ajdown
Posting in this thread
Oh, that would be ... Stupid, irrational, anti-social legislation
I assume you would be either for drugs, and/or someone that partakes in them regularly?
Early morning arrests/warnings in Coldharbour Lane
- Thread starter ovaltina
- Start date
I assume you would be either for drugs, and/or someone that partakes in them regularly?
Earlier...
ajdown said:
Several kinds of equality are the law. Do you consider yourself compelled to obey that, too?
E2A:
ajdown said:
This, too is most definitely illegal. The post itself is arguably an offence of incitement and/or under anti-terror legislation.
No picking and choosing laws, eh?
Jonti
what the dormouse said
The law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practice
The law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practice. It's nasty and cheap to lose sight of this fact and join in the public demonisation of Brixton's herb sellers and their customers -- wherever those customers come from.
It's no secret that many coppers enjoy a bit of puff; and that anyway policing the demon drink and drinkers is far more hazardous to the cops involved than managing the (largely manufactured problem) of people who want only to enjoy a harmless herb.
So of course I'm opposed to attempts to uphold this immoral and unworkable law. Not only is it stupid and immoral in itself, but it encourages stupid and immoral attitudes.
Attempts to defend the present legislative and enforcement systems can only promote hypocrisy, cynicism and moral corruption. We've enough of those kind of anti-human attitudes from the likes of ajdown already.
The law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practice. It's nasty and cheap to lose sight of this fact and join in the public demonisation of Brixton's herb sellers and their customers -- wherever those customers come from.
It's no secret that many coppers enjoy a bit of puff; and that anyway policing the demon drink and drinkers is far more hazardous to the cops involved than managing the (largely manufactured problem) of people who want only to enjoy a harmless herb.
So of course I'm opposed to attempts to uphold this immoral and unworkable law. Not only is it stupid and immoral in itself, but it encourages stupid and immoral attitudes.
Attempts to defend the present legislative and enforcement systems can only promote hypocrisy, cynicism and moral corruption. We've enough of those kind of anti-human attitudes from the likes of ajdown already.
ajdown
Posting in this thread
"Attempts to defend the present legislative and enforcement systems can only promote hypocrisy, cynicism and moral corruption. We've enough of those kind of anti-human attitudes from the likes of ajdown already. "
You'll have to translate to english, because I haven't got the faintest clue what you are talking about.
You'll have to translate to english, because I haven't got the faintest clue what you are talking about.
ajdown
Posting in this thread
Have fun then.
I'm just not sure how it can be 'immoral' to use the law that has been put in place for good reasons to... enforce a moral standard?
If there was more emphasis on morals in society rather than 'do my own thing, fuck you' then we wouldn't have all these problems, drug usage being one of them.
I can't figure out what taking something to either change your perception, make you act silly, or just totally lose touch with reality, has as an appeal. It doesn't solve anything in the end, and in many cases only exacerbates the very issues people were trying to get away from in the first place.
I'm just not sure how it can be 'immoral' to use the law that has been put in place for good reasons to... enforce a moral standard?
If there was more emphasis on morals in society rather than 'do my own thing, fuck you' then we wouldn't have all these problems, drug usage being one of them.
I can't figure out what taking something to either change your perception, make you act silly, or just totally lose touch with reality, has as an appeal. It doesn't solve anything in the end, and in many cases only exacerbates the very issues people were trying to get away from in the first place.
There's an argument in favour of decriminalisation and allowing Amsterdam-style cafes.
But having dealers and scammers on the streets of a downtrodden town centre surrounded by estates, where families and single parents are trying against the odds to bring their kids up away from crime, is less than ideal.
You may think everything's fine with weed and there's an unjust international conspiracy against it, and you're probably right, but you can't seriously think street dealers are a good thing for Brixton.
George & Bill
semiotically superfluous
'partakes of'.
No victim, no crime.
Why do you feel you have the right to dictate what I can or cannot ingest?
Woof
Well, there's your decrim' argument.
The street dealers are there because of prohibition, not despite it.
Woof
editor
hiraethified
Like alcohol and tobacco, yes?
Although I'd agree that street dealers and the chaotic scenes that accompany them aren't the most savoury things to grow up around, I wouldn't suggest that they're much of a temptation or a good advertisement for a life of crime to kids. Hardly high rolling glamour and besides, most kids around here would be more than connected enough to find something better to indulge in should they feel the need.
As Jessie's pointed out, it's prohibition which leads tends to lead to street dealing and not so surreptitious whistling action.
editor
hiraethified
A lot of kids start early, running/cycling the drugs to their elder, street dealing brothers. They get lots of cash for doing fuck all and all the protection they could wish for, so they grow up well versed in the drug trade and loving the easy money.
It's not good.
I appreciate that, but it's the kids already well exposed to drugs that tend to fall into that life, rather than children from stable family homes who happen to stumble into crime through encounters with street dealers iyknwim.
Sadly I'm well aware of kids getting sucked into street dealing. You get to watch it happen again and again around here unfortunately.
Sadly I'm well aware of kids getting sucked into street dealing. You get to watch it happen again and again around here unfortunately.
Missez
Britisher Abroad
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you against all drugs including tabacco and alcohol or are you only against drugs that might be difficult to tax?
I am pretty sure that morals have nothing to do with the law against drugs, which are arbitrary at best...and quite frankly I am not sure if 'morals' are something you can (or would want to) legislate for anyway.
But even kids who don't go into dealing are still exposed to a degree of lawlessness and, i dunno how to express it, just shit, that they wouldn't be if the dealers/scammers were not here.
Probably like a fair percentage of people on this board, I don't have kids, and I can turn down a street dealer with a simple shake of the head. They're not a big problem for me. If, however, I were a parent, I think it would piss me off to have to live in a community where they are an everyday sight, along with the daft twats who come down here to be ripped off every day.
As someone on the thread said, this makes a good argument for decrim/ or controlled distribution from cafes. Personally I'd be in favour of legal distribution, but it aint gonna happen for the forseeable future, if at all. in the meantime, I haven't got a problem with the police doing what they can to get the dealers out of Brixton.
hendo
Fish finger sandwiches
I sympathise completely. But in fairness the situation in the High Street is a lot better than it's been for a while. The other reason I'd move (if I was in your situation) is the schools. But that's a whole other thread.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
I think the concerns about streetlife selling puff are ludicrously overblown. Do people really think those guys present attractive role models? Get serious, puhleeze!! Tarannau has put it succinctly and clearly; the "won't someone think of the children" argument simply does not fly.
Young teens get involved in the illegal drug trade because family and friends (mainly family, I'd say) are involved. It's not fun, it's not glamourous and it's not attractive -- not to most kids growing up in the area. The only folks who see it as remotely glamourous are relatively well-off off types who think it's somehow "edgy" and therefore trendy.
It's not. And kids growing up in the area can see that perfectly well for themselves.
Young teens get involved in the illegal drug trade because family and friends (mainly family, I'd say) are involved. It's not fun, it's not glamourous and it's not attractive -- not to most kids growing up in the area. The only folks who see it as remotely glamourous are relatively well-off off types who think it's somehow "edgy" and therefore trendy.
It's not. And kids growing up in the area can see that perfectly well for themselves.
Sorry but that is not the case at all and I say this as someone who has worked with and lived with some of the most difficult children who have been excluded from school.
3 years ago, I had a neighbour who moved into the flat next door to me.
He could not have been a day over 18.
He had a lexus 4 by 4, was covered in bling and was regularly visited by much younger kids in school uniform who thought he was "da business" after school as he was at home most often during the day.
One of our neighbours regularly bought some of his "merchandise" and told me that the kid made easily about 45k to 60k a year.
I doubt that most people here earn that much.
The kids who go to visit him will want to earn that kind of money and will start off on the street as drug dealers hoping to graduate to that level in the seniority chain.
Those most susceptible will be the ones who like the "rebellious" aura of being on the street and not working behind a till at Sainsbury's for £6 an hour, being given orders by "da man".
For children who are not used to boundaries and structure, who rather than being properly disciplined are given reflexology massages, working behind a bar, standing behind a till or even sitting behind a desk for 8 hours speaking to angry customers seems a lot harder than hanging out on the street for the equivalent amount of money. So it is attractive to many children.
In fact the only deterrent from that lifestyle is that being constantly chased away by police and irritated residents can be tiresome.
editor
hiraethified
Nah. That's not what I've seen on my estate. There's kids of 12 or whatever that suddenly are earning a bomb, are feared by their peers because they're protected and they can buy all the latest XBox consumerist shit - just for cycling around and doing drop offs. And it's as exciting as fuck to them, as it would have been to me at that age.
Are you trying to tell me that a paper round compares?
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
I find it hard to believe this (have you read the Freakanomics chapter 'Why most drug dealers live with their mother'? - it has pretty good evidence - albeit from the US - that it's only those towards the top of the chain that make real money).
However I'm not disputing the principle point of your post.
ohmyliver
poppin' like a cork
Well, they have sniffer dogs outside Liverpool Street station every Friday these days...
Well, ok, for at least the last 2 weeks running.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
No, but you seem to be trying to put words in my mouth. I find that every bit as nasty and cheap as the Daily Mail-ish demonisation of the herb and the people who trade it and use it.
Regardless of this kind of silly misrepresentation, the point remains that none of these things you claim to know about the trade would be going down in the absence of prohibition (given a sensibly regulated market, of course).
editor
hiraethified
I live here and I know what I see, thanks. I make no other claim. Why are you so shirty today?
