Tim Worstall

Tell The Government What You Really Think…

Over at the ASI I’ve got a piece which I would be very grateful if people would spread the word about. Point your readers to, paste up in forums, generally get it out and about.

You see, the Government is having a consulting period about drugs. What should in fact be done about recreational drugs and the law? Indeed, they’ve asked you to write in and tell them what you think should be done about the two: or the one, the law about said drugs.

I am, as I think you’ll know, pretty much on the straight legalization ticket: as is the ASI, although perhaps in a slightly more restrained manner. Obviously I’d be ecstatically happy if that were the general tenor of the responses to the Govts. call….legalize the damn things you stupid bansturbators.

However, I’m aware that there are those who have not yet found enlightenment on this matter: but I do urge you as well to tell them what you think.

You know, since our servants have decided to seek our opinion, shouldn’t we actually let them know what it is?

In

13 responses

  1. The Remittance Man Avatar
    The Remittance Man

    I don’t think thier server has enough bandwidth for me to tell them everything I think about them.

    Reply
  2. Anthony North Avatar
    Anthony North

    Perhaps we shouldn’t get a PR exercise mixed up with them actually wanting our opinion.
    Forgive me for being cynical, but when did they ever listen?

    Reply
  3. Ingram Avatar
    Ingram

    The questions were rather leading and left little room for real opinion to be posted. That said, as I am in agreement with your stance Tim, I did as requested and let them know what I think…

    Reply
  4. sanbikinoraion Avatar
    sanbikinoraion

    Cheers for the mention, Tim.

    Reply
  5. sanbikinoraion Avatar
    sanbikinoraion

    (as in, thanks for posting on this, I don’t give a toss whether you “hat tip” me or not)

    Reply
  6. john b Avatar
    john b

    One question where there is significant room to post real opinion is q7 on cannabis reclassification. If respondents were to make the points here (all true) that:
    1) there is no real evidence cannabis is stronger now than in the past
    2) the only real evidence cannabis can cause serious mental health problems is when used by under 18s
    3) based on international and historical experience, reclassification would do nothing to cut use by under-18s and little if anything to cut overall use
    …then the end-point reached might just be more sensible.
    Tim adds: Also causality. That paper on cannabis induced psychosis seems to have missed the fact that those going psychotic tend to self medicate: booze fags and cannabis (as well as other drugs). They did not control for this possibility. So what they might have been measuring was the greater availability of dope to those going nuts: not that dope makes you nuts. Given that overall scizophrenia rates are stable, this seems a more likely explanation, actually.

    Reply
  7. james Avatar
    james

    As someone who has been an occasional (& sometimes not so occasional) user since the hippy sixties – see Tim’s later post my natural feelings are all for legalization.
    However.
    When I smoke, I smoke to get high. That’s why we smoke. Cannabis isn’t like alcohol. There isn’t a quick half on the way home or a glass or two with a meal. There isn’t a social dimension to smoking unless it’s a group of people getting wasted on a shared spliff. Nobody in there right mind wants to be in the company of someone who’s stoned. It’s worse than spending an evening with an alky.
    The problem I see is that we’ve not yet evolved an etiquette for the dopehead. With drink we respond very differently to someone who’s had a pint with a pie than someone who’s necked half a bottle of vodka.
    A while ago I passed a couple of guys sitting on a wall, sharing a spliff & enjoying the sunshine. That’s not uncommon these days. Later I realised they were the fitters who would be re-lining the brakes on my car. I went to another garage.

    Reply
  8. johnnybonk Avatar
    johnnybonk

    ” there is no real evidence cannabis is stronger now than in the past” …
    pants, pants, pants
    … modern skunk is very strong and readily available. Believe what you want, but skunk is stronger than anything available 20 years ago. The leb and double zero and red seal that we used to get was good hash, but the modern skunk is much stronger.

    Reply
  9. zorro Avatar
    zorro

    Johnnybonk, its you who’s talking pants… It may be stronger than what /you personally/ used to smoke but believe me there was some strong shit around in the old days. I was once, about 18 years go, /given/ some thai which was stronger than any skunk I’ve subsequently tried. I was given it because the person who had it found it /too strong/.

    Reply
  10. zorro Avatar
    zorro

    another thought;
    Vodka is a lot stronger than Beer. We just don’t drink it in pints..

    Reply
  11. zorro Avatar
    zorro

    btw thanks for the link Tim, I’ve told ’em what I think (for all the good it will do with our new puritan prime minister.)

    Reply
  12. johnnybonk Avatar
    johnnybonk

    Zorro,
    Yes, one could sometimes encounter mind-blowing gear, but it was rare, though in general the hash was better than it generally is today. However, skunk is mainstream now, I can score it down the road, and it is way stronger than anything I could readily get 20 years ago – thats why I said “readily available” in my original post. As you yourself said “I was once” … such gear was a rare treat not the norm, which it is nowadays.
    Funny that you should mention some exceptional gear of about 18 years ago, I encountered some uncommon weed that claimed to be Thai – real trippy like modern skunk, in about 1988, in London – perhaps it was the same batch – completely off the charts compared to anything that was normally available.

    Reply
  13. Roger Thornhill Avatar
    Roger Thornhill

    Zorro, yes, and barely wine looks like beer but can be 11% proof!
    If drugs were legal they can then be labelled.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to johnnybonkCancel reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading