Where all the blog posts go that end up on the front page!

Moderators: Lass, Lad

Post Reply
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:31 pm
Political Stand:


Post by philbell »

The government is umming and arring over the classification of cannabis at the moment. Now I am no big fan of it but is there any point in reclassifying the stuff? At the end of the day resources need to be put into smack and crackheads. To stop the robberies and muggings that they make to fund their habits.

How often has somebody spaced out on weed robbed somebodies house to feed the habit? They more likely to crash out in the house!! It is the proper class A addicts that are the problem that need sorting out way before the dope smokers.

On the same point ecstasy and speed is classed in the same bracket as heroin and crack and crystal meth. They are not comparable in any way!! I know people who have the odd E or bomb occasionally at the weekends and carry on a normal life with no addiction*. None of them would touch the ‘dirty’ stuff. Stuff that ruins your life and all of those around you. Taking the pills and speed and weed does not lead to a path of taking smack crack and meth.

There is an obvious omission in the above, and that is cocaine. That again is ‘Class A’ but it is only brought to light due to celebrities being hooked on it. The fact is that many normal people use the stuff with no problems or addiction. The reason being that the people with too much money and time on their hands (celebrities) do not live in the real world to start with.

*As with anything there are those that go outside the boundries, as with alcohol, you will get people taking speed through the day and through the week. In my experience it is generally women who use speed as an excuse to lose weight (as it suppresses the appetite). In this respect it does work for weight loss but then does cause an addiction. Even so this addiction is generally a mental rather than physical (I need it to stay thin stays in the head) and is not anywhere near the addiction of smack crack and crystal meth.

The point to all this is that rather than chasing the ‘softer options’ the government should surely be aiming to stamp out the proper hard stuff and the dealers and pushers of it. Yes the rest needs to be sorted also but there is that much of everything available and only so many places available in the prisons. I know of regular dealers of Heroin who actively push it, are caught week in week out and get cautions or fines yet some poor git out for a night out is caught with a couple of pills on them are hammered to the full extent of the law to make an example. Is that not wrong?

It’s like doing the joyrider for no insurance and no licence but only fining them £50 but hammering the person that has been pulled for a dodgy light and got another defect after scouring the car and giving them points and huge fines. (Cases that HAVE happened locally recently)

Often it is the generally law abiding citizen that gets hammered for the most menial of ‘crimes’ while the criminals get the most menial of sentences. After all it is easier to prosecute the people who nothing of the law and its loopholes than the ones that know it inside out (the constant offenders).

OK so they get caught once in a while but the sentences/crime are miniscule to what happens to the man in the street. I have plenty of data to back this up.

Might have gone off on a tangent a bit but tell me I’m wrong!!!

User avatar
Senior Member
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: UK
Political Stand:

RE: Drugs

Post by Dom »

Well I think you're right about the smackheads who commit crimes to fund their habits. These are the people who should be targeted, rather than the harmless weed smokers. Having said that, you could go one further and say that if more money was spent trying to catch the dealers, then there'd be far fewer addicts who commit crimes to fund their habits.

Personally, I've never touched any of it. I've not even smoked a cigarette. It's no big deal for me, and I dont mind what other people do. Well, actually, that's a lie, I do mind when I see kids and teenagers smoking in this day an age. There's no need for it, and to be honest tobacco is worse for you than a lot of the 'harder' drugs!

I think the money should be spent targeting the criminals who get the stuff into the country in the first place, and then the guys who sell it for a living. Once they've been taken out of the picture, the money can be spent rehabilitating those who are addicted to the stuff and can no longer get it. Cut off the supply, and there'll be far less addicts/criminals to take care of.

As for the weed smokers, though, I think that the attitude that "weed isn't so bad" is wrong. I'm not saying the stuff is as bad for you as cocaine or tobacco even, but if the government and the police reduce it's "badness" then more people are going to be tempted to try it. It might only be a Class C drug, but it's breaking the law to smoke it. If we want to discourage drug use altogether, all drug takers should be treated equally, and punished accordingly. Some drugs may very well have worse side effects for the person taking them (and for everyone around them) but in the eys of the law, they're all guilty, whatever they take. If they're treated as such, then that may help to curb the attitudes that "some aren't so bad as others".


Post Reply