[Mrluvaluva]

In the light of cannabis being kept as a class C drug, I wondered what everyones stance was on british drug laws. What are your views?

[Red Moon]

Cannabis aside, they basically aren't hard enough and the laws aren't well thought out.

One only has to look how celebrities get away with drug taking to see how easy the law is on drug takers. Celebrities should have the book thrown at them if they are known to be taking class A drugs. These people are role models for youngsters.

And while I am at it, any decent Government should clean up those City types that run the stock market with noeses full of coke.

[Callum]

I have a funny turn whenever someone mentions the word "heroin" and I see a picture of someone misusing a needle for drugs. It makes me feel sick, it's a real phobia. I think a huge crackdown should be done on drugs, their horrible things that rot away people's lives.

[Legend]

I think it's a tough one. If addicted then yeah, they potentially ruin your life and it doesn't take a lot to get addicted so in that sense, if they were legalised then they'd be so much easier to get hold of so more people are going to get hooked, which obviously isn't good. But at the same time, alchohol is legal and can potentially ruin your life if you get dependant on it ... but then I couldn't imagine walking into the newagents and asking for a bag of coke. Weed, I'd say that should become legal purely for the fact it's been proven to be a good pain relief.

As for drugs, for personal use, every so often then I don't see the big deal. I contradict myself because I don't think you should be arrested and charged if using them for personal use but obviously drug dealers is a different story and I'd say they should, purely as they intentionally get people hooked. The odd spliff, the occasional line when you're out ... I personally don't see the big deal and hate people who frown upon it. Especially coke, it's a good 20/30 minute high with no side effects ... can the same be said for alcohol?

It's a tough one though in regards to the legal system.

[MrGaryy]

I'm all for drugs lol just kidding. I think there a lot of room for improvement.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Red Moon
Cannabis aside, they basically aren't hard enough and the laws aren't well thought out.

One only has to look how celebrities get away with drug taking to see how easy the law is on drug takers. Celebrities should have the book thrown at them if they are known to be taking class A drugs. These people are role models for youngsters.

And while I am at it, any decent Government should clean up those City types that run the stock market with noeses full of coke.

Why though? Yeah they are "role models" but it's their choice. If they want to take drugs for personal use then hey, leave them to it. I doubt any person with an ounce of common sense will see their favourite singer taking drugs and think "I like their music so I'll take drugs too" ... fair enough celebrities put themselves in the public eye but what they get upto away from the limelight is their business. Fair enough news stories and pictures in magazines come out but I doubt they intentionally go out looking for "X in drug fuelled sex romp" headlines.

I do think they are frowned upon too much.

[Tom]

There are celebrities who openly use them in the public eye but nothing happens. A normal person is caught with some in their back pocket with no evidence of them even taking it and they are fined or sent down for god knows how long.

I'm all for occasional use, I don't see the harm in it because its something done every now and again without doing any harm to anyone else, but those addicted to it should be sorted out mentally and legally. Those people who are addicted are harming themselves and others around them.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Legend

Why though? Yeah they are "role models" but it's their choice. If they want to take drugs for personal use then hey, leave them to it. I doubt any person with an ounce of common sense will see their favourite singer taking drugs and think "I like their music so I'll take drugs too" ... fair enough celebrities put themselves in the public eye but what they get upto away from the limelight is their business. Fair enough news stories and pictures in magazines come out but I doubt they intentionally go out looking for "X in drug fuelled sex romp" headlines.

I do think they are frowned upon too much.

I agree, especially as nicotine and alcohol are the two most damaging drugs you can take, although they are perfectly legal and not frowned upon to the extent that other drugs are.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Tom_
There are celebrities who openly use them in the public eye but nothing happens. A normal person is caught with some in their back pocket with no evidence of them even taking it and they are fined or sent down for god knows how long.

Oh definately, whilst the law is as it is then celebrities should be treated like everybody else. But that's for another debate as celebrities generally get away with a lot more than the general public anyway, unfortunately.

[Red Moon]

Originally posted by Legend
I do think they are frowned upon too much.

But some of the people that see Celebrities as role models take things too far. Look at Chanelle from BB8, she is so utterly obsessed with Victoria Beckham that if Victoria stuffed coke up her nose she would be doing it too. Chanelle is the sort of person that wears that barnd knickers as her idol, so much so if she could get hold of a real pair of her knickers would put them on clean or not.

People in the public eye need to be made an example of. It's no good just just doing the kids on the streets for taking drugs when the famous people and the people with money get away with it. That is how it seems in this country.

One law for the rich and another for the poor.

[Tom]

I'd say there were only a small handful of people who are like Chanelle. You don't see people like her every day. To have a squeaky clean image on celebrities would just be pointless and defeats the concept of individuality, but I do agree in the sense that they should be treated like everyone else.

[Red Moon]

Originally posted by Tom_
I'd say there were only a small handful of people who are like Chanelle. You don't see people like her every day.

I agree that only a handful of people are as extreme as Chanelle, but it only takes one person to die because they follow a Celebrities life style to die a pointless death, to ask the question if these people shouldn't be shamed in the press?

I feel they should. They can me made an example of. Hopefully then someones life might be saved.

The law thinks Celebrities have a hard life and should get away with things. The point is they decided they wanted the Celebrity life style and with it comes responsibilities. One of those is not to take class A drugs and get away with it. What sort of message does that send to young people?

[Tom]

Originally posted by Red Moon

I agree that only a handful of people are as extreme as Chanelle, but it only takes one person to die because they follow a Celebrities life style to die a pointless death, to ask the question if these people shouldn't be shamed in the press?

I feel they should. They can me made an example of. Hopefully then someones life might be saved.

The law thinks Celebrities have a hard life and should get away with things. The point is they decided they wanted the Celebrity life style and with it comes responsibilities. One of those is not to take class A drugs and get away with it. What sort of message does that send to young people?

I mis-interpreted one of your posts. I initially thought you meant they shouldn't take them at all which I don't think its true as its their lives and if they are willing to face the consequences then fair enough but I've realised that you actually meant they should face the consequences and not get away with it like most are at the minute. Pete Docherty for example. 14 weeks in prison, he'll be out in 7. Any ordindary person would have been given at least 2 years but with the celebrity culture these days its mandatory for them to have some sort of disorder or problems earlier on which excuses them from being punished. I do agree, its why the British justice system is becoming a laughing stock and is becoming abused by pretty much everyone. Rules have to be applied consistently and I agree that celebrities should be named and shamed in the media- it might force them to get their act together whilst showing people what addiction can do. But having said all of that, I still don't oppose casual/occasional use (non-addiction), but if someone is caught then they should face the consequences although I do believe its frowned upon too much when there are worse legal drugs.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Red Moon

I agree that only a handful of people are as extreme as Chanelle, but it only takes one person to die because they follow a Celebrities life style to die a pointless death, to ask the question if these people shouldn't be shamed in the press?

I feel they should. They can me made an example of. Hopefully then someones life might be saved.

The law thinks Celebrities have a hard life and should get away with things. The point is they decided they wanted the Celebrity life style and with it comes responsibilities. One of those is not to take class A drugs and get away with it. What sort of message does that send to young people?

Yeah I understand there are people like that out there but more fool them for lacking any common sense and intelligence. I don't see why celebrities shouldn't be entitled to do what they want behind closed doors, however, I agree about them getting away with it ... if we don't get away with it then they shouldn't.

[Daniel__]

OMG i hate it when you see chavs standing on street corners smoking weed its like go get a job or go learn something.

[Stu]

Lets not get our drugs mixed up before we go any further , for some of the more naive members bound to post on about how drugs destroy lives. Be careful not to generalise. Yes their are bad drugs but some are good. Its almost embarrassing having to get cautioned for smoking a joint , and then come home and watch advertisments on the TV telling me to get drunk. We have a moral right to disobey unjust laws , and its simply a matter of time before a lot of European citys will become as tolerant as your average Amsterdam.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Legend

I don't think you should be arrested and charged if using them for personal use but obviously drug dealers is a different story and I'd say they should, purely as they intentionally get people hooked.

Whatever drugs you use, they all come from dealers, and you will always have dealers while drugs are illegal. The only way you can get the numbers down, is to legalise drugs, and I don't think that is a good idea at all.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva

Whatever drugs you use, they all come from dealers, and you will always have dealers while drugs are illegal. The only way you can get the numbers down, is to legalise drugs, and I don't think that is a good idea at all.

Arguably, there is no problem to legalise drugs. The two most dangerous drugs you can take are nicotine and alcohol, yet they are the ones that are legal.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Tom_

Arguably, there is no problem to legalise drugs. The two most dangerous drugs you can take are nicotine and alcohol, yet they are the ones that are legal.

Not true. Alcohol and nicotine are more addictive than cannabis, and are more harmful for you. What about heroin or ecstasy? You cannot overdose by smoking too many cigarettes in one go. It is possible to die from drinking too much in one session, but this is not a common case. Would you condone the legalisation of heroin then? Don't you think this would make it readily available for everyone and then how many drugs overdoses would we be facing?

[Tom]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva

Not true. Alcohol and nicotine are more addictive than cannabis, and are more harmful for you. What about heroin or ecstasy? You cannot overdose by smoking too many cigarettes in one go. It is possible to die from drinking too much in one session, but this is not a common case. Would you condone the legalisation of heroin then? Don't you think this would make it readily available for everyone and then how many drugs overdoses would we be facing?

But the thing is with alcohol and nicotine you need more which causes more long term damage, but with other drugs you don't so you are actually less likely to overdose because one dose is sufficient. I'm not saying they should be legalised, which I don't think they should be, but if they were ever to be then I wouldn't see a major problem with it especially if they were regulated.

[~Kizwiz~]

I have mixed views on drugs. I had my first spliff at 14 and my first line of speed when I was 16. I used drugs recreationally for a few years. Then I moved down south and started to smoke skunk almost every day. It was a hazy 10 years. In the first few years I took a mixture of E's and speed when out too and then blitz the smoke on a comedown to ease the pain. I didnt do speed/E's from when I was about 25 because I didnt like the comedown anymore. It wasnt worth the buzz.

Then I found that coke didnt have the comedown, and it was fun and made my nerves go and my confidence bigger.

Circumstances made me leave my home and with it my growing coke addiction. Now the only thing I touch is alcohol. My life just doesnt fit the old lifestyle.

I would legalise weed/skunk/solid in a heartbeat. Simply because like others have said in this thread its not really harming anyone. Yes there are side effects which can effect some people physiologically but so can a lot of other things like alcohol and prescription drugs. I would rather meet a stoned person in the street then a drunk one simply because you dont get violent of puff.

With regards to the other more harder drugs, i think it would be easier to control what people are taking if it was legalised and monitored in the correct way.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Tom_

But the thing is with alcohol and nicotine you need more which causes more long term damage, but with other drugs you don't so you are actually less likely to overdose because one dose is sufficient.

So other drugs like heroin are not addictive? Can heroin not cause long term damage? You are less likely to OD on heroin than nicotine?

[Tom]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva

So other drugs like heroin are not addictive? Can heroin not cause long term damage? You are less likely to OD on heroin than nicotine?

I meant you need more in the one go whereas with nicotine and alcohol you keep going. I never said they aren't addictive.

[Ruth]

Originally posted by Dannyboi
OMG i hate it when you see chavs standing on street corners smoking weed its like go get a job or go learn something.

I know tons of people who smoke weed, and used to smoke a lot of it myself. I hold down a responsible job, and so do all of my friends. It's not just the stereotypical chavs you refer to who smoke it.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Tom_

I meant you need more in the one go whereas with nicotine and alcohol you keep going. I never said they aren't addictive.

Noted and agreed. You said "with alcohol and nicotine you need more which causes more long term damage, but with other drugs you don't"

That to me said with other drugs you don't need more, meaning that they were not addictive.