• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "A victory for commonsense !!!"

Collapse

  • oracleslave
    replied
    Originally posted by DiscoStu View Post
    Bollocks. Compared to deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol they pale into a minority so small it's insignificant.
    If it's just one who happens to be a family member of mine then it's significant.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by DiscoStu View Post
    Bollocks. Compared to deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol they pale into a minority so small it's insignificant.
    Are you talking absolute numbers or percentages here?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by DiscoStu View Post
    Bollocks. Compared to deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol they pale into a minority so small it's insignificant.

    Ban alcohol and tobacco then. I have no problem with that, and we will all be healthier for it, but don't use them as an excuse to add further dangers to our health and thus burdens to the taxpayer through increased reliance on the NHS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ruprect
    replied
    Originally posted by DiscoStu View Post
    Bollocks. Compared to deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol they pale into a minority so small it's insignificant.
    I understand how you chose your moniker now DS

    Leave a comment:


  • Ruprect
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    I don't agree and there are many instances of death through ecstacy. Kids need protecting sometimes and this is one of those occasions IMO.
    Also, there is the issue of 'pathway' drugs whereby one lower level drug leads to trying higher level. The best thing is just not to go there.
    Some kind of evidence to back up your pointless bleatings would be appreciated. Anything with ".dailymail." in the URL does not count.

    Leave a comment:


  • DiscoStu
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    I don't agree and there are many instances of death through ecstacy. Kids need protecting sometimes and this is one of those occasions IMO.
    Also, there is the issue of 'pathway' drugs whereby one lower level drug leads to trying higher level. The best thing is just not to go there.
    Bollocks. Compared to deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol they pale into a minority so small it's insignificant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by gingerjedi View Post
    Do you put a fork through footballs that stray into your garden before you throw them back?

    It's just kids having a good time.

    I don't agree and there are many instances of death through ecstacy. Kids need protecting sometimes and this is one of those occasions IMO.
    Also, there is the issue of 'pathway' drugs whereby one lower level drug leads to trying higher level. The best thing is just not to go there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ruprect
    replied
    I have to say the decision doesn't surprise me in the least. The government has a habit of comissioning expert reports and then ignoring them completely, especially when it comes to drug classification.

    Leave a comment:


  • gingerjedi
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    ... well at least I am ecstatic !!!!!!
    Do you put a fork through footballs that stray into your garden before you throw them back?

    It's just kids having a good time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    ... well at least I am ecstatic !!!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Based on number of deaths & general cost to the economy Alcohol would be a Class B drug.
    By the same measures, Ecstasy barely counts as a C Class.

    The only reason Daily Mail readers give a toss about this is the (misguided) Leah Betts campaign.

    Leave a comment:


  • FSM with Cheddar
    replied
    commonsense?



    A total disregard of the expert evidence provided.
    A continued implementation of an ideology based on bigotry, not reason.
    A government completely out of step with the public.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by bogeyman View Post
    Great news.

    What are you on?

    a low fat diet !!

    Leave a comment:


  • bogeyman
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    Just announced on the news that ecstacy will not be downgraded !!!!!!

    They must have done a poll on it !!!!
    Great news.

    What are you on?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    started a topic A victory for commonsense !!!

    A victory for commonsense !!!

    Just announced on the news that ecstacy will not be downgraded !!!!!!

    They must have done a poll on it !!!!

Working...
X