Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

The War on Drugs.

I can’t agree with all Sir Richard has to say here but it’s a good start and it is good that such a bearded twat notable businessman has said what everyone else is thinking. Here is my take. I guess I could go into a heck of a lot on drugs but I could also stick to one story. It’s LS6 (Cardigan Rd – so next to the Co-op and Village Video and an otherwise reasonable-looking looking crib. And I mean really because it is a nice gaff with fellow postgrads so I ask my bomb-shell question (the one I always ask) – “Been burgled in the last year?”. And they are good, honest decent people so give me an honest answer. Unfortunately it’s the wrong one which is a shame because they had a nice gaff, nicely located and at a reasonable rent. Guess what they killed it for me with? Some scrote had legged-it up the drain-pipe to steal a bottle of “Wash’n'Go”. The cops had been called and said it’s spot-on for “cooking-up” heroin (the cops had lamentable experience). Well I sort of liked to think at the time I was a Man of the World but clearly not that primed for such epic scumbaggery. I mean scaling a drain to knock a window out to steal shampoo (ignoring the laptops). I mean apart from anything the Co-op was just over the road and surely shop-lifting from that was much easier than cat burglary.

15 Comments

  1. fake says:

    The war on drugs based upon my own experience.

    Put rat poison in your tea = Murder = Investigation.

    Put rat poison in your drugs = Drugs related death = Case closed.

  2. John Galt says:

    Repetition from yesterday’s thread, but what the hell…

    “I’ve tried cannabis in Amsterdam and it left me completely untouched, so for the most part, drugs haven’t stirred my bacon. Equally, my brother served 9-years for drug trafficking and his ‘mate’ the actual drug dealer walked away scot free after letting his wife (of his two children) take a 20-year rap for trafficking, conspiracy, money laundering, yadda, yadda, yadda.

    My brother got what he deserved, because he was a fucking idiot, but I also know full well that drugs is a shitty morality free zone. Ultimately, drugs is a business, a cold and deadly business, made MUCH, MUCH worse by the ineffectual “War on Drugs” conducted by western governments.

    Legalisation and health monitoring would be better than financing criminal exploitation.

    I’m not a big fan of Richard Branson, but he’s said out loud what many of us are thinking, which is that the “War on Drugs” is throwing away a vast amount of time, money and police/military resources on an effectively unwinnable war.”

    Furthermore…

    We’ve tried it this way for more than 40-years and the only winners seem to have been the multi-millionaire drug barons who’ve made a fortune and swanned off to the Costa del Crime. Not all of them were killed or imprisoned.

    Given the number of agencies worldwide that are involved in the “War on Drugs” and the necessary vested interests that brings I cannot see any alternate strategy being taken. Every time the alternative of using either drug referals or state provisioned supplies to users is mentioned, the usual attack dogs are unleashed and the people supporting a more tolerant, enlightened and subjected to a barrage of public assault through the main stream media.

    Until the vested interests (DEA, ATF, etc.) are themselves reformed or unfunded (preferably due to the debt crisis sweeping the west), nothing will change.

  3. RAB says:

    Now now, Sir Richard is a perfectly pleasant bloke. I used to talk to him on the phone occasionally back when his sole business was Virgin Music. He even used one of my favourable reviews of one of his band’s as a full page advertisment once. Funny thing is though, he doesn’t actually know that much about music, unlike say Chris Blackwell of Island fame. Richard’s strength is to hire the best and delegate. It was his A&R Dept that built his business for him.

    Legalise the lot, it is the libertarian way after all. We could get back to the 8% solution days of Sherlock Holmes, when all you had to do was pop down the Chemists to get hold of whatever was your pleasure, or fucked you up.

    People like to get high on whatever, Booze, Pot, Mushrooms et al, we have ever since the Stone age, things aint going to change now, legal or illegal.

    Now in the words of Steppenwolf’s the Pusher, “I’ve smoked a lot of grass and popped a lot of pills, but I’ve never taken nothing that my Spirit, could kill”

    So quite frankly I don’t let the users of white powders over my doorstep. You just can’t trust ‘em. This quote from Lou Reed’s Heroin is spot on…

    It’s my wife, it’s my life…

    Yes indeed, and no-one and nothing is more important than their next fix. Stupid people, but hey I’m not in the legislating against stupidity business either.

  4. Stonyground says:

    In an ideal world all drugs would be legal and accurate information about the likely consequences of using them would be freely available. In the real world tobacco and alchohol are the only drugs that are legal and our government lies about them continuously.

  5. Single Acts of Tyranny says:

    You know prohibtion has failed when……

    virtually everyone knows where they could buy drugs. This simple fact alone seems to me to be the killer to any prohibtion argument.

    Really, ask yourself, if you had to, could you speak to some friends, colleagues, people in the pub/gym/work who could get you drugs? If the answer is yes, then we need to ask ourselves why we continue with something we know has failed?

    Declaration of interest: I am a white, middle class, middle aged bloke living in suburbia who has never so much as smoked a joint (really). If I can get them, the game is up.

  6. MickC says:

    John Galt above has it right-its about the money-just not the drug dealers money.

    And, of course, politicians just love to play the morality card and protect the citizen card, whilst destroying our freedom.

  7. John Galt says:

    @MickC:

    Being a libertarian of the minarchist variety (a.k.a. “Night watchman state” – I’m sure Sam Vimes would be proud), my preference is to cut the state right to the bone and keep on cutting.

    I would legalize all forms of drugs purely on the basis that we then wouldn’t need to try to enforce drug legislation which is stupid, inappropriate and unenforceable. If Boots wants to sell “Boots own brand Cocaine” then let them.

    In fact the more the merrier, because as soon as it becomes a legal retail item (possibly with some low level of additional duty attached to cover the cost of problems) then all of the criminals would fuck off and go and find something else to do as their would no longer be massive profits to be made illegally. They could even go legit, frankly I don’t care.

    The reason we have the violence, theft, murder and mayhem associated with drugs is because for those that corner even a small part of the market, the amount of money that can be made is phenomenal.

    Turn it into a legal (possibly licensed) retail and wholesale business and the costs would come down to about within the same range as going out for a few beers or whatever. If you want to get off your tits on skunk, then that’s up to you.

    Only way to deal with the problem.

  8. Bobo says:

    Legalise it all, but people will still commit crimes to get the money to pay for their next fix. Legalise it all, and people will still screw their lives, and the lives of their kids, and the lives of anybody in their neighbourhood, right up because of it.

    Also, does Branson really want to the state to be giving people their first shot of heroin? Or methamphetamine? Or whatever is the next synthetic stimulant with unknown side-effects to appear on the market?

  9. Mr B says:

    Agree in principle and in theory ;everyone should be responsible for their own choices/decisions but-this industry worldwide covering everything from a bit of puff to crystal and coke and smack is just so Massive . Is it realistic to think it would just -a)give up without a massive extremely violent & deadly fight and b) that most of the associated crime would disappear?

  10. NickM says:

    Bobo,
    Why do so many people think that – like you seem to – that legalization implies the state gets the drug monopoly. No! John Galt is on the money here.

  11. John Galt says:

    One of the main problems is that I believe we are prevented from full legalization of drugs due to being signatories of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and members of various other supranational bodies dealing with drugs.

    In preparation we’d have to repeal or repudiate these treaties and withdraw from the various bodies.

    Not a problem for me (as a minarchist), but the chance of retaliatory action, especially from the United States is quite high.

  12. Single Acts of Tyranny says:

    @ Bobo “Legalise it all, but people will still commit crimes to get the money to pay for their next fix”

    Does this account for all the cigarette related muggings then?

  13. Why do so many people think that – like you seem to – that legalization implies the state gets the drug monopoly. No! John Galt is on the money here.

  14. Sunfish says:

    Does this account for all the cigarette related muggings then?

    Laugh all you want. They do happen. Usually, someone asks a stranger for a cigarette. When he hears “no,” he hits the other guy and takes the smokes anyway.

    I don’t remember this ever happening back when I used to poison myself with $2/pack Camel Lights, but at $5/pack, well, it’s unusual but it happens.

    (I suspect there’s a lesson here about what happens when government drives up a price in order to deter use of a product…naaaahh.)

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: