You were doing okay until the last line. If you have decent reading skills you will know that I agree with the internationally accepted view that alcohol is a drug; it is a controlled, but nonprescription drug (on this country) If you can't accept that simple fact then anything else you have to say is worthless. What you were pointing out was nonsense on the bssis that you put no intelligent context into your daft mutterings. Regarding legislation you are only repeatimg what I had already said.
Yes it will. I wasn't referring to illegality, but the notion that you can test your drugs in nightclubs and they will either day safe or unsafe, which is exactly the model which Leah Betts mum wanted to follow.
Again you finish with a ****ish statement, fully in keeping with your ****ish selective reading skills. I
As someone who has taken quite an obvious stance here I'd be interested on your thoughts on the point I highlighted. As magic truffles were legal at the time were they fine, despite the fact that they, without question, had a bigger effect that anything illegal I ever dabbled in?
They've actually tried that here already, clubs in Preston and Manchester had drug testing facilities in them, though I've no idea how successful it's been. It seems that Columbia, Portugal, Spain, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands all offer free drug testing facilities, though only Vienna, Bogota and Preston/Manchester have they actually tried offering the service inside night clubs, usually they're tested in chemists.
I cant pretend that I've ever done any research on the matter, be it a quick internet search or something more comprehensive. I just remember Leah Betts' mum campaigning for it and she said if they had similar facilities in nightclubs here that they do in the Netherlands then her daughter might be alive today.
I didn't find it funny or clever; just as I found most of his posts as poor and uninformed, which is why I did not refer to them or support them in any way. Show me where I have ever disagreed with either the statistics or the thinking behind them? It's a simple thing to do, show me? Again, bring forth your facts and show me where I have defended either the UK policy on drugs or any mixed thinking on drink and drugs? I know you're a tad thick, but go back and read slowly, then it may dawn on you. Who is, Walter? (Maybe Sterling did, but he was the only one I can recall.) First of all, you tell me what you think my 'obvious' stance is? It should be easy for you, by all accounts.
No. I'm not spamming the thread - I don't even know what that is ffs. I am answering posts that are directed at me or ask me direct questions. What is your problem? Every post I have made is totally relevant to the subject of the thread. Ta. Edit: I grouped the responses because there were a number of them and I have seen it said on here that it is a preferred method.
Suddenly I'm the unintelligible one. I'm not sure that you've said much of any relevance throughout this entire thread. Although that could just be because my eyes glaze over when I start to read your ramblings...
That's because I have answered questions and remarks that are based on things I have neither said or think. You were challenged to disprove that, so go ahead.
In that case, I ask again, should recreational drugs be legalised? And please don't complete your answer with 'end of', as it won't help me to take you seriously.
Ok then, ignore that part - what do you think of what I said about the legal substance that I acquired and ingested legally?
You said that my argument was 'piss poor'. Feel free to elaborate on that any time you like. Or did I miss that one, too?
