Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Drug laws in this country are ridiculous Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mkap)
    lol you didnt make it clear as you added 'more like' stop tryna make it out im dumb :lol:
    I'm not, this has nothing to do with that.

    I was saying your position was simplistic, it's not an attack on your intelligence. There are intelligent people who hold this simplistic position on drugs. It's just that it's not a particularly considered approach

    If you took it as me calling you dumb then I apologise. That was not intended
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    That's very true. I hate to make this about class, but why is it that the English lower-middle class is much nastier than the middle and upper-classes? I say this as someone who is not from the UK originally.

    It seems like those who are just above council estate people on the class scale are often the ones who are most hostile to them, even though maybe their own family was in that situation just a few generations back. Unfortunately this section of society invariably votes against their own economic interests, while the middle and upper-classes in many ways can afford to be much more liberal

    I suppose one way to continue the economic status quo is to keep the working-class, the underclass and the lower-middle class at each others' throats and constantly fighting over their small share of the pie rather than questioning the system in general
    People at the bottom can often be exceptionally kind and warm, people who do well too have a really open selfless attitude, but between that it's like Oswald ****ing Mosley.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kashmir Skirt)
    Killing a person because they sold a few hundred £'s worth of drugs is not at all reasonable. The level of evil involved in ending a human being's life is much more than any of the evil the average street dealer has created or ever will create.


    It's like shooting someone for being late to work, they'll never be late again, but they'll never do anything else again either.
    you just pointed out my point. they are not going to be doing any drug dealing again.
    just like a dangerous murderer i personally would kill them so they can't harm anyone again. if you put them in prison and let them out a few years later believing they've reformed you could be wrong, so eliminate that threat and make things so no more people will be harmed from that murderer ever again. so un-alive the murderer.

    again, true, the level of evil involved is a problem and punishments should be handed out accordingly.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kashmir Skirt)
    Killing a person because they sold a few hundred £'s worth of drugs is not at all reasonable. The level of evil involved in ending a human being's life is much more than any of the evil the average street dealer has created or ever will create.
    Indeed. Peter Hitchens has been hawking this idea that the reason we are "losing" the drug war is that we aren't tough enough, that if we introduced the death penalty and life sentences then we would start to make a dent.

    This position immediately exposes its proponent as a parochial individual who lacks even the most superficial knowledge of the rest of the world.

    In Singapore and China, they have the death penalty for drug offences, even comparatively small amounts like maybe 100 grams of heroin. People are regularly executed for drug offences in those two countries, and yet the drug trade still exists there.

    There is no way you can stamp out a trade that allows you to buy a substance for 50 pence a gram in Afghanistan or Burma and sell it gram-for-gram at a price more than you get for gold. A kilo of heroin is worth more than a kilo of gold, and it can be purchased for about $500 a kilo in producer countries. There's no way that you could ever get rid of a trade that allows that kind of arbitrage value
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mkap)
    lol you didnt make it clear as you added 'more like' stop tryna make it out im dumb :lol:
    Relax mkap. Some issues are simple (1+1=2) some issues are complex (how to defeat religious extremism). Tackling the drug trade falls into the latter catergory and simply locking people away is a simple solution to a very complex issue
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kashmir Skirt)
    People at the bottom can often be exceptionally kind and warm, people who do well too have a really open selfless attitude, but between that it's like Oswald ****ing Mosley.
    Haha this is so true!

    I feel like I've experienced both ends of the British class system; I live in a fairly working-class but up-and-coming neighbourhood in central London. I've been involved in the Labour Party and trade union activities and interacted with many working-class people through that.

    On the other hand, I come from a semi-rural background in my home country (riding, hunting, shooting etc) and I know quite a few aristos here in that vein. I've spent a fair bit of time at the Travellers Club and my ex-boyfriend was the son of an earl.

    I find the top and bottom of English society quite sympathetic and a lot of fun to be around. They're very genuine people, a strong sense of fair play and quite laid back. It's just the people in the middle in this country who seem really uptight, parochial, etc
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    Indeed. Peter Hitchens has been hawking this idea that the reason we are "losing" the drug war is that we aren't tough enough, that if we introduced the death penalty and life sentences then we would start to make a dent.

    This position immediately exposes its proponent as a parochial individual who lacks even the most superficial knowledge of the rest of the world.

    In Singapore and China, they have the death penalty for drug offences, even comparatively small amounts like maybe 100 grams of heroin. People are regularly executed for drug offences in those two countries, and yet the drug trade still exists there.

    There is no way you can stamp out a trade that allows you to buy a substance for 50 pence a gram in Afghanistan or Burma and sell it gram-for-gram at a price more than you get for gold. A kilo of heroin is worth more than a kilo of gold, and it can be purchased for about $500 a kilo in producer countries. There's no way that you could ever get rid of a trade that allows that kind of arbitrage value
    You can take it to extreme levels, if we simply killed every human being in existence, there would be zero crime, but this ignores the capacity for humans to do good and the value of a human life. It's a really miserable way of looking at the world.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    It's also interesting to me that police expend major resources sending officers undercover to buy a few £10 bags of heroin and netting very small-time dealers. If they really wanted to, they could get the big fish. As soon as you find the guy on the very bottom rung, you don't arrest him, you get a warrant for telephone interception and find out who his supplier is. When you've done that, you get a warrant for telephone interception on that supplier and find out who supplies him, and so on up the chain. It seems like a huge waste of resources to focus on nobodies at the bottom of the drug supply chain and then bang them up for years.
    Someone's been watching the wire
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Don't be ridiculous. The lax drug laws in this country ceased to be enforced long ago.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    I suppose one way to continue the economic status quo is to keep the working-class, the underclass and the lower-middle class at each others' throats and constantly fighting over their small share of the pie rather than questioning the system in general
    They are supposed to hit down at those below rather than look upwards.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    ....
    And then they're hit with POCA.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    'As soon as you find the guy on the very bottom rung, you don't arrest him, you get a warrant for telephone interception and find out who his supplier is. When you've done that, you get a warrant for telephone interception on that supplier and find out who supplies him, and so on up the chain.'

    Sounds like a good story for a drug TV show based in Baltimore...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Orange s0da)
    Someone's been watching the wire
    Just posted that, scrolled up to see what other people had been saying and saw your comment XD
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Problems with the current law aside, I don't think there's a great deal of substance in the "legalise it and treat addicts rather than criminalise them" logic that is being used on this thread either.

    The greatest social problems from addiction come from alcoholism. It is legal, widely available and there is no criminal justice recourse against addicts. Would the same status, applied to drugs, really reduce harm? I don't think it would. At any rate, the laws are rarely applied harshly to normal addicts anyway. Too often the consequences of addiction on families and communities, where alcohol is concerned, are not dealt with: the individual does not wish to engage with rehabilitation, and the police cannot intervene where there there are obvious problems.

    In terms of dealing, I agree: we too often conflate low-level dealing with the high-level control of the operation. That said, there's an argument that the two actions are, in principle, the same and it is only opportunity that separates individuals who shift a few grammes of something with those who move hundreds of kilos.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    So you're asking whether I'd prefer the police spend their time pursuing and locking up small-time drug offenders which has a very limited effect on the drug trade, or whether I'd rather they pursue the big-time drug traffickers who are invariably involved in other forms of criminality as well? Do you really need to ask that?

    Of course the first one is easier. That's not really a justification for doing it instead, in fact it just underlines how superficial and futile it is, and how lazy it seems, to focus on that.



    I have no idea what you just said. I mean, I know the words are in English but put together in the order you have them it just seems like gibberish
    I don't think she was talking so much as to you than talking about the attitude of the police system.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    yes
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by mkap)
    well if people dont like the time, then dont do the crime.

    simple.
    what happens when the law is unjust
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.