'Harmless'
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
jamiemartin721  Reading 18 Feb 15 4.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote dannyb1 at 18 Feb 2015 3.53pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Feb 2015 9.40am
Quote Stirlingsays at 17 Feb 2015 11.12pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 17 Feb 2015 10.59pm
Control of the market, control of the supply, and eradication of the criminal element.
You can't eradicate the criminal element....That's unrealistic. Market Control - The production of drugs, recreational of all kind in the UK is controlled through license to produce for market. Under any system of production the capacity to produce is driven by the ability to produce in bulk, at low cost. Under the licence and laws of the production of alcohol the supply of bootleg illegally produced alcohol in the UK is largely non-existent - Simply because production on a sufficient scale to compete with legal production is not financially viable. Supply - Slightly harder to control, however, the capacity for the control of price, makes the possibility of competition non-existent. The price of even common recreational drugs is driven by the illegal market. Cannabis is a remarkably cheap drug to produce, and yet the retail price on a 1/8th is around twenty quid, simply because of the mark up, of around 500% that occurs in the supply model. The simple fact is that the illegal market simply couldn't compete with a legal one (exactly the same way it couldn't with prohibition). Organised crime gangs would simply be priced out of the production and supply, because they can't compete in production, distribution or supply. This applies to all recreational drugs, which when produced legally (for research and medical use) retail to the end supplier at 1/35th of the price of the black market, unadulterated). Simply put organised crime can't operate at that competition level, other than to sell very low quality product. That leaves plenty of room for revenue generation through taxation and profit. Criminal element - Essentially why would you buy from a criminal source, when you can obtain from a legal source for less and at better quality? You wouldn't. That wouldn't end crime, it would however mean that certain very lucrative avenues of crime were unavailable. Ending prohibition didn't end the American Mafia, but it did massively reduce the violence and how that crime impacted general society. Similarly, the same could be said of the UK. The drug market is worth a fortune to organised crime and it generates a huge amount of crime to firstly control it, and then secondly through the cost of drugs (ie of addicts to obtain drugs through shoplifting, burglary, prostution). A legal market could sell the same gram of heroin that costs 80 quid on the street, at profit, for the price of a packet of cigerettes, unadulterated. Meaning that an addict with a two gram a day habit, is having to find 12 quid, rather than 160 quid a day to maintain their habit. In order to obtain that 160 quid through crime, generally you'll need to commit at least 480 worth of crime. Where as finding 12 quid could be as simple as working a part time job, or at worst committing 36 pounds worth of crime.
I'm going on the price my wife pays for hers, she does usually buy an ounce at a time, so maybe she's getting a deal there.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 dannyb1 Chichester 18 Feb 15 4.35pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Feb 2015 4.11pm
Quote dannyb1 at 18 Feb 2015 3.53pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Feb 2015 9.40am
Quote Stirlingsays at 17 Feb 2015 11.12pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 17 Feb 2015 10.59pm
Control of the market, control of the supply, and eradication of the criminal element.
You can't eradicate the criminal element....That's unrealistic. Market Control - The production of drugs, recreational of all kind in the UK is controlled through license to produce for market. Under any system of production the capacity to produce is driven by the ability to produce in bulk, at low cost. Under the licence and laws of the production of alcohol the supply of bootleg illegally produced alcohol in the UK is largely non-existent - Simply because production on a sufficient scale to compete with legal production is not financially viable. Supply - Slightly harder to control, however, the capacity for the control of price, makes the possibility of competition non-existent. The price of even common recreational drugs is driven by the illegal market. Cannabis is a remarkably cheap drug to produce, and yet the retail price on a 1/8th is around twenty quid, simply because of the mark up, of around 500% that occurs in the supply model. The simple fact is that the illegal market simply couldn't compete with a legal one (exactly the same way it couldn't with prohibition). Organised crime gangs would simply be priced out of the production and supply, because they can't compete in production, distribution or supply. This applies to all recreational drugs, which when produced legally (for research and medical use) retail to the end supplier at 1/35th of the price of the black market, unadulterated). Simply put organised crime can't operate at that competition level, other than to sell very low quality product. That leaves plenty of room for revenue generation through taxation and profit. Criminal element - Essentially why would you buy from a criminal source, when you can obtain from a legal source for less and at better quality? You wouldn't. That wouldn't end crime, it would however mean that certain very lucrative avenues of crime were unavailable. Ending prohibition didn't end the American Mafia, but it did massively reduce the violence and how that crime impacted general society. Similarly, the same could be said of the UK. The drug market is worth a fortune to organised crime and it generates a huge amount of crime to firstly control it, and then secondly through the cost of drugs (ie of addicts to obtain drugs through shoplifting, burglary, prostution). A legal market could sell the same gram of heroin that costs 80 quid on the street, at profit, for the price of a packet of cigerettes, unadulterated. Meaning that an addict with a two gram a day habit, is having to find 12 quid, rather than 160 quid a day to maintain their habit. In order to obtain that 160 quid through crime, generally you'll need to commit at least 480 worth of crime. Where as finding 12 quid could be as simple as working a part time job, or at worst committing 36 pounds worth of crime.
I'm going on the price my wife pays for hers, she does usually buy an ounce at a time, so maybe she's getting a deal there. Then I would say you're wife was getting it from good hands rather then street dealers if you catch my drift.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| reborn 18 Feb 15 4.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Having had two stays in Psych wards, I can say that the majority of people there (who could talk), had a weed smoking habit before going insane. Like alcohol, the majority will do it without serious repercussion, but to deny its link to mental illness is stupidity. In some it clearly causes psychosis.
My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| imbored UK 18 Feb 15 5.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote reborn at 18 Feb 2015 4.57pm
Having had two stays in Psych wards, I can say that the majority of people there (who could talk), had a weed smoking habit before going insane. Like alcohol, the majority will do it without serious repercussion, but to deny its link to mental illness is stupidity. In some it clearly causes psychosis.
As others have highlighted the illegality of the drug makes it much more likely that people will indulge in stronger strains and other drugs too. I'd much rather people have a pint, than buy random concoctions from some random guy on a street corner. That's the equivilent of current policy.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Feb 15 5.46pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Feb 2015 9.40am
Market Control - The production of drugs, recreational of all kind in the UK is controlled through license to produce for market. Under any system of production the capacity to produce is driven by the ability to produce in bulk, at low cost. Under the licence and laws of the production of alcohol the supply of bootleg illegally produced alcohol in the UK is largely non-existent - Simply because production on a sufficient scale to compete with legal production is not financially viable. Supply - Slightly harder to control, however, the capacity for the control of price, makes the possibility of competition non-existent. The price of even common recreational drugs is driven by the illegal market. Cannabis is a remarkably cheap drug to produce, and yet the retail price on a 1/8th is around twenty quid, simply because of the mark up, of around 500% that occurs in the supply model. The simple fact is that the illegal market simply couldn't compete with a legal one (exactly the same way it couldn't with prohibition). Organised crime gangs would simply be priced out of the production and supply, because they can't compete in production, distribution or supply. This applies to all recreational drugs, which when produced legally (for research and medical use) retail to the end supplier at 1/35th of the price of the black market, unadulterated). Simply put organised crime can't operate at that competition level, other than to sell very low quality product. That leaves plenty of room for revenue generation through taxation and profit. Criminal element - Essentially why would you buy from a criminal source, when you can obtain from a legal source for less and at better quality? You wouldn't. That wouldn't end crime, it would however mean that certain very lucrative avenues of crime were unavailable. Ending prohibition didn't end the American Mafia, but it did massively reduce the violence and how that crime impacted general society. Similarly, the same could be said of the UK. The drug market is worth a fortune to organised crime and it generates a huge amount of crime to firstly control it, and then secondly through the cost of drugs (ie of addicts to obtain drugs through shoplifting, burglary, prostution). A legal market could sell the same gram of heroin that costs 80 quid on the street, at profit, for the price of a packet of cigerettes, unadulterated. Meaning that an addict with a two gram a day habit, is having to find 12 quid, rather than 160 quid a day to maintain their habit. In order to obtain that 160 quid through crime, generally you'll need to commit at least 480 worth of crime. Where as finding 12 quid could be as simple as working a part time job, or at worst committing 36 pounds worth of crime.
I known plenty of people who buy bootleg fags....It's the same principle. Bootleg booze as well, if they can get hold of it at a cheaper price. They legalised marijuana in Colorado....Hasn't worked. There are plenty of arguments against any kind of legalization....The tacit approval the state would then be giving to drugs use...The increase in drug taking leading to more medical intervention.....I'm not sure I want the state getting involved in rubber stamping more negative life choices over the options we already have. For me hallucinogenic drugs usage for pleasure is attached to failure and I don't want my young son growing up in a society that shrugs its shoulders about it. Anyway I could live with legalization though I don't agree that it is the best overall way to proceed....If the problems with it could be overcome and genuinely led to an improvement I could see that opinion changing. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Feb 2015 5.49pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| imbored UK 18 Feb 15 6.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
A year after marijuana legalisation in Colorado, 'everything's fine' confirm police Quote It's been a year since Colorado became the first state in the US to legalise marijuana, and its impact on health, crime, employment and other factors can now be more empirically measured.
So, did it bring about an apocalypse leaving the streets strewn with out-of-work addicts as some Republicans feared? "We found there hasn't been much of a change of anything," a Denver police officer told CBC this week. "Basically, officers aren't seeing much of a change in how they do police work." Not only has the legalisation of cannabis not come with a rise in crime, it has also created thousands of jobs, as tourists flock to the city's 60+ marijuana outlets. A local newspaper even appointed its first cannabis critic in April. "So the sky isn't falling?" a CBC reporter asked the officer. "The sky isn't falling," he replied. Impaired driving, property crime and violent crime were all dropping in Denver prior to legalisation, and the trend has only continued. Even drug use among young people is down, the report claims.
Colorado's unprecedented move led to Washington, Alaska and Oregon voting for legalisation, and this week a bill was filed to legalise it in New York. Cannabis remains a Class B drug in the UK, carrying a prison sentence for possession of up to five years. For balance.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 18 Feb 15 6.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Awful piece. Give a 70 year old non smoker, two hits of strong, pure dose of weed, stick him in a giant vibrating coffin and expect him not to be distressed.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Feb 15 7.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote imbored at 18 Feb 2015 6.13pm
A year after marijuana legalisation in Colorado, 'everything's fine' confirm police For balance.
Reading between the lines maybe what's happened is that there is still a black market with, I imagine, most of the problems that comes with....but now there is also state revenue. This doesn't deal with the message that the state is putting out about drugs but it is at least interesting. It probably needs more time.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| We are goin up! Coulsdon 18 Feb 15 7.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote EverybodyDannsNow at 18 Feb 2015 6.57pm
Awful piece. Give a 70 year old non smoker, two hits of strong, pure dose of weed, stick him in a giant vibrating coffin and expect him not to be distressed.
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| imbored UK 18 Feb 15 7.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote We are goin up! at 18 Feb 2015 7.32pm
Quote EverybodyDannsNow at 18 Feb 2015 6.57pm
Awful piece. Give a 70 year old non smoker, two hits of strong, pure dose of weed, stick him in a giant vibrating coffin and expect him not to be distressed.
It doesn't surprise me. The anti argument is largely emotion based rather than going by the facts.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| TUX redhill 18 Feb 15 7.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote imbored at 18 Feb 2015 5.16pm
Quote reborn at 18 Feb 2015 4.57pm
Having had two stays in Psych wards, I can say that the majority of people there (who could talk), had a weed smoking habit before going insane. Like alcohol, the majority will do it without serious repercussion, but to deny its link to mental illness is stupidity. In some it clearly causes psychosis.
As others have highlighted the illegality of the drug makes it much more likely that people will indulge in stronger strains and other drugs too. I'd much rather people have a pint, than buy random concoctions from some random guy on a street corner. That's the equivilent of current policy. 'Reborn' has passed on the knowledge he has gained by those he found himself surrounded with at that time. He 'implied' nothing. Just gave facts. Stop twisting and honest post, read what was written and there's a slim chance you may learn something.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| imbored UK 18 Feb 15 8.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote TUX at 18 Feb 2015 7.56pm
Quote imbored at 18 Feb 2015 5.16pm
Quote reborn at 18 Feb 2015 4.57pm
Having had two stays in Psych wards, I can say that the majority of people there (who could talk), had a weed smoking habit before going insane. Like alcohol, the majority will do it without serious repercussion, but to deny its link to mental illness is stupidity. In some it clearly causes psychosis.
As others have highlighted the illegality of the drug makes it much more likely that people will indulge in stronger strains and other drugs too. I'd much rather people have a pint, than buy random concoctions from some random guy on a street corner. That's the equivilent of current policy. 'Reborn' has passed on the knowledge he has gained by those he found himself surrounded with at that time. He 'implied' nothing. Just gave facts. Stop twisting and honest post, read what was written and there's a slim chance you may learn something. We were actually in complete agreement on another thread very recently over the treatment of religious people. Here I disagreed. As is life. It was an honest reading of his comments. A damn sight nicer may I add, than the treatment he receives towards his faith that routinely goes without comment. Back on topic.. If someone says "the majority of people there (who could talk), had a weed smoking habit before going insane." it's hardly an 'out there' idea to ask if they think that this is the case on a wider scale.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.