Travel5 mins ago
Drugs
2 Answers
I think we've all forgotten whose responsibility it is for what we put into our own bodies. It shouldn't matter whether something is legal or not. it's the use it's put to. This present furore concerns a substance which enhances plant development - whether someone uses it other than for that purpose is their responsibility alone. Should we perhaps ban bleach in case some neanderthal, knowing what it is decides to drink it or paraquat for the same reason? The list of banned substances would be endless.
Whilst I have every sympathy for grieving family members being interviewed saying it should've been made this or that, it doesn't really matter. It's a DRUG, with all the usual consequences associated with drug use. It's no good shifting the blame. The 'I didn't know the gun was loaded' excuse is wearing a little bit thin.
Although I rejected the concept some years ago I'm slowly coming round to embrace the Darwinian principle, where people stupid enough to endanger their own lives should be allowed to do so, the premise being they won't pass on any of their genes to others. The only proviso being whether they're also endangering anyone else and in these circumstances, whilst in prison they should be given the cold turkey treatment and if they re-offend to double the previous jail term.
Millions of pounds and millions of man-hours are used by the various agencies to curb (usually) drug-based 'anti-social behaviour' - NO, CRIME.
There's plenty of evidence to show what happens if they consume drugs on a regular basis and if they choose to walk down that road, let them. With a diminishing demand perhaps the drug peddlers will crawl back under their respective stones, the police can devote more time to more important matters and the waiting rooms at the local A&Es will be far less busy.
Whilst I have every sympathy for grieving family members being interviewed saying it should've been made this or that, it doesn't really matter. It's a DRUG, with all the usual consequences associated with drug use. It's no good shifting the blame. The 'I didn't know the gun was loaded' excuse is wearing a little bit thin.
Although I rejected the concept some years ago I'm slowly coming round to embrace the Darwinian principle, where people stupid enough to endanger their own lives should be allowed to do so, the premise being they won't pass on any of their genes to others. The only proviso being whether they're also endangering anyone else and in these circumstances, whilst in prison they should be given the cold turkey treatment and if they re-offend to double the previous jail term.
Millions of pounds and millions of man-hours are used by the various agencies to curb (usually) drug-based 'anti-social behaviour' - NO, CRIME.
There's plenty of evidence to show what happens if they consume drugs on a regular basis and if they choose to walk down that road, let them. With a diminishing demand perhaps the drug peddlers will crawl back under their respective stones, the police can devote more time to more important matters and the waiting rooms at the local A&Es will be far less busy.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by LewPaper. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Interesting perspective, lewpaper, and one which also reflects the current obsession with Health & Safety. If you want to walk on top of that cliff, it's at your own risk - so why all the warnings and fencings and signs implying that "this cliff is high up, it's a long way down, and you might die if you fall off"... Society seems to have come to a viewpoint where we are no longer responsible for our own actions, if things go wrong then it has to be someone else's fault.
I've got to go to work in a minute, but I think/hope this will be an interesting thread to follow today!
I've got to go to work in a minute, but I think/hope this will be an interesting thread to follow today!