale as forced treatment for those who are sectioned. However an order like 'You must not consume drugs' is absurd and punishing an addict for breaching that order is beyond absurd and wholly unjust.

If someone just wants to get high all day every and harms no one else? I think that should be their right.

[Chris Bryce]

,,,I much rather spend £50/d on NHS prescribing controlled heroin than have an addict shoplifting/mugging/burglary-ing £500 worth of stuff each day,,,


Soft drugs should be put in the same category as alcohol/tobacco. Ensure quality, discourage underage consumption, tax.

And I suspect the extra revenue from the latter would pay for the former. win-win-win

[vetran]

Methadone programme is in the majority of cases the result of a court order. ie, do the programme and you will avoid prison.

You absolutely can not force an addict to undergo effective treatment against their will. It doesn't work. But they can absolutely pretend that it works.

It's a healthcare issue. Let doctors work out the best course of action. If giving safe drugs to someone prevents them committing real crimes, then so be it.

Harm reduction is the name of the game.

Agree its a medical issue. I would make kicking the habit part of the court order and lock up addicts who repeatedly fail with no access to drugs and slow removal of methadone. They may not be willing to quit but if you get them off drugs and support them they may be ready sooner.