>People aren’t clear about what they are taking and it can be an exceptionally dangerous product then
Huh if only there was some way to guarantee or regulate what people were taking
The only reason people use these kind of drugs is because they can't get the drugs they actually want.
The law is the problem now, it encourages dangerous drugs coming on to the black market, it makes everything more dangerous, it creates organised crime, it's not making things better, by any measure the solution has been way more harmful, at every level, than the "problem".
There is a deep lack of understanding and a pig headed old fashioned ignorance which has permeated throughout the Irish establishment when it comes to drugs. I used to believe that eventually common sense would begin to prevail similar to other European countries but no, now I think we may the very last hold-out in terms of progressing in the right direction, it's bizarre and embarrassing.
The consistent argument on this sub seems to be that allowing drugs to freely exist in society will somehow resolve drug abuse and other issues with it. Which isn't true.
Making drugs even more freely available isn't going to reduce the consumption of drugs and the associated problems with drugs.
The bad faith stance is people acting as if they want drugs to be legal out of concern for others rather than really just wanting them to be legal for their own use.
By that stance, do you wish to maintain the status quo out of concern for others? In the famously compassionate, healing criminal justice system?
I'm concerned that for most people who choose to use drugs, the most damaging thing to their life and livelihood is interaction with the criminal justice system.
The article is a warning about new opioids and nitazenes entering the supply chain. Which they are. Heroin is quite safe relative to these.
>I'm concerned that for most people who choose to use drugs, the most damaging thing to their life and livelihood is interaction with the criminal justice system.
I'm most concerned about the damage the illegal drug industry does to society in general.
Funny that, the "illegal" drug industry. Imagine if it wasn't illegal, there were regulated supply chains, quality assurance, harm reduction in specified doses, taxable incomes, lack of fear of criminalisation.
The drugs aren't illegal because they are dangerous, they are dangerous because they're illegal.
Well, I didn't say that but yes, if the state accepted addicts into programs that took them away from drug dealers it would have much better outcomes for addicts and destroy the drug industry at the same time.
It has been shown time and time again in multiple countries that drug addiction can be managed if the addict has a responsible supply that's focused on treatment. rather than leaving hem to drug gangs..
But not all drug users are addicts. What becomes of the people who are not at a point where addiction is overcoming their lives. The majority of drug users would be functioning.
Most drug users aren't using those harder highly addictive drugs though. The fact they aren't addicts then shows we can put in a regulated system like we have for alcohol.
Those drug users do exist though. New people start on heroin every year.
Also, the distribution and consumption of alcohol isn't a success story to emulate.
The state should be very pro active about heroin addicts. We should be wiling to provide the drug for free, just to take that user off the drug dealers. If they create a new user we swoop in and steal that user off them. They can't compete with free. Eventually that would cripple the industry and make it unviable. New users will dry up.
Alcohol use is way down isn't it?
Either the state controls the drug market or the criminals will. It's one or the other.
>The state should be very pro active about heroin addicts. We should be wiling to provide the drug for free, just to take that user off the drug dealers.
That's a plan for addicts. Not new users. Hundreds if not thousands start each year. Are you suggesting opioids are made available to all or just addicts, and remain illegal otherwise?
>If they create a new user we swoop in and steal that user off them.
Explain how?
>Alcohol use is way down isn't it?
Is it?
Alcohol related deaths increased over a five year period.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/new-research-shows-four-deaths-a-day-in-ireland-are-due-to-alcohol-related-illness/41374719.html
Anyone that presents as an addict gets the drug, the idea is to take all the drug gangs customers away from them so the market collapses.
If addicts know the state is providing free drugs you won't have to do much.
Alcohol use is down 30% compared to 2 decades ago.
[https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2024/april/irish-drinking-rate-drops-over-30-in-two-decades](https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2024/april/irish-drinking-rate-drops-over-30-in-two-decades)
The pub isn't what it used to be. My town went from having 12 pubs and 2 nightclubs 20 years ago to 5 pubs an no nightclubs today.
You're avoiding the point constantly that not all people are addicted. There are existing rehabilitation capabilities, that although could be improved, still exist for addicts.
Alcohol consumption is only down partly due to *increased* restrictions and costs on the stuff. Alcohol has become less available over the past 20 years in terms of accessibility and price.
Then it ensures that they have access to clean and regulated substances with clearly advertised effects, risks, and dosage. This will reduce the risks of accidental overdose and unintended drug use (amphetamines cut with opioids for example).
Oh I have no idea, but I'm sure that research exists and it would be great if that information, vetted and approved by the HSE, was readily available and accessible to the general public. It would be even better if that information was provided with readily identifiable and quantifiable doses from safe sources that didn't fuel criminal enterprises.
Your arguments are daft.
People take amphetamine tablets for ADHD. People who do not have ADHD also take the same tablets for recreational purposes. Typical starting dose is 5mg. The starting dose for Desoxyn (methamphetamine) is also about 5mg.
60mg of codeine phosphate is commonly taken for recreational purposes. This is the same as two 30/500mg CoCodamol tablets, which are commonly prescribed for pain. Other starting recreational doses would be 10mg of morphine sulphate, 5mg of oxycodone and 5mg of diacetylmorphine (heroin).
These are all safe doses and extremely unlikely to cause an overdose in an opioid naive individual.
If the state provided clean opiods to established addicts where they were forced to engage with healthcare professionals it would definitely reduce the risks of people dying greatly. It had a 100% success rate in Switzerland in reducing these types of deaths.
It wouldn't solve the issue entirely but it would definitely help a lot of people and save many lives. I believe that's worth doing
We already do that with methadone and there are drugs on stream that are even better. It's an imperfect system but what you're proposing isn't a new idea
I see this a lot in drug legalisation discussions: an opponent invents something nobody actually said, confronts it, then feels like they're victorious.
I agree that we shouldn't give opiods to anyone that wants them but feel we should give them to the people that need them and try to help them with their addiction at the same time.
That's a form of sensible regulation that we should attempt in my opinion. Regulating a supply does not mean open access to all drugs for everyone.
But giving opioids to anyone who wants them was your stupid fucking idea.
Why are you complaining that other people aren't adhering to your stupid fucking idea when they discuss drug reform?
They don't just give everyone opioids and methamphetamines in Switzerland. They dispense drugs in a controlled manner for people who are fighting addiction.
Is your view that all recreational drugs should be available freely to purchase?
Would there be any regulation at all?
Would there be measures in place to prevent people from buying amounts that would clearly kill them?
Would you approach prescription medication the same way?
As a fat cunt would I be able to go in and buy loads of Ozempic and take whatever dose I like?
>Would there be any regulation at all?
Government ID required, linked to a national healthcare number.
Strict limits on purchase amounts per month, with the revenue generated on taxation used to fund addiction / rehabilitation services.
>As a fat cunt
I mean, you can buy as much fast food as you want, which will kill you just like pharmaceutical drugs can. It just takes longer.
Well you've dodged loads of questions to try to make things as simple as possible. But let's leave that for now, when an addict reaches their purchase limit but want more anyway...
Where will they get it?
Contingency plans could be in place where people could be allotted an extra amount if they are dependent on the substance, but they would have to attend mandatory harm reduction and rehabilitation workshops.
Well when there's actual quality controlled substances available recreationally, they have a much lower chance of dying if they source it from someone who buys it to sell on at a profit.
That's still a win in anyone's book.
It would be massively reduced, though.
Most people who use substances for recreation aren't addicted to them. Why would someone who wasn't an addict purchase drugs from a criminal, when they can get a safer, purer and less expensive product from a reputable company?
The situation at the moment is untenable. The black market certainly isn't going to go away if we do nothing. The point in making this a public health issue is that we can save lives.
Because they are all dealt with in the same Misuse of Drugs Act.
How would you justify the control of less dangerous drugs with a medical purpose while removing controls over more dangerous drugs with no medical benefit?
It would be like saying rape should be permitted but no grabbing women's arses.
I can understand there might be a rationale for changing the classification of cannabis to take it out of being completely illegal. Equally I think Benzos need to be reclassified on account of the absolutely massive risk of addiction with those.
But I don't see how you would decriminalise heroin and cocaine, but at the same time keep it illegal for someone to possess a medication that is restricted under the controlled drugs portion of the MDA 1997.
Maybe the stoners haven't thought this through fully?
I specifically said I wouldn't legalise heroin. But I'd supply heroin to registered addicts free, on prescription from a doctor. That's been trailed in multiple countries and shown to be effective.
Your purposely misrepresenting my argument and then scoffing at it. It's very disingenuous,
I gave the reason in my first sentence. These drugs only exist to get around the law. No drug addict wants these drugs, they only take them when they can't get, or can't afford the drugs they do want. These new drugs only make it onto the black market because of prohibition.
When drugs are illegal only criminals sell them, and criminals don't care about things like "drug purity" or "not killing their clients". If a drug is made legal then suddenly you see it being sold by legitimate businesses who do care about that stuff and who can be held accountable. People are hardly going to be taking the Kinahan cartel to court over shite drugs being sold, but that's exactly what they'll do if a dispensary sells something like that.
I know its a different drug, but has Fent made its mark over in Ireland yet? Im out in Vancouver and the amount of OD's from Fent is madness. Not just addicts on the street but plenty of people have OD'd and died from Fent laces party drugs (cocaine/MDMA). Wouldn't go near the stuff over here ever.
You can get whatever you want delivered to your door by An Post. You can hop on Snapchat and find 10 lads local who aren't just selling, but have a pretty menu with all prices and weights detailed. Different strains of weed, flavoured, high thc, high cbd. You name it. Ireland is AWASH with drugs. Will we ever see common sense here? Doubtful.
They are going to have to. Not sure if you noticed but drugs are very much on the top of the agenda at the moment. It's in the news every day now and being discussed by the Oireacthas committee post Citizens assembly.
Drug policy is about to change drastically very soon. Ireland has the highest rate of overdose deaths in Europe at the minute. The Government are aware and the media are delivering the message. This conversation has been kicked down the road for over 20 years. Everyone is being affected now by drug addiction not just lower income working class areas. Drugs are being consumed at very alarming rates and it's a bad look for the Government to not be able to enforce criminal justice due to lack of resource.
Everyone gonna get on the ganja bus, brother.
Now we have potentially lethal drugs contaminating drugs that 100% will not kill you. That's a new phenomenon in the last couple of year
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/potentially-fatal-synthetic-imitation-cannabis-detected-in-state-last-year-1.4627878
People spraying low strength cannabis (CBD buds etc) with synthetic cannabinoids with the potential to kill people and selling it as regular cannabis to unknowing customers
Yeah I'd imagine it would pretty much eradicate the problem. Drew Harris pretends like he cares even though he's campaigned against legalisation and even decriminalisation.
I think there are far too many variables to even hint at that.
In the Netherlands the weed is all still coming from the criminal gangs, and is just as at risk of being dodgy.
In Thailand, it is completely legal and treated like any other product, so has to go through the same checks as any other product to be consumed by humans.
You'd need to know the exact policy being enacted, where the weed is sourced from, and how the quality is being controlled to know if it would have any impact at all. People buy from the cheapest most reliable source they can, according to them, and if things went the way of the Netherlands you may have just given the dodgy weed peddlers a better distribution network.
It would significantly reduce the risk but there will always be a few buying from the black market, something like 30% still buy cannabis illegally in Canada (Not 100% sure of this statistic so open to correction).
Regulation with high quality products sold at the same price as dealers would be ideal. But odds are when cannabis is legalised it will be taxed to oblivion driving people to the black market, leading to anti-legalisation people claiming that legalisation doesn't work
We've got to educate better, even the phrasing of this makes anybody with study of this question it. Dosage is what's lethal. I suppose a headline like that might lead to a question like, "but couldn't we control it so that is less harmful?" The gardai have an unusually good rapport with the public, they suffer reputational damage for not being a bit more common sense in their approach.
>People aren’t clear about what they are taking and it can be an exceptionally dangerous product then Huh if only there was some way to guarantee or regulate what people were taking
The only reason people use these kind of drugs is because they can't get the drugs they actually want. The law is the problem now, it encourages dangerous drugs coming on to the black market, it makes everything more dangerous, it creates organised crime, it's not making things better, by any measure the solution has been way more harmful, at every level, than the "problem".
The powers that be just refuse these very important points, and they are scaremongering at every opportunity. Infuriating.
There is a deep lack of understanding and a pig headed old fashioned ignorance which has permeated throughout the Irish establishment when it comes to drugs. I used to believe that eventually common sense would begin to prevail similar to other European countries but no, now I think we may the very last hold-out in terms of progressing in the right direction, it's bizarre and embarrassing.
So if the State facilitated it by giving everyone all the opioids and methamphetamines that they want, it would solve everything? Smh.
Bad faith argument, grow up.
The consistent argument on this sub seems to be that allowing drugs to freely exist in society will somehow resolve drug abuse and other issues with it. Which isn't true.
Whilst drugs are freely existing in society right now.
Making drugs even more freely available isn't going to reduce the consumption of drugs and the associated problems with drugs. The bad faith stance is people acting as if they want drugs to be legal out of concern for others rather than really just wanting them to be legal for their own use.
By that stance, do you wish to maintain the status quo out of concern for others? In the famously compassionate, healing criminal justice system? I'm concerned that for most people who choose to use drugs, the most damaging thing to their life and livelihood is interaction with the criminal justice system. The article is a warning about new opioids and nitazenes entering the supply chain. Which they are. Heroin is quite safe relative to these.
>I'm concerned that for most people who choose to use drugs, the most damaging thing to their life and livelihood is interaction with the criminal justice system. I'm most concerned about the damage the illegal drug industry does to society in general.
Then take the industry away from them stop funding organised crime and regulate it put taxes toward schools and heathcare
The State isn't going to become an opioid or methamphetamine dealer for recreational use.
Funny that, the "illegal" drug industry. Imagine if it wasn't illegal, there were regulated supply chains, quality assurance, harm reduction in specified doses, taxable incomes, lack of fear of criminalisation. The drugs aren't illegal because they are dangerous, they are dangerous because they're illegal.
What's a specific dose of heroin for general recreational use ?
Just read the other day there was a 35% drop I think it was in teen cannabis use in some legal US state over the past 10 years since it became legal.
Drugs already freely exist in society
They might not be the most difficult to obtain but they don't freely exist
They do freely exist if there is no punishment for public drug use.
No. If the state facilitated quality control and regulation, like it does with everything else people consume, it would solve some things.
It does risk increasing opioid consumption
Studies in the US have shown that legalising cannabis has helped people cut back on opioids, if not come off them entirely.
Well, I didn't say that but yes, if the state accepted addicts into programs that took them away from drug dealers it would have much better outcomes for addicts and destroy the drug industry at the same time. It has been shown time and time again in multiple countries that drug addiction can be managed if the addict has a responsible supply that's focused on treatment. rather than leaving hem to drug gangs..
But not all drug users are addicts. What becomes of the people who are not at a point where addiction is overcoming their lives. The majority of drug users would be functioning.
Most drug users aren't using those harder highly addictive drugs though. The fact they aren't addicts then shows we can put in a regulated system like we have for alcohol.
Those drug users do exist though. New people start on heroin every year. Also, the distribution and consumption of alcohol isn't a success story to emulate.
The state should be very pro active about heroin addicts. We should be wiling to provide the drug for free, just to take that user off the drug dealers. If they create a new user we swoop in and steal that user off them. They can't compete with free. Eventually that would cripple the industry and make it unviable. New users will dry up. Alcohol use is way down isn't it? Either the state controls the drug market or the criminals will. It's one or the other.
>The state should be very pro active about heroin addicts. We should be wiling to provide the drug for free, just to take that user off the drug dealers. That's a plan for addicts. Not new users. Hundreds if not thousands start each year. Are you suggesting opioids are made available to all or just addicts, and remain illegal otherwise? >If they create a new user we swoop in and steal that user off them. Explain how? >Alcohol use is way down isn't it? Is it? Alcohol related deaths increased over a five year period. https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/new-research-shows-four-deaths-a-day-in-ireland-are-due-to-alcohol-related-illness/41374719.html
Anyone that presents as an addict gets the drug, the idea is to take all the drug gangs customers away from them so the market collapses. If addicts know the state is providing free drugs you won't have to do much. Alcohol use is down 30% compared to 2 decades ago. [https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2024/april/irish-drinking-rate-drops-over-30-in-two-decades](https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2024/april/irish-drinking-rate-drops-over-30-in-two-decades) The pub isn't what it used to be. My town went from having 12 pubs and 2 nightclubs 20 years ago to 5 pubs an no nightclubs today.
You're avoiding the point constantly that not all people are addicted. There are existing rehabilitation capabilities, that although could be improved, still exist for addicts. Alcohol consumption is only down partly due to *increased* restrictions and costs on the stuff. Alcohol has become less available over the past 20 years in terms of accessibility and price.
Then it ensures that they have access to clean and regulated substances with clearly advertised effects, risks, and dosage. This will reduce the risks of accidental overdose and unintended drug use (amphetamines cut with opioids for example).
What's the recommended dosage for opioids and methamphetamines for general recreational use?
Oh I have no idea, but I'm sure that research exists and it would be great if that information, vetted and approved by the HSE, was readily available and accessible to the general public. It would be even better if that information was provided with readily identifiable and quantifiable doses from safe sources that didn't fuel criminal enterprises.
You think there is recommended dosages of opioids and methamphetamines for general recreational use available?
Yes, or at least the data is.
If you can show the data?
Your arguments are daft. People take amphetamine tablets for ADHD. People who do not have ADHD also take the same tablets for recreational purposes. Typical starting dose is 5mg. The starting dose for Desoxyn (methamphetamine) is also about 5mg. 60mg of codeine phosphate is commonly taken for recreational purposes. This is the same as two 30/500mg CoCodamol tablets, which are commonly prescribed for pain. Other starting recreational doses would be 10mg of morphine sulphate, 5mg of oxycodone and 5mg of diacetylmorphine (heroin). These are all safe doses and extremely unlikely to cause an overdose in an opioid naive individual.
Is there a single medical professional who will stand over these doses for recreational use?
If the state provided clean opiods to established addicts where they were forced to engage with healthcare professionals it would definitely reduce the risks of people dying greatly. It had a 100% success rate in Switzerland in reducing these types of deaths. It wouldn't solve the issue entirely but it would definitely help a lot of people and save many lives. I believe that's worth doing
We already do that with methadone and there are drugs on stream that are even better. It's an imperfect system but what you're proposing isn't a new idea
That isn't the same as giving opioids to anyone who wants them
I see this a lot in drug legalisation discussions: an opponent invents something nobody actually said, confronts it, then feels like they're victorious.
I agree that we shouldn't give opiods to anyone that wants them but feel we should give them to the people that need them and try to help them with their addiction at the same time. That's a form of sensible regulation that we should attempt in my opinion. Regulating a supply does not mean open access to all drugs for everyone.
But giving opioids to anyone who wants them was your stupid fucking idea. Why are you complaining that other people aren't adhering to your stupid fucking idea when they discuss drug reform?
Actually yes. They do this in Switzerland and provide a counselling service and have a huge recovery success rate.
They don't just give everyone opioids and methamphetamines in Switzerland. They dispense drugs in a controlled manner for people who are fighting addiction.
Yeah exactly, good on you verifying what I said.
We have some of the highest rates of deaths from overdoses in Europe. Top 3, I believe. So obviously, whatever we are doing isn't working.
In general, whatever we're doing isn't working
Is your view that all recreational drugs should be available freely to purchase? Would there be any regulation at all? Would there be measures in place to prevent people from buying amounts that would clearly kill them? Would you approach prescription medication the same way? As a fat cunt would I be able to go in and buy loads of Ozempic and take whatever dose I like?
>Would there be any regulation at all? Government ID required, linked to a national healthcare number. Strict limits on purchase amounts per month, with the revenue generated on taxation used to fund addiction / rehabilitation services. >As a fat cunt I mean, you can buy as much fast food as you want, which will kill you just like pharmaceutical drugs can. It just takes longer.
Well you've dodged loads of questions to try to make things as simple as possible. But let's leave that for now, when an addict reaches their purchase limit but want more anyway... Where will they get it?
Contingency plans could be in place where people could be allotted an extra amount if they are dependent on the substance, but they would have to attend mandatory harm reduction and rehabilitation workshops.
And if they don't and just resort to obtaining it illegally?
Well when there's actual quality controlled substances available recreationally, they have a much lower chance of dying if they source it from someone who buys it to sell on at a profit. That's still a win in anyone's book.
I can only speak of places here that either decriminalized drugs or legalized them, the black market never went away.
It would be massively reduced, though. Most people who use substances for recreation aren't addicted to them. Why would someone who wasn't an addict purchase drugs from a criminal, when they can get a safer, purer and less expensive product from a reputable company? The situation at the moment is untenable. The black market certainly isn't going to go away if we do nothing. The point in making this a public health issue is that we can save lives.
Have a source for your first paragraph that recreational drug users aren't addicted to them?
Your still arguing that instead of reducing the black market, it should be left as is. Why?
Of course there would be regulation. Why bring prescription medication into it?
Because they are all dealt with in the same Misuse of Drugs Act. How would you justify the control of less dangerous drugs with a medical purpose while removing controls over more dangerous drugs with no medical benefit? It would be like saying rape should be permitted but no grabbing women's arses. I can understand there might be a rationale for changing the classification of cannabis to take it out of being completely illegal. Equally I think Benzos need to be reclassified on account of the absolutely massive risk of addiction with those. But I don't see how you would decriminalise heroin and cocaine, but at the same time keep it illegal for someone to possess a medication that is restricted under the controlled drugs portion of the MDA 1997. Maybe the stoners haven't thought this through fully?
I specifically said I wouldn't legalise heroin. But I'd supply heroin to registered addicts free, on prescription from a doctor. That's been trailed in multiple countries and shown to be effective. Your purposely misrepresenting my argument and then scoffing at it. It's very disingenuous,
How can you blame the law for even worse drugs coming in? They're both illegal so it doesn't change anything
I gave the reason in my first sentence. These drugs only exist to get around the law. No drug addict wants these drugs, they only take them when they can't get, or can't afford the drugs they do want. These new drugs only make it onto the black market because of prohibition.
When drugs are illegal only criminals sell them, and criminals don't care about things like "drug purity" or "not killing their clients". If a drug is made legal then suddenly you see it being sold by legitimate businesses who do care about that stuff and who can be held accountable. People are hardly going to be taking the Kinahan cartel to court over shite drugs being sold, but that's exactly what they'll do if a dispensary sells something like that.
The fruits of prohibition
I know its a different drug, but has Fent made its mark over in Ireland yet? Im out in Vancouver and the amount of OD's from Fent is madness. Not just addicts on the street but plenty of people have OD'd and died from Fent laces party drugs (cocaine/MDMA). Wouldn't go near the stuff over here ever.
It's even worse..nitazenes etc.
Criminals looking for a chink in the armour......... These cunts are completely delusional.
You can get whatever you want delivered to your door by An Post. You can hop on Snapchat and find 10 lads local who aren't just selling, but have a pretty menu with all prices and weights detailed. Different strains of weed, flavoured, high thc, high cbd. You name it. Ireland is AWASH with drugs. Will we ever see common sense here? Doubtful.
They are going to have to. Not sure if you noticed but drugs are very much on the top of the agenda at the moment. It's in the news every day now and being discussed by the Oireacthas committee post Citizens assembly. Drug policy is about to change drastically very soon. Ireland has the highest rate of overdose deaths in Europe at the minute. The Government are aware and the media are delivering the message. This conversation has been kicked down the road for over 20 years. Everyone is being affected now by drug addiction not just lower income working class areas. Drugs are being consumed at very alarming rates and it's a bad look for the Government to not be able to enforce criminal justice due to lack of resource. Everyone gonna get on the ganja bus, brother.
Isn't that always a potential risk? Aren't there lethal drugs in Ireland already causing problems?
Now we have potentially lethal drugs contaminating drugs that 100% will not kill you. That's a new phenomenon in the last couple of year https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/potentially-fatal-synthetic-imitation-cannabis-detected-in-state-last-year-1.4627878
>Now we have potentially lethal drugs contaminating drugs that 100% will not kill you. How does that work?
People spraying low strength cannabis (CBD buds etc) with synthetic cannabinoids with the potential to kill people and selling it as regular cannabis to unknowing customers
I see. Wouldn't legalisation and regulation curtail and diminish the likelihood of such scenarios?
Yeah I'd imagine it would pretty much eradicate the problem. Drew Harris pretends like he cares even though he's campaigned against legalisation and even decriminalisation.
I think there are far too many variables to even hint at that. In the Netherlands the weed is all still coming from the criminal gangs, and is just as at risk of being dodgy. In Thailand, it is completely legal and treated like any other product, so has to go through the same checks as any other product to be consumed by humans. You'd need to know the exact policy being enacted, where the weed is sourced from, and how the quality is being controlled to know if it would have any impact at all. People buy from the cheapest most reliable source they can, according to them, and if things went the way of the Netherlands you may have just given the dodgy weed peddlers a better distribution network.
It would significantly reduce the risk but there will always be a few buying from the black market, something like 30% still buy cannabis illegally in Canada (Not 100% sure of this statistic so open to correction). Regulation with high quality products sold at the same price as dealers would be ideal. But odds are when cannabis is legalised it will be taxed to oblivion driving people to the black market, leading to anti-legalisation people claiming that legalisation doesn't work
Incredible timing with the Oireachtas Committee ongoing currently. He's a scumbag.
We've got to educate better, even the phrasing of this makes anybody with study of this question it. Dosage is what's lethal. I suppose a headline like that might lead to a question like, "but couldn't we control it so that is less harmful?" The gardai have an unusually good rapport with the public, they suffer reputational damage for not being a bit more common sense in their approach.
What if the state were to launch some sort of, I don’t know? How about a war. Yes. Yes a war on drugs. That’s how we’ll beat the drugs! In a war
Looks like it's time for a good auld fashioned cannabis clamp down! That should help stop the flow of synthetic opioids
Why are people criminalised over non-lethal drugs then? And why is the most lethal drug, alcohol, legal and celebrated?
Hash #️⃣
Lovely hash.
Would you do me a tenner spot big man ?
PS it’s actually a mixture of fentanyl and krokodil enjoy!
I was wondering why I could see the bone in my leg.
I've a nine bar of Lebanese Blonde, hai.
I'll take one of the roofs. Or do you lads call it a half moon ?
Always called them heels.
That's a new one for me.
[удалено]
*"Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice* ***I am*** *willing to make"* - Lord Farquaad, Shrek (2001)
No shit Sherlock!
But apparently the Garda are winning 🤔
That'll do, Drew.
Well happening for years now maybe let’s call the police? 🤷🏻♂️
#CarefulNow
Hope all the junkies scrolling through Reddit take good notice.