Russel Brand.....on drugs......in parliment
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17823272
Not quite what it sounds like and I know a lot of people on here despise the guy, but he talks some sense.
Not quite what it sounds like and I know a lot of people on here despise the guy, but he talks some sense.
Edited by tj2002 on Tuesday 24th April 13:45
kers up for 50 years would also stop them doing crimes. tj2002 said:
AshVX220 said:
What amazes me and pisses me off in equal measure is that this country is more tolerant of people who are addicted to illegal substances, than those addicted to legal drugs.
It's all very wrong.
eh?It's all very wrong.
AshVX220 said:
This country is more tolerant of junkies than it is of smokers.
Can't remember the last time a pleasant meal or coffee was spoiled by someone blowing cocaine in my face...Maybe if smokers disappeared under railway bridges or along a canal tow path to satisfy their addiction people would notice them less?
superkartracer said:
That list is laughable. Lil Wayne as a genius? WTF did I miss something? Oh and Charlie Parker died at 34. Not exactly a prime example or a reason to legalise drugs is he?R11ysf said:
superkartracer said:
That list is laughable. Lil Wayne as a genius? WTF did I miss something? Oh and Charlie Parker died at 34. Not exactly a prime example or a reason to legalise drugs is he?Not bad for a coke head.
WTF indeed
AshVX220 said:
What amazes me and pisses me off in equal measure is that this country is more tolerant of people who are addicted to illegal substances, than those addicted to legal drugs.
It's all very wrong.
yeah, agreed they should all be treated equally... if found with a pack of benson and hedges the coppers should confiscate them and give you a caution..It's all very wrong.
Obviously a mandatory sentence for carrying marlboros with intent to supply..
He's making a lot more sense than usual (I mean he managed to let Katy Perry go!)
If you were a visiting alien you'd think we were all insane.
You've got every high street in the UK like a riot in an Asylum every Friday and Saturday night as thousands of people go mad on a drug that kills 8000-9000 Britons a year, yet is legal to buy, own, make, store, whatever you like as long as you're old enough to accountable for your actions. In fact so completely normal that if an adult mentions they don't drink it's noteworthy and people will wonder to themselves if the non-drinker is a former addict. It causes our A&E departments to over-flow with blood, pain and suffering, makes seemingly normal people homicidal and causes more domestic violence than X-Factor.
You can buy a another drug in virtually any mainstream retailer that kills around 80,000 people a year in England alone, about 18% of the adult population is more addictive than virtually any illegal drug and has been engineered for decades to be MORE addictive. Only a few years ago you could buy Tobacco if you were 16! Even more than that, until about 5 years ago you could go about killing people who don't even use it. The users fill up the beds in hospitals that the pissheads don't take.
These drugs are taxed, and made by huge companies who lobby governments all over the world so they're legal.
The other non-taxed drugs are illegal and make huge profits for criminals, because as Brand says, addicts care little about the legalities of it all, they go about causing nightmares for anyone who happens to live near them as they steal anything to feed their habit and fill the pockets of the dealers and ulitimatiely the producers and exporters in places like Afganastan and South America.
You've got teenagers with the natural urge to experiment buying a little bit of weed from dealers, and before long it's "why not try this"
The police spend huge chunks of their budget chasing after the dealers and users and trying to clean up the mess after a junkie has torn the arse out of a neighbourhood.
Personally I decriminalise all drugs. Allow the softer, non-harmful (I know there is great debate over this) ones to be sold under strict control and taxation - take the billions of pounds out of the pockets of dealers and into the hands of business and UK PLC.
Make the harder, harmful and addictive ones available to the addicts in return to counselling and treatment. I'd rather we spent the money keeping a junkie off the streets and trying to cure them of the addiction rather than trying to imprison them and tidy up after them. If they never ‘go clean’ it’s regrettable, but it’s still cheaper to give a junkie a bit of government made heroin and some clean needles than try to keep up with their £100k a year habit.
Russell Brand is a nonce but in general there is a case for treating drug users differently. I think here in the UK we have a more progressive outlook on how to deal with drugs. In the United States they believe in enforcement and prison only despite decades of proof that it doesnt work. Every large medical body has at some stage pointed out drug addiction is a medical issue, not a criminal one. The stats also show legal drugs (drinking and smoking etc) kill far more people than the illegal ones. Theres logic in the idea that the drugs trade will only be brought down by legalising what they sell and this phoney 'war on drugs' the Americans are obsessed with will never yield results.
Others of course say if you made illegal drugs legal then more people would use them and die, they'd also say the cost of drug enforcement and keeping people in prison is irrelevent because you cant arrange your justice system and laws around whats most cost effective.
Its an interesting one.
Others of course say if you made illegal drugs legal then more people would use them and die, they'd also say the cost of drug enforcement and keeping people in prison is irrelevent because you cant arrange your justice system and laws around whats most cost effective.
Its an interesting one.
P-Jay said:
A lot of sense
It used to work to an extent until the UK gave into pressure from the USA to fight a war on drugs. There were a few druggies about, much fewer than now of course, but they were largely hidden and there was not the incentive to either get people hooked or for them to steal once they had.I doubt if it is possible to go back to those days now. The door has been opened. There is a whole industry now producing designer drugs and it is unlikely that any government could or would want to keep up with the new ones.
The evidence of alcohol and tobacco is that people will try to injure themselves regardless of the evidence. However, evidence, oddly from the USA, tends to support the suggestion that addiction is complex and given changes of circumstances, many so-called addicts can free themselves.
We don't know the result of supplying drugs to addicts. What we do know, however, are the massive problems of not doing so.
By the want, regarding your comment on those who are tea-total. I don't drink and haven't since 79 when I developed a stomach problem. People assume I'm an ex-addict. I've given up trying to convince them otherwise.
Anyone who suggests decriminalising cocaine or heroine has had no direct experience of the effects of the drug on the user or the people around the user, they are incredibly damaging, legal or not. Weed has arguably less effect but it's still not an advisable pass time and the link between strong weed and psychosis is founded.
I see no reason to decriminalise, legalise or otherwise condone recreational drug use, the alchohol and smoking counter example strengthen the argument for prohibition, not otherwise, because the make proof that many people in society, given the choice, make some incredibly bad choices, and the personally and society at general need protection from that.
Furthermore the argument that criminals will stop being criminals and start paying legal taxes on the decriminalisation of their is ridiculous and shows extreme niavety to the business model criminality is based on. You can buy criminal DVDs, booze and fags as easilly as the non criminal taxed items.
I like Brand, he's a funny man, but I wouldn't trust a professional comedian and self promotionalist to have a clear view on these matters, I've read his books and his supposed "drugs hell" seems little more than some late teen dabbling, he never even injected, by his own admission he is not prepared to make judgment on the issues surrounding decriminalising.
I see no reason to decriminalise, legalise or otherwise condone recreational drug use, the alchohol and smoking counter example strengthen the argument for prohibition, not otherwise, because the make proof that many people in society, given the choice, make some incredibly bad choices, and the personally and society at general need protection from that.
Furthermore the argument that criminals will stop being criminals and start paying legal taxes on the decriminalisation of their is ridiculous and shows extreme niavety to the business model criminality is based on. You can buy criminal DVDs, booze and fags as easilly as the non criminal taxed items.
I like Brand, he's a funny man, but I wouldn't trust a professional comedian and self promotionalist to have a clear view on these matters, I've read his books and his supposed "drugs hell" seems little more than some late teen dabbling, he never even injected, by his own admission he is not prepared to make judgment on the issues surrounding decriminalising.
Edited by mattnunn on Tuesday 24th April 17:19
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff