Cocaine

[Pothole]

Original Poster said:

Gaspode said:

3 problems with taking drugs:

1. Funding the global drugs trade is a pretty stty thing to do with your money
2. When you are stoned, you might think you are cool, but the rest of the world thinks you're a tosser
3. You may not think it's doing you any harm, but by the time you realise that it is, it's too late

1. Totally agree
2. I disagree on the basis that the majority would not be able to spot someone on coke
3. Totally agree

Why do you think that your 2. matters?

[Plotloss]

1 could morally be replaced by funding indian child labour buying cheap st not being an overly good use of cash.
2 & 3 could easily apply to booze, which is apparently largely social accepted.

Society will only move forward when everyone stops sitting in judgement of one another.

[RDMcG]

I would think its like any drug (booze for instance) and there are some people who can do it without any adverse effects and others whose lives are wrecked by it. I knew a lot of people who did it when I was younger and I assume there are many still.I very rarely run across it in business, though.

Personally I am for legalization of anything that has no worse effects than booze so there can be some kind of tax revenue from it. Its seems inconsistent to have tobacco and alcohol being legal and other stuff being banned.

[Mr Fenix]

Drugs are for mugs.

I don't need drugs to have a great time, all I need is some good company and lots of laughs. If that makes me an uncool straight edge dork. So be it.

Death penalty for junkies. No excuses no money pished away on failed rehab. Give 'em a massive overdose of their poison of choice and boom demand for drugs would fall through the floor. Its not insensitive or brutal. Its just pragmatic.
(

[Plotloss]

Mr Fenix said:

Drugs are for mugs.

All drugs or just the illegal ones?

If it's the latter, if they were legal would one still be a mug for taking them?

[CharlesdeGaulle]

musclecarmad said:

That takes me onto the topic of the army (of which i know many many soldiers) and they are all on it and worse - but they are fighting for our country which is more than what I do so I say if it helps them then good for them. Interestingly I have heard there are more brothels in iraq than you'd believe, but that's a different story

I try not to respond to the most idiotic of our small-ish community's posts, but that cannot be ignored.

You are talking utter ste. 'They are all on it and worse...' simply proves the lie that you don't 'know many soldiers'. You may know someone that thought about joining the TA 20 years ago but never did 'because I can't take the discipline innit' but most soldiers do not take any illegal drugs (especially on operations) and nor does it help anyone fight, especially under intense pressure, high temperatures, and when you are subject to random drugs tests, even on operations. So stop spouting-off about things you clearly know nothing about.

As for your 'interesting' rumour that there are lots of brothels in Iraq, if you're insinuating that they are in any way military, the comment is not worthy of even refuting.

The armed forces have to deal with drug misuse as a social problem like every other employer does, but very few soldiers think it is acceptable to do drugs, and those that do are a despised minority.

You're being a complete cocktard.

[The real Apache]

The Army all have regular drug checks

[Shay HTFC]

hidetheelephants said:

Sack any plod found to be indulging. The comparison with being caught doing 90 on a motorway is a facile strawman argument; there are no victims stemming from the offence, whereas funding the drug trade cannot be viewed as anything but bad. Then there's any physiological and mental changes that may occur while under the influence or as a consequence of regular use. I have the same thoughts about service personnel using, particularly while on duty. If you like taking drugs, find an alternative career.

How do you feel about Police Officers drinking alcohol. Surely that also incurs physiological and mental changes compared to those who stay sober.

And how do you feel about Dutch Police Officers smoking cannabis? If you are insinuating that taking drugs which are deemed illegal by UK law makes you perform Policing duties to a lower standard, then surely the Dutch police force is less effective than our own.

[Glassman]

Mr Fenix said:

Drugs are for mugs

Soap, is there something we should know about you?

[Original Poster]

Pothole said:

Original Poster said:

Gaspode said:

3 problems with taking drugs:

1. Funding the global drugs trade is a pretty stty thing to do with your money
2. When you are stoned, you might think you are cool, but the rest of the world thinks you're a tosser
3. You may not think it's doing you any harm, but by the time you realise that it is, it's too late

1. Totally agree
2. I disagree on the basis that the majority would not be able to spot someone on coke
3. Totally agree

Why do you think that your 2. matters?

Ay??

[Pothole]

Shay HTFC said:

hidetheelephants said:

Sack any plod found to be indulging. The comparison with being caught doing 90 on a motorway is a facile strawman argument; there are no victims stemming from the offence, whereas funding the drug trade cannot be viewed as anything but bad. Then there's any physiological and mental changes that may occur while under the influence or as a consequence of regular use. I have the same thoughts about service personnel using, particularly while on duty. If you like taking drugs, find an alternative career.

How do you feel about Police Officers drinking alcohol. Surely that also incurs physiological and mental changes compared to those who stay sober.

And how do you feel about Dutch Police Officers smoking cannabis? If you are insinuating that taking drugs which are deemed illegal by UK law makes you perform Policing duties to a lower standard, then surely the Dutch police force is less effective than our own.

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves. The plod in the OP was not only breaking the law on possession of class A drugs but doing it openly and blatantly. I would say that makes him less credible as an upholder of the law. Whether it specifically interferes with said officers performance of his duties is academic. To me.

[Shay HTFC]

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

[The real Apache]

Shay HTFC said:

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

does that affect their ability to carry out their duty?

[Plotloss]

No names, no dates, no locations - obviously.

Good mate was a copper for 14 years, made Sergeant.

Shift of 30 coppers.

18 regular pot smokers.

[Pothole]

Shay HTFC said:

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

80 or 90? If you're going to be stupid, could you at least try and be consistent.

I think the ridiculous speeding comparison has been dealt with above.

[The real Apache]

Plotloss said:

No names, no dates, no locations - obviously.

Good mate was a copper for 14 years, made Sergeant.

Shift of 30 coppers.

18 regular pot smokers.

no random D&A checks then?

[Plotloss]

Didn't say anything about them smoking on duty, as far as I know they didn't.

[Shay HTFC]

The real Apache said:

Shay HTFC said:

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

does that affect their ability to carry out their duty?

That takes me back to my original question, which was answered using the "Police Officers shouldn't do illegal stuff".

Do Dutch Policemen perform worse than ours because they are allowed to smoke cannabis?

[dugt]

Shay HTFC said:

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

Speeding is the only truly victimless crime (that i can think of) Your not harming anybody by doing 80/90 on the motorway

Doing drugs is one day going to fk up your own life, and most likely others.

[Pothole]

Shay HTFC said:

The real Apache said:

Shay HTFC said:

Pothole said:

Obtuseness & strawmen again. I believe that at the very least those that we pay, and expect, to uphold the laws of the land should at least appear to be abiding by those laws themselves.

So you do have a problem with Police Officers driving at 80mph in their time off then. Or do you decide which laws are and are not ok to break?

does that affect their ability to carry out their duty?

That takes me back to my original question, which was answered using the "Police Officers shouldn't do illegal stuff".

Do Dutch Policemen perform worse than ours because they are allowed to smoke cannabis?

Who knows? I think it's irrelevant.

Edited by Pothole on Sunday 6th June 22:05