Sailhack said...

Wanna hear something funny...I had to google 'Kronic', never heard of it until this thread started!

Waaay back, when I was a teen, a work colleague (apprentice) and a few others decided to try boiling up (insert exotic flower name) and eating the petals, as it was growing in our local botanical garden. I turned up at his place the next day to get a lift to trade-school and he was still hallucinating!

2 of his mates ended up wandering the street that night with no pants on & getting locked up, whilst he swore that I had called in to have brekky with him that morning! He even remembered the conversation he had at brekky with me and his ex girlfriend's dad (who had passed away a couple of years before!)...totally trippin!

As for dangerous - I was too young to drive, so he drove the 2hrs to trade-school. he fell asleep 3 times on that journey & went onto the gravel, I had to grab the wheel and yell at him each time, he also drove into some peoples driveway that he thought he knew!

Daytura....

I disagree mark and I'm no user.

Leagalising drugs at last will enable us to see exactly who is using why they are using etc and enable us to gear health services properly.

not everyone who is addicted is a 'zombie' i knew a lawyer in a successful self made business who used heroin daily. He wanted to stop because he didnt like mixing with criminals and the law board would have frowned upon his activities should he have become a 'registered addict' There are many examples of people using drugs and maintaining 'lifestyles' Its naieve at best to think otherwise.

Legalising drugs isn't going to suddenly increase the rates of amphetamine induced wife beatings. Why would it. There is no evidence to suggest that following prohibition that people went berko and killed each other drinking.

My two cents worth.

Just because alcohol and tobacco are legal isn't an arguement to legalise, cannabis, kronic, amphetamine, cocaine, heroin, mushies etc. There is a huge amount of research that establishes tobacco and alcohol cause immesurable pain and suffering on the community. Why would the govt legalise anymore drugs?

They are all drugs of addiction and all have the capacity to screw any person that takes them, sure there are examples where people partake and lead a normal functioning life, but for every 'successful' user there are another 100 that are watching their life go down the toilet. If drugs can bring down the likes of Ben Couins they can get anyone.

If you don't believe all this sh1t is bad, look at the Northern Territory Intervention a few years ago and all the research into Foetal Alcohol Syndrome, and the liquor bans in place up north, find an ED doctor and ask them about the effect of drugs and alcohol on their workload, check out the courts on a Monday morning or chat to a psych nurse and get their point of view.

It's too late (and totally inconceivable) to ban alcohol and tobacco, but geez imagine the positives if it was done.

Amsterdam is also no longer an example of positive drug use either, last I read it was getting out of hand over there and they had started the process of restricting access to cannabis.

GalahOnTheBay said...

Chris6791 said...

Why would the govt legalise anymore drugs?

Simple - so that they could tax them just as they do tobacco and alcohol...

I could just claim that tax revenue exceeds costs, but that would be pointless without some basis to support the claim. It took me a while to find it but for 2004/5 total tax revenue to state and federal govt for alcohol, tobacco (and illicit drugs) was about 7.8 billion dollars, compared to the total cost to community and govt calculated to 55 billion dollars.

Doesn't sound like a good investment to me?

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/34F55AF632F67B70CA2573F60005D42B/$File/mono64.pdf

Chris6791 said...


Amsterdam is also no longer an example of positive drug use either

Not so .....

In the Netherlands 9.5% of young adults (aged 15–34) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level of Finland (8%), Latvia (9,7%) and Norway (9.6%) and less than in the UK (13.8%), Germany (11,9%), Czech Republic (19,3%), Denmark (13,3%), Spain (18.8%), France (16,7%), Slovakia (14,7%) and Italy (20,9%) but higher than in Bulgaria (4,4%), Sweden (4,8%), Poland (5,3%) or Greece (3,2%). The monthly prevalence of drugs other than cannabis among young people (15-24) was 4% in 2004, that was above the average (3%) of 15 compared countries in EU. However, seemingly few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.30%), well below the average (0.52%) of the same compared countries.

The reported number of deaths linked to the use of drugs in the Netherlands, as a proportion of the entire population, is together with Poland, France, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic the lowest of the EU. The Dutch government is able to support approximately 90% of help-seeking addicts with detoxification programs. Treatment demand is rising.

Criminal investigations into more serious forms of organized crime mainly involve drugs (72%). Most of these are investigations of hard drug crime (specifically cocaine and synthetic drugs) although the number of soft drug cases is rising and currently accounts for 69% of criminal investigations.

Strangely its the 40th anniversary of 'the war on drugs' that Nixon introduced this Friday.
I'm gonna wear a hat.

Chris6791 said...

Why would the govt legalise anymore drugs?

Why did they make the illegal ?

Because of the bohemian types that partook.

Not for any other reason, just the politicans didn't like the class of people who legally carried out an activity.

Follow that logic and why wouldn't you ban Rugby League or tricked up Jap hatches ?

poor relative said...

Chris6791 said...


Amsterdam is also no longer an example of positive drug use either

Not so .....

In the Netherlands 9.5% of young adults (aged 15–34) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level of Finland (8%), Latvia (9,7%) and Norway (9.6%) and less than in the UK (13.8%), Germany (11,9%), Czech Republic (19,3%), Denmark (13,3%), Spain (18.8%), France (16,7%), Slovakia (14,7%) and Italy (20,9%) but higher than in Bulgaria (4,4%), Sweden (4,8%), Poland (5,3%) or Greece (3,2%). The monthly prevalence of drugs other than cannabis among young people (15-24) was 4% in 2004, that was above the average (3%) of 15 compared countries in EU. However, seemingly few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.30%), well below the average (0.52%) of the same compared countries.

The reported number of deaths linked to the use of drugs in the Netherlands, as a proportion of the entire population, is together with Poland, France, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic the lowest of the EU. The Dutch government is able to support approximately 90% of help-seeking addicts with detoxification programs. Treatment demand is rising.

Criminal investigations into more serious forms of organized crime mainly involve drugs (72%). Most of these are investigations of hard drug crime (specifically cocaine and synthetic drugs) although the number of soft drug cases is rising and currently accounts for 69% of criminal investigations.

What I got from that was they still have a drug problem, can't provide help to all that need it (though they have legalised and taxed it), and the problem is getting worse not better?

chronic said...

Sailhack said...

Wanna hear something funny...I had to google 'Kronic', never heard of it until this thread started!

Waaay back, when I was a teen, a work colleague (apprentice) and a few others decided to try boiling up (insert exotic flower name) and eating the petals, as it was growing in our local botanical garden. I turned up at his place the next day to get a lift to trade-school and he was still hallucinating!

2 of his mates ended up wandering the street that night with no pants on & getting locked up, whilst he swore that I had called in to have brekky with him that morning! He even remembered the conversation he had at brekky with me and his ex girlfriend's dad (who had passed away a couple of years before!)...totally trippin!

As for dangerous - I was too young to drive, so he drove the 2hrs to trade-school. he fell asleep 3 times on that journey & went onto the gravel, I had to grab the wheel and yell at him each time, he also drove into some peoples driveway that he thought he knew!

Daytura....

hmm chronic you seem to know about the angels trumpet. Do i take that as an admission of guilt?

Chris6791 said...

What I got from that was they still have a drug problem, can't provide help to all that need it (though they have legalised and taxed it), and the problem is getting worse not better?

Really?
what i got was that despite cannabis being legally available the rates of use in the youth is less rthan many other EU countries where cannabis is illegal.
I also got that the death rate due to drugs is the lowest in the EU as legalisation has enabled people to access treatment.

I am unsure as to what prohibition is trying to achieve. It does not discorage drug use, aids organised crime, stigmatises drug users, makes accessing and providing treatment impossible, makes it easier for minors to obtain and makes a health problem a criminal one.

poor relative said...

Chris6791 said...

What I got from that was they still have a drug problem, can't provide help to all that need it (though they have legalised and taxed it), and the problem is getting worse not better?

Really?
what i got was that despite cannabis being legally available the rates of use in the youth is less rthan many other EU countries where cannabis is illegal.
I also got that the death rate due to drugs is the lowest in the EU as legalisation has enabled people to access treatment.

I am unsure as to what prohibition is trying to achieve. It does not discorage drug use, aids organised crime, stigmatises drug users, makes accessing and providing treatment impossible, makes it easier for minors to obtain and makes a health problem a criminal one.

Good man PR, but it's a lost cause. I've had these same debates with lots of people over the years to no avail. They're so entrenched in the view that drugs should be illegal that they just can't seem to take in that there could be another approach. You can point out that 40 years of prohibition hasn't stopped anything and it's like Mrs Marsh's chalk. It just doesn't get in.

By the way, FWIW, worst drug I take is alky-hol (beer and wine preferred). Gave up ciggies years ago. Tried cannabis a couple of times as a young'un but didn't inhale...

Chris6791 said...
It took me a while to find it but for 2004/5 total tax revenue to state and federal govt for alcohol, tobacco (and illicit drugs) was about 7.8 billion dollars, compared to the total cost to community and govt calculated to 55 billion dollars.

Doesn't sound like a good investment to me?

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/34F55AF632F67B70CA2573F60005D42B/$File/mono64.pdf

(we tax illicit drugs?)

$55 billion dollars? Holy ****!
Per year? That's nearly 20x the cost of the NBN... forever.

Chris6791 said...

Illicit drugs obviously aren't directly taxed but they are calculated into the cost to the community of $55b, just a poorly structured sentence on my part thats all

No more bongs for you!

Mark _australia said...

That explains his munchies
"time for lunch yet? time for lunch yet?" all morning.....

Just had a kebab for lunch, not bad

poor relative said...

I wonder if the demand for locally cooked speed would drop if Heroin was more freely available.

Na, one is an upper, the other is a downer. Different users, and they rarely mixed.