Ecstasy is a remarkably safe substance

[Taf]

The legalisation of all drugs is "inevitable", according to the Chief Constable of North Wales.

Mr Brunstrom was invited onto Radio 4 by three members of Dyfed-Powys Police, who were guest editing the New Year's Day's edition of the programme.

He also said there was a lot of "scaremongering" and "rumour-mongering" about drugs.

"Ecstasy is a remarkably safe substance - it's far safer than aspirin," he said.

"If you look at the government's own research into deaths you'll find that ecstasy, by comparison to many other substances - legal and illegal - it is comparably a safe substance."

In October, Mr Brunstrom said drugs laws were out of date and that the police are engaged in a battle which they cannot win.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7166748.stm

OK, so they can't win, but does that mean they have to give up trying? They can't win against murder and terrorism, so should they be legalised too to save police time?

[Mike]

The nutter speaks again, that wally shouldn't be allowed out never mind being a Chief Constable

[fred]

well, he hasn't had his name in the papers for a few days

[Spite]

  I agree with the legalisation of all drugs.  It's a fight they can never win, it makes evil men extremely rich, I doubt that any more people would get addicted than already are, and it would help prevent all the associated crime that goes with illegal drugs.  Also, I don't believe it's anyone's business what people put into their own bodies.

[Admiral-SirJohn]

I agree.  Alcohol laws are a good example.  In the US, the legal drinking age is 21; the highest in the world (not counting those countries that ban it outright).  However, the legal penalties for things that happen to those who get drunk (DWI, drunk & disorderly, etc.) are not all that severe.

In Europe, however, it is the opposite.  The legal drinking age is much lower (18, if not less), but the penalties for alcohol-related crimes are quite severe.

If such measures as these are implimented, drugs could be legalized, taxed, and regulated the same way that alcohol and tobacco are.  And the tax revenue can be used for programs for those who need help, just like taxes from alcohol and tobacco are (supposed to - and in some places really are).

[Spite]

If such measures as these are implimented, drugs could be legalized, taxed, and regulated the same way that alcohol and tobacco are.  And the tax revenue can be used for programs for those who need help, just like taxes from alcohol and tobacco are (supposed to - and in some places really are).

  Just imagine the revenue income from drugs.     They'd be able to lower income tax, increase healthcare, provide better education, etc.  (In theory.  In probability it'd go towards daft schemes and gravy trains.)

[Taf]

Hospitals. police and Joe Public already have a hard enough time coping with drunks... what would it be like if being drugged was allowed? Or would they legalise drugs and then make being drugged illegal?

[Spite]

Hospitals. police and Joe Public already have a hard enough time coping with drunks... what would it be like if being drugged was allowed? Or would they legalise drugs and then make being drugged illegal?

  It's not like that, Taf.  Few drugs produce aggressive effects.  I've never seen a bunch of stoners slugging it out for the pleasure of it.  Many violent crimes are committed because the criminal can't get their drugs.  All the current legislation is doing, is criminalising people, and causing more crime, and making some extremely evil people, very rich. Most street prostitutes do the job because they're drug addicts and the only place they can get their fix from is the pimps who got them hooked in the first place.  It'd be worth it just for the drop in crime.  I doubt if there'd be more addicts than there are now.  Think about it, thousands, maybe millions of people use drugs recreationally and the number of addicts is relatively low.  Drugs are here to stay.  Have been for thousands of years.  It's not realistic to pretend it's a fight the Police can win.

[Taf]

When drugs such as Laudanum could be openly, and legally, bought from pharmacists, it was the richer end of society that could afford them, and the poorer end of society that couldn't... so they stole, robbed and mugged to get the cash to buy what they wanted/needed.

So legalisation is not the answer either.

How long before tobacco is taxed to the level where addicts turn to theft to feed their habit?

An example of this is in the Czech Republic where tobacco prices have risen massively (EU edict), whereas wages have been almost static. Rather than see a large reduction in the numbers of smokers, they have seen the appearance of a large black economy of smuggled tobacco (run by mafia gangs) and tobacco-lorry hijackings where there used to be none at all.

The same can be said of another legal drug, alcohol, over there too..... garden stills have never been so productive since shop-bought alcohol began to be taxed heavily.... and they have now got VAT on top of the taxes now..... and not just a piffling 17.5% either....

[Spite]

When drugs such as Laudanum could be openly, and legally, bought from pharmacists, it was the richer end of society that could afford them, and the poorer end of society that couldn't... so they stole, robbed and mugged to get the cash to buy what they wanted/needed.

  Nonsense!  The poor folks, and their children, drank Gin!  (No, really, they did.)  Anyway, the days you're talking about, people couldn't afford food!

[Spite]

  Also, by the same arguments above, Taf, I take it you'd be in favour of prohibition and the criminalisation of Tobacco?

[Taf]

Not at all... I believe in free choice.... what I don't believe in is HMG making profit out of peoples' addictions, penchants or pastimes.

If it's legal, it should be free of tax, but subject to strict age limits.

If it's deemed to be so dangerous to life that it should be banned, they should ban it, but they probably never will as addicts are easily-milked tax cashcows.

It seems somewhat bizarre that HMG make a point of taxing peoples' happiness or pleasure, in order to pay for wars... the original reason behind Income Tax... a "temporary tax".

Tax should be universal, not dragged from specific groups of people.

[Spite]

Tax should be universal, not dragged from specific groups of people.

  It is universal.  Give up drinking and smoking, and you'll still pay it. 

[Taf]

IF we ALL gave up smoking and drinking, then EVERYONE would see a massive tax hike to make up the shortfall....

[Spite]

IF we ALL gave up smoking and drinking, then EVERYONE would see a massive tax hike to make up the shortfall....

  Aww, I dunno.  I used to love me smokes.  Took drugs, too.  No needles or hard stuff, but I did my fair share.  Mixed with some horrible people, as well, as a consequence.  I'd happily kill them all tomorrow, too, 'cause I know they'd slaughter all my kids, if it meant making a few extra quid.  Those people have made a living of their illegality.