Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
Drug policy forum, thanks freediver! (Read 8803 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 53184
At my desk.
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #15 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 10:16am
 
But saying that prohibition does not work is not an argument in favour of decriminalisation. If you apply the same standards, decriminalisation is even worse. That is why I'm asking what you mean by saying it 'doesn't work.'
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #16 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 11:42am
 
In comparison to alcohol - perhaps the figures are slightly better - but the Greens were talking about harm minimisation.  At the moment we have horrific problems with Ice and white and blue collar workers are becoming quickly addicted - not to mention ecstasy as a favourite recreational drug.  No-one knows how these drugs have been formulated or what substances are used, which often results in death.

Under the Greens Policy of harm minimisation - there would still be prohibition on drugs (I assume), but for all those addicts who have been written off or others at the start of their addiction, wouldn't narcotics on prescription and taken under supervision be preferable to their wellbeing?  The demand for these drugs would certainly lessen.

To be quite honest - the more I look into it, the answer seems to lie nowhere.  To me - if I compare it to the action the government took in regard to methadone for junkies - harm minimisation seems well worth trying.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
zoso (Guest)
Guest


Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #17 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 12:13pm
 
freediver wrote on Jun 28th, 2007 at 5:52pm:
Governments have been fighting the trafficking of drugs for years with little success and a huge cost.

How do you measure the 'success' of prohibition.

Simple, if prohibition worked, supply would drop. It hasn't, for all intents and purposes it has increased.

Regardless of whether you use prohibition or harm minimisation tactics to combat drug demand, you have to find social ways to make people choose the correct path for themselves. Fear of retribution does not reduce demand, the only way demand will drop is if the desire to consume drops.

State governments and police are gradually realising that end user prohibition simply does nothing, take out a user or street level dealer and a dozen more are lined up ready to fill the void. The way to fight illicit drug trade is to cut it off at the head, but with prohibition in place demand is still focused on illicit means of supply. Cut off the snakes head and two grow back. Remove prohibition, give a legal means of supply to the consumers, cut off the snakes head and it is less likely to come back, since people can source their goods elsewhere. If you talk to any moderate recreational drug user they will tell you that they would much prefer toavoid the shady drug dealers if they had the choice. Prohibition encourages organised crime, and petty crime.

Quote:
Why would demand be reduced eventually? The reason why prohibition does not stop supply is that demand is relatively insensitive to price.

You really think that? You have a degree in economics right? And you are going to sit here and publish on record that you do not think demand of drugs is sensitive to price? I take it you have never actively sought out drugs for personal use Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
zoso (Guest)
Guest


Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #18 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 12:24pm
 
freediver wrote on Jun 28th, 2007 at 5:00pm:
To my mind that is irrelevant to the discussion, swallowing crushed glass is likely far more damaging than all of them but is it specifically illegal?

If it ever became a problem, I'm sure it would be. There's no point outlawing something that isn't even a problem.

Find me some figures that suggest drug abuse is actually a problem worth spending the vast quantities of money that we spend. If eating crushed glass were a problem, I would still be arguing this same line of argument, bugger the government, they have absolutely no right to tell me what I can consume and what I can not! Obesity, smoking and drinking are responsible for far more deaths than illicit drug use in this country, are they regulated? Do you want the government fining you for eating too many hamburgers?? What kind of Orwellian society limits what people put in their mouths?

Quote:
You hear countless stories from social workers who claim alcohol is THE problem out there when it comes to substance abuse.

That's because it isn't prohibited. Which side are you on again?

Horsebull! The uniquely famous example of US alcohol prohibition proved that prohibition of alcohol INCREASED consumption, and INCREASED organised crime to the point that certain cities were under virtual mob rule. Consumption of substances is not a criminal problem! Policing does nothing to stop the underlying social issues that drive people to consume. The reason alcohol abuse is such a huge problem is because of the complex social situations that drive people to desire that particular kind of escape. Prohibition would not stop this, and you are blind to history if you think it would.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 53184
At my desk.
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #19 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 12:25pm
 
Simple, if prohibition worked, supply would drop. It hasn't, for all intents and purposes it has increased.

Doesn't supply increase even further when drugs are decriminalised?

And you are going to sit here and publish on record that you do not think demand of drugs is sensitive to price?

I said it is relatively insensitive to price. The black market is effectively a tax on drugs. Prohibition increases their cost to the end consumer. Yet it does not 'work.'
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #20 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 5:44pm
 
Quote:
Doesn't supply increase even further when drugs are decriminalised


Interesting point Freediver - perhaps more people will become addicted.  I'm not an expert on drugs - only my experience with some people who were addicted to heroin.  Once they went on the methadone program - I would assume there were 2 less people demanding it.

In decriminalising drugs - it would only be for those addicted.  There is no point continually arresting drug users - it has to be stopped at the source.

Maybe illicit drugs will be a continual merry-go-round - when some get off, some get on...you need an expert to answer this question.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
merou
Full Member
***
Offline


Less Tolerance, More Shooting

Posts: 193
Pilbara WA
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #21 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 12:33pm
 
This is a difficult subject and I have been on both sides. I am an ex heroin addict and have strong views on the side of zero tolerance.
Prohibition and government supply would solve many anti social type problems, such as robberies, break and enters etc. What it does not solve is the fact heroin, speed, ice and drug addicts in general should not procreate, drive cars or vote.
bugger EM!
Marijhuana is probably on the same level as alcohol.
Back to top
 

Shoot the scum and let God sort em out.
 
IP Logged
 
merou
Full Member
***
Offline


Less Tolerance, More Shooting

Posts: 193
Pilbara WA
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #22 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 12:39pm
 
mantra wrote on Jun 29th, 2007 at 5:44pm:
Quote:
Doesn't supply increase even further when drugs are decriminalised

 Once they went on the methadone program - I would assume there were 2 less people demanding it


That's absolute bullshite, the methodone stops them from feeling withdrawls between hits.
Back to top
 

Shoot the scum and let God sort em out.
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 41791
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #23 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 1:08pm
 
I thought peope get hooked on methadone and it is harder to get off than smack ?
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
merou
Full Member
***
Offline


Less Tolerance, More Shooting

Posts: 193
Pilbara WA
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #24 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 1:16pm
 
They do, and it is. But they don't stop taking smack when they are on the methodone, or they use smack to get off the methodone.
I tried the methodone program for 3 months, in the end I just took a good hard look at myself and my life, went cold turkey and moved away from any influence. now 4 years on I can visit old friends who are still farked up and just laugh at them, needless to say they don't welcome me anymore. It is always just a phone call away but self respect is stronger than addiction, I don't care what the "save the junkie" people say, Addiction is not an illness, it is just piss weak.

The physical pain and no sleep lasts about 2 weeks, then deminishes, the mental struggle last about 8 weeks.
10 weeks of agony and turmoil is a small price to pay for life.
0 TOLERANCE IS THE ONLY ANSWER
Back to top
 

Shoot the scum and let God sort em out.
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #25 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 1:58pm
 
Quote:
They do, and it is. But they don't stop taking smack when they are on the methodone, or they use smack to get off the methodone.


That's a bit of a generalisation.  There may be some who abuse it - but many others don't.  I have seen people get back on their feet after going on the Methadone program and turn their lives around.

They may be physically addicted to it - but that's the extent of it.  As long as they can get their regular dose from the local chemist or doctors' surgery - they have no need to lie, cheat and steal to buy heroin and can resume a "normal" life.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
oceanz
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Auzgurl..

Posts: 3531
Gender: female
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #26 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 6:14pm
 
mantra wrote on Jul 27th, 2007 at 1:58pm:
Quote:
They do, and it is. But they don't stop taking smack when they are on the methodone, or they use smack to get off the methodone.


That's a bit of a generalisation.  There may be some who abuse it - but many others don't.  I have seen people get back on their feet after going on the Methadone program and turn their lives around.

They may be physically addicted to it - but that's the extent of it.  As long as they can get their regular dose from the local chemist or doctors' surgery - they have no need to lie, cheat and steal to buy heroin and can resume a "normal" life.




mantra,

my sister has been using drugs in one form or another all her life.

She is now onm methadone..But as I see it ,it is worse than the actual drugs she ws on.

She has to go thru all this redtape if she wants to obtain methadone to tide her over whereever it is she wants to go..Govt controls are very strict. She went away to attend my brothers funeral and I was told she was seeking and using other druga at the same time she was using her methadone.

thanks for the info merou about coming off theses drugs..I often thought about kidnaping her and forcing her o go cold turkey, but worried i may hurt her physically if I do that.

But not so you say..
Back to top
 

&&Jade Rawlings on Cousins " He makes our team walk taller..a very good team man , Ben Cousins"
 
IP Logged
 
merou
Full Member
***
Offline


Less Tolerance, More Shooting

Posts: 193
Pilbara WA
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #27 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 6:25pm
 
It realy is sad OB I wish I could tell you about an easy way, unfortunately it is hurts and it's draining. You could kidnap her and hold her for as long as you like, she will just be waiting for her chance. The only way is if she is willing.

Mantra, you might think they are living a normal life, if they don't want you to know then you will not know, not every junkie is drawn and sick looking, not every junkie is a thief but they all lie to some extent.I had my last 2 boxing fights as an addict.
Back to top
 

Shoot the scum and let God sort em out.
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 41791
Gender: male
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #28 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 7:12pm
 
Oceans , srry to hear that. she has to want to do it herself, i believe.

Yes, junkies are EXCELLENT liars. They are ALWAYS thinking and obsessing about their next hit.
Most are on smack for about a decade (or so), then come off it by  their own accord.
If they are still alive.


Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Drug policy forum, thanks freediver!
Reply #29 - Jul 27th, 2007 at 7:47pm
 
Merou - that's why I put "normal" in inverted commas. I have no illusions about the nature of a junkie.   Like Oceans - I have a sibling who has been using the program for many years - and he is an angel today compared with what he used to be like.

He works, pays his bills and fulfills his obligations.  To  me that is 1000% better than the life he led as a junkie not to mention the pain he put our family through.

A friend works for a chemist supplying methadone and many of the people who come in for their dose are office workers, sales people, executives, tradesmen and of course the occasional dreg.

But if half these people can lead some sort of responsible life - good on them and good on the program.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print