a serious point worth considering I would ban smoking -but accept that the government would need to raise the £10 BILLION it gets in taxation elsewhere-where should it come from?? income tax? petrol? alcohol? your choice is.....?
is this................... your manifesto for the next election-legalise crack and prostitution? not a big vote winner I fear-not saying I'm against in principle-for one thing it would create a huge number of jobs monitoring it all
at the minute were fighting an unwinnable war on drugs. how much is spent every year fighting it. and how much money is going straight into the hands of undesirable elements. prohibition in the usa virtually established organised crime. how much money could be put into education and communities which could mean that people wouldn't feel the need to start on them in the first place? you'd also remove the 'cheeky' element of these things, folk doing them just because it's 'naughty'. and you'd know what you're getting too.
It's an argument we keep hearing but after the reduction in NHS costs... </p> ....roughly £2.62 per week per head of population.</p>
There's a flaw in that logic If I could buy Heroin legally, safe stuff with no contaminates and the correct dosage, then I'd buy some today. Opiates are ******* great, but there's no way I'd put the ***** they sell on the street into my body and there's no way I'd risk a criminal record getting it. But if it's legal, gimme gimme gimme.
You know what I find funny... ...is that (and after reading these results and reading the smoking posts below) is that the majority of people who oppose this 'ban' are usually the individuals who complain about the 'nanny state' - which is what essentially this would be. Just some other random points that are floating about my head: - reduced NHS costs but also reduced income from the tax on tobacco: I don't know what the correlation between the two is. - this potential ban would only push tobacco 'underground' and create a black market in the like: potential increase in crime? - yes tobacco is bad for you, but so is too much sugar, fatty acids, exhaust fumes etc etc: where would this end? - I thought Darren Gough supported Tottenham but I'll forgive him since I thought his Pasadobe was rather good.
Indeed Wanting a total ban on something is a bit of a stereotypical, far right, Daily Mail reaction to the issue. Won't somebody please think of the children!!! I think it is fairly conclusive from the poll on here and by just walking around and observing people, that smoking is a rapidly declining pastime. It's just not that appealling anymore if you're excluded from doing it in so many of the places you want to be. It'll just die out over time. It's not like the tobacco high is sufficient to attract thrill seekers like other drugs do. It'll just be an unappealling habit. Banning it now would be grossly unfair too. You can't radically change the rules and goalposts over-night. One minute cigarettes are (rightly or wrongly) a part of society, fools get addicted and tobacconists make a living, the next minute, the addicts have no supply and the tobacconist goes out of business, losing the once-legitimate trade he depended on. You have to phase things out.
"Opiates are f####g great" Nice one. But I understand there are more downsides to taking heroin than just the risk that you might score some bad sheet. Like the physical dependance, leading to an inability to support a job or normal life, leading to a shortage of finances (don't think they would be any cheaper if they were legal) leading to homelessness, vagrancy, prostitution and crime. Getting a bad experience (which might make you give it up) is probably the best you can hope for!
I reckon the only reason drugs are expensive is the amount of hands it passes through before reaching the streets. And then they are getting all sorts cut into the stuff they buy. It might be an idea for registered heroin users to get free heroin prescribed for free. The amount it would cost to hand it out for free must surely be cheaper than the cost of policing the crimes that heroin users commit. A far chunk of all crimes committed must be down to drug users paying for their habit.
RE: Indeed Smoking may well be a "rapidly declining pastime" although so many young people seem to be smoking....see kids in the street smoking, and just today when I went out at work and saw a couple of nice looking young lasses (late teens/early 20's) that got me thinking that I've seen a lot of young women smoking so is teh message really hitting home? I wouldn't advocate a complete ban - but I think smoking whilst driving should be banned. p.s. I thought the "nanny state" was a fluffy liberal thing but then you say this is a far right Daily Mail thing! I'm confused!
By the time the drug companies have paid for rights, development, testing, regulation, insurance, taxation etc. it'll probably cost about the same! Mind you, it was because they withdrew free morphine from addicted patients around a century ago that the underground heroin trade took off in the first place.
Maybe it's different in Barnsley In Barrow, the number of people smoking is significantly down. Quite remarkable in fact, considering the short timescales involved. I allus took the authoritarian nanny state to be at complete odds to the liberal attitude. How can you be liberal (in the pure sense of the meaning) and tell people what to do? Liberals stand for less rules and regulations - the opposite of a nanny state. Now I'm wondering if I've had the wrong end of the stick all these years!
