to be a little shocked at the laissez faire attitude to drugs on here?

[ThatVikRinA22]

at risk of sounding like your mum and pulling a cats bum face

im a bit shocked. Ive seen reference to drugs and recreational drug use on here before, and while i love the diversity of mn, im always quite shocked at what seems to be a majority? view that recreational drugs are just part of life, that its ok because 'professionals' do it too, that its not the same to be seen to use cocaine at the weekend as it is to be a shoplifter or prostitute with an addiction to herioin....

is it just that no one sees the murkier side of drug use?

i suppose i see the darker side because of what i do for a living, but even before that, i would never have been tempted to try. There are the wider issues with production, trafficking, crime, gangs, and the environmental issues in production
just one such story here

my brother was a heroin addict, and i lost my sister to drugs, one way or another, i believe drug use contributed to her death. Seriously, most the crime i deal with is in some way drug related. Two weeks ago i was involved in an attempted murder over cocaine and cannabis supply.

i am not some rabid campaigner, but this is mumsnet - are most of us parents? i find it odd that people can froth about the small stuff, that people get pilloried for some really bizarre stuff on here while threads about drug use get a fairly "meh" response. (yes its a thread inspired by the coke using teachers assistant....)

why is that? genuinely interested to explore why coke use is seen as ok, and wonder what is not ok?

if its ok for the TA to use coke at the weekend, is it ok for them to smoke crack? or use heroin? doctors were mentioned on the last thread....would you undergo an operation knowing your doctor or surgeon had used coke? or smoked cannabis?

if its just part of life, where would you draw the line?
do people not realise what it takes to get that gram of coke at the pub at the weekend?

Please Beanie read this. Chocolate is really bad. Diamonds and gold cause wars. I'm not saying coke is good, just don't close your eyes to the damage other things do.

vicar I first posted at 13.34 agreeing with you. I'm sorry you have had a tough afternoon/ evening arguing your point, with only a handful of defenders. I still think you are right to bring up this topic.

Please don't spend more time and energy on it tonight though.

You are always a very caring, compassionate and rational poster and I look forward to seeing your name on threads

Vicar, not that it means much but you (and the police as a whole) have my respect and gratitude for the work you do in protecting us all.

Please don't let some keyboard warriors undermine the very real work you do to keep us all safe. You are appreciated by the vast vast majority of people.

BeanieStats Beanie you really need to read up on the exploitation in the cocoa bean trade.

The one that has caused the deaths of men, women and children...as well as miscarriage, birth deformities and all manner of awful things.

I personally have called the non-emerg line hundreds of times and the emerg line many times. My arse has been saved by the Police so many times I can't count. I work in addictions, homelessness and SS, fields that aren't known for their love of the Police. However, I say thank you. I do try to thank individual Police officers when I have had exemplary service and I encourage others to do the same.

I still disagree about this grin I hope you feel better soon Vicar

fail.

Raggybaggy I completely agree with you that it is not an exact analogy. It is an analogy for the purposes of pointing out that something that can and does cause death is not in itself bad.

Drugs are very different, I agree with you. But I think the dangers can be managed in exactly the same way medical drugs are for example (because they are the same thing!).

Effects are not unpredictable, and in fact are very predictable (within a range). Individuals do react differently, but this is true of anything, and again is within a range that is predictable.

A lot of the perceived unpredictability is to do with the substances drugs are cut with (because they are not extrinsically monitored).

BeanieStats It does.

And it really would be better to know what a person actually does before calling them a 'keyboard warrior'... one of the lower comments I've seen on this thread.

"You cannot criticise where drugs come from without examining where your clothes come from, where your food comes from, because I promise you you will not like what you find. The people with wealth are trampling all over the people with little, and unfortunately you and I (and almost everyone in a 'western' country falls into the wealth camp)."

Yes, it's true that as a Westerner it's often very hard for me to know whether I'm exploiting people by the things I buy and the system I live in. But I buy fair traded goods wherever I can, particularly chocolate and coffee, because I think that trying to limit my exposure to exploitation is a worthwhile thing to do even if I can't totally eliminate it. I only buy the bare minimum of technology items I need to do my job, for example, because I know about the ethical problems associated with the raw materials used in their production.

I have to eat, and I have to wear clothes (otherwise Vicar's colleagues might arrest me) - so yes I'm complicit in something, somewhere. But you know what? All I have to do not to be complicit in the suffering caused by the drugs trade on top of anything else I'm responsible for is not take drugs. Nobody needs to take drugs. The way people are going on here you would think it's a great personal hardship to not have abundant coke on tap.

I think it's a very odd view to say, well I can't solve all the world's ills so I'm not going to worry about my personal role in compounding them, even though I could easily avoid doing so.

Very true FairPhyllis. I do my best to buy only fair trade produce and I think about the ethics of buying the things that I do. If you read about the destruction and pollution caused by drug production in places like Columbia I really don't know how you can justify it for a short period of 'fun' on a Saturday night.

Nah, sorry FairPhyllis and exoticfruits, you both know full well that not everything you buy is fair trade.

And unless you can 'hand on heart' say that everything you do buy unethically is something you need, and nothing to do with something you just want, then a) I'm going to call you out on it, and b) I'm going to say, lets talk about what needs actually are when human lives are at stake.

"well I can't solve all the world's ills so I'm not going to worry about my personal role in compounding them, even though I could easily avoid doing so"

Absolutely wrong. I would say its much easier to tell other people what they should be giving up to solve the world's ills, and if you're going to do that, you shouldn't be surprised when people point out the preventable blood on your own hands.

Cake is the worst drug :(

What is Cake? Well, it has an active ingredient which is a dangerous psychoactive compound known as dimesmeric andersonphosphate. It stimulates the part of the brain called Shatner's Bassoon. And that's the bit of the brain that deals with time perception. So, a second feels like a month. Well, it almost sounds like fun...unless you're the Prague schoolboy who walked out into the street straight in front of a tram. He thought he'd got a month to cross the street.

It only makes a difference if everyone starts with a small, individual effort.

It is very easy to find out the misery of drug production - sites too numerous to link to.

I agree exoticfruits... the problem is when you stop focusing on your 'small, individual effort', and start deciding what other people should be doing.

And yes, there is misery in drug production. I have no issues with holding my hands up to the blood debt I accrued when I was a user. I just don't kid myself that I'm not still racking up blood debt with the publically endorsed products I still buy. Oil anyone?

But if you are going to say that drug production alone is the problem, and that chocolate, diamonds, and cheap clothes/furniture/household objects are just fine and dandy, then there is a problem.

And if you can admit that actually all of those things cause a huge deal of human misery and death, and that none of them are actually needed by anybody, then you have a point... but the point is that we need to sort out our supply and demand chains (and sources), and not "Drugs are bad!"

Yes yes yes, chocolate production is bad as are clothes made from sweatshops.

The point is, you can buy Fairtrade chocolate and you can buy fairtrade clothes. There is a growing awareness of child slavery and sweatshops and there is a growing trend towards fairtrade products.

You cannot get fairtrade drugs.
And no matter how bad the chocolate industry is; it does not result in rape, murder, child trafficking, etc. Drugs are even responsible for the civil war in Colombia that has cost million of lives and has been running now for 40 years.

This fact along leads to a strong argument to legalise drug production so that people can choose Fair trade drugs.

But will your average druggie give a shit about what is happening in Colombia enough to pay a little extra for their drugs? I doubt it.

If production is legalised, the entire system can come under public scrutiny and legitimate market competition set up.

The problem with drug production is not the end product. Just as child trafficking and slavery to produce cocoa does not mean the cocoa itself is bad.

The problem with drug production is drug production, which I entirely agree should be criticised and changed.

Having said that, (just as an example) I wouldn't have to tap into any terrible supply chain whatsoever if I were legally allowed to grow my own cannabis plants. So would that be alright? Or is it really just about "drugs are bad" even if the supply chain were sorted out (which I am all for taking action on).

And in the nicest possible way, your dismissal of the conditions under which chocolate is produced is simply uninformed.

thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/child-slavery-and-chocolate-all-too-easy-to-find/ This is just scratching the surface, but all the information is out there if human misery in supply chains is a real concern.

Scared - the drug trade is far far bigger that chocolate production and my point is that fairtrade chocolate IS available. So you have a choice. And fairtrade chocolate is a lot more widely available more popular than even 5 years ago.

Even if you legalised drugs, just like chocolate and the sale of mass produced clothes is legal, you will get these problems in the supply chain only bigger, because drug gangs will not relinquish their control and governments are corrupt enough to turn a blind eye.

I'm sorry to say it but do you honestly think that people on drugs will choose the more expensive, legal, fairtrade product over the cheaper stuff they can get on the black market just as easily as they can today? Do you think they are that morally attuned?

Your chocolate blog piece, as shocking as it is, is hardly comparable to a 40 year war in Colombia costing millions of lives is it? It's a moot point anyway as you DO have a choice in which chocolate to buy. Or you can just choose not to stuff your face with the sickly stuff in the first place.

I agree with you THERhubarb that drug production is a bigger problem.

Where we differ is that you seem to think the solution is 'don't buy drugs'.

Again, in the nicest possible way, I believe that position is utterly naieve (especially as we already know that policy isn't working!)

The fact that you think people on drugs wouldn't choose fairtrade only highlights the point that you think all people on drugs are the tragic cases found in the streets and encountered on the wrong end of the legal system.

The hidden (but vocal) group of productive functioning members of society (who also happen to use drugs) certainly would at least consider buying fairtrade, which is the same choice we grant to all consumers.

The point is that the whole choice and ability to actually start attempting to sort out the supply chain is utterly denied, and the entire sorry mess is swept under the carpet.

I have never given a solution Scared. I have not offered an opinion either way.

It is true that I don't think most drug users would buy fairtrade drugs, but that doesn't mean that I think most drug users are the tragic cases found on the streets - that is your projection and it is wrong.

My husband was a prolific drug taker himself.

I think that once you are addicted to something, whether it be chocolate or cigarettes or drugs then your own thoughts are invariably selfish ones and more concerned with where you can get your next hit rather than looking at the wider issues of drug racketeering.

Yes there may be the odd professional coke snorter who has the money and moral sense to buy fairtrade coke but I honestly don't think that fairtrade drugs will become as popular as fairtrade chocolate. They are on two completely different levels.

And I really don't think that it would work either because drug gangs, police and governments would make it very very difficult if not impossible for the people supplying such drugs legally. Drugs money goes a long long way and they would not risk losing that.

"It is true that I don't think most drug users would buy fairtrade drugs, but that doesn't mean that I think most drug users are the tragic cases found on the streets"

I accept this statement, but no it is not a projection, just a misinterpretation based on other running arguments that have been made on this thread (that clearly do make that judgement), and I occasionally forget I am arguing with individuals, not the whole thread.

I also agree with you that addiction is a major problem and should be managed. I do not agree that adequate management is blanket banning the source of the potential addiction.

And I also agree with you that drug gangs would not want to give up their massive profits.... but I believe a major reason drugs are so profitable is less to do with demand as the fact that the supply chain has a legal stranglehold on it, and no legitimate public scrutiny and monitoring, just a blanket: "Well you shouldn't be doing that anyway!"

Sorry to take this off on a tangent, but I'm interested in this idea of managing the health risks associated with illegal drugs in the same way as legal, medicinal drugs. I just don't see how that's possible, since unless you manufacture the drugs yourself (or grow in the case of cannabis), you really don't have any idea what is going into them.

While it is true that illegal drug manufacturers may not cut their drugs with anything highly toxic because they want repeat custom, I think it is probable that they cut it with agents that can cause long-term damage to health. This is an industry that is not regulated or held to account after all.

Finally, even recreational drug use has an effect on health. The amount of coke needed before it starts having an adverse effect on the heart, for example, is surprisingly small, especially when imbibed with alcohol, as it commonly is. Smoking a joint has the same effect on the lungs as smoking 20 normal cigarettes. A recent study showed that just one tablet of ecstacy has a permanent effect on the brain. Many of the legal highs can result in a breakdown of mucous membranes. Ketamine can lead to incontinence.