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?

Re addiction: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders lists 7 criteria, any 3 of which makes a substance addictive.

Even salt has 4 of them. Namely:

• withdrawal syndromes
• development of tolerance
• inability to control level of usage
• difficulty quitting and restricting (even with full knowledge of health hazards).

Is this getting interesting for you yet, MaryZed?

the drugs discussed on this thread were all legal once - drugs law was a post war thing.

It is people like you who make me stay away from these threads.

I'm always amazed by how much pleasure people can take in being just horrible.

So, you consider alcohol to be an "addictive drug", although so many millions use it on a more or less regular basis and none but a few are actually addicted.

And you would like it to be made illegal for everybody on this basis. Do you not see that this is not a rational viewpoint?

Given that planes kill people once in a while, would you like them to be outlawed, too?

Oh so you are running away.

OK then

FFS Cote, is that really necessary?

IMO addiction of any kind, by its very nature, has to be unhealthy. Whether that is: food, sex, drugs (illegal or prescription), cigarettes, alcohol, video games etc. Anything that takes over your life, to the exclusion of other things, cannot be good for you.

BTW although many know alcohol / tobacco can cause a great deal of harm health wise, the government will have to be cautious in its approach to banning these substances, not only because of the tax revenue raised by booze / fags but because the majority of users would be up in arms. That is probably why the government pours money into health schemes that most people ignore and try to ban smoking in all but a handful of venues (own house / own car) because most people would see it as an infringement on their personal liberty. People tend to hate the Nanny State approach. Persuasion is better than coercion.

I have no answers, only questions too.

"Oh so you are running away."

This in particular just comes across as taunting. Not sure if you meant it that way or not. But it sure leaves a bad taste in my mouth anyway.

I agree that addiction is a major problem.

I think possibly part of the problem is that people would really like drugs (in particular) to just disappear. For them to completely just vanish off the face of the earth and for no one to ever use them again.

Part of what I disagree with, is the idea that we can ever realistically achieve that, or that illegality may in fact be making things far worse.

Drugs are illegal now, and we already know the kinds of problems we are having. That people still become addicts, and that they do not have to be from any particular sort of background, nor do there have to be any failings in the parents.

I think we will always have addicts, but I think we can change the types of people who become addicts, and I think we can minimise the fallout when they do.

When I say change the 'types of people who become addicts', I mean change the context in which drugs are available and become used.

1. Make sure that anyone who decides to use drugs knows exactly what the risks actually are, and what they can do to minimise those risks. As I have been saying, the education from the government has been extremely dishonest, young people pick up on that dishonesty, and disregard the whole thing.

2. Make sure that people are not forced to get drugs from entirely unreliable sources (if they are absolutely determined to take them), and that the sources supply them with adequate/accurate information at the same time. This would at least ensure that the material wasn't 'cut' with any manner of toxic substances, and could be the least harmful possible (for example, least powerful strains of cannabis.

3. Make sure that people can talk openly about what they are doing and how it is affecting them, without stigma, or fear of the law. Addiction will be at least have a chance of being spotted a lot sooner.

"that people would really like drugs (in particular) to just disappear"

Not everybody. Especially not the 2,152,000 cannabis users, 813,000 of cocaine users, 517,000 ecstasy users, 319,000 amphetamine users, 159,000 ketamine users, to name a few (estimated 2009 figures).

It would help this debate to acknowledge that only 9% of cannabis users eventually become addicted. This figure is 15% for alcohol, 17% for cocaine, 23% for heroin, and 32% for nicotine. (From a large-scale survey - read about it in Scientific American

I do agree with you that prohibition isn't working and is creating all sorts of secondary problems as happened with alcohol prohibition.

Personally, I would like it all legalised and a minimum age of 30 imposed.

Ah yes, to clarify, this statement...

"that people would really like drugs (in particular) to just disappear"

refers to the position of many of the posters who are very anti-drugs in general, think drugs are bad, should always be banned, nobody should do them, etc.

I do not mean everybody. I'm rather arguing for responsible management of drugs myself.

Yes, BigBroom, that is really necessary.

People who are too sentimental for various personal reasons to have a rational discussion on this subject are trying to restrict opposing viewpoints from posting. Then getting angry (Ffs ) and run off when you point out the flaws in their arguments.

Yes, it's very sad that they have lost loved ones who have become addicted to various substances. I feel sorry for them just as I sympathise with those who live with alcoholics or who have lost loved ones to alcoholism.

However, neither group has the right to come to AIBU and tell us what we can and can't say.

I am talking about the facts with numbers. If they can't take it, they shouldn't be on the thread.

The one draw back I can see to legalisation is faster roadside drug testing...

Driving while high (as drunk) lose your licence.

If I turn up to work drunk, I'd get my ass fired. I'd expect the same for being drugged up.

You sound very angry Cote [baffled]. I didn't tell you what you could and couldn't say (you told me twice I shouldn't be on the thread), I never said alcohol should be made illegal, I haven't been rude to anyone, I have debated my point of view rather than making categorical statements, and I haven't been unpleasant to anyone.

I am going to use Justine's "Your post on this thread makes you sound like an (unpleasant) arse".

And I'm not running away, I'm leaving the thread because I don't come to mumsnet to have arguments with people who think it is ok to be just downright nasty .

You were goading, Cote. Which is not on.

I can't imagine why you think I sound angry. Especially since you are the one who used the angry face in response to my post a few hours ago.

You called me & my posts:

• not interesting
• not useful
• snarky
• dismissive
• rude
• nasty
• unpleasant
• arse

And what have I said on this thread to deserve this tirade?

You are the one attacking me, MaryZ.

OneMoreChap - Roadside drug testing is already in practice in France. In fact, I saw on TV the other day that DUI of drugs has surpassed DUI of alcohol for the first time this year.

I don't think it is particularly laissiz-faire, but more of an understanding of how widespread the problem is.

CoteDAzur,your posts come across as very strong.
Some posters on here have suffered a great deal.
In those circumstances,people often then need to talk to each other a lot more gently.
It would be nice if you could do that as well.

You just called me an "arse", but would like me to be more gentle with you.

Umm... Let me think about that one

I most certainly did not call you an "arse".
I have never called anyone that in my entire life.

I repeat my post of 20.26pm

Please try not to deflect this time.
We can all see what you are doing.

amillionyears
I most certainly did not call you an "arse"

You didn't. I suspect he wasn't talking to you but to

MaryZed
I am going to use Justine's "Your post on this thread makes you sound like an (unpleasant) arse".

eh? I am now more confused.

Are CoteD'AZure and OneMoreChap the same person,or do they know each other?

is CoteD'AZure a man?

Of course CoteDAzur is a man. Penny drops. Couldnt know all that stuff about freemason lodges otherwise!