My neighbours dope habit driving me nuts

Shanefos: I like it, a higher tax on food that is clearly unhealthy. Sounds good. Maybe direct the tax towards the businesses that sell the food (they could either shoulder the extra tax themselves, or increase the cost to the consumer), which would give them an incentive to healthy up their wares a bit more in order not to be elligible for the unhealthy food tax. Healthy alternative fast food would be given a bit of a bonus. Good idea.

Somebody said it on a thread here about speed cameras – the government could never implement a “Stupid Tax” (i.e. a tax on stupid people), so they tax things like cigarettes heavily instead.
I say they implement a junkfood tax for the likes of KFC, McDonald’s, Hungry Jacks, etc., etc. as well!

And did you consider how much tax an average smoker pays just by feeding their habit?

I thinking along your lines of thinking Tap –

what about people that do not eat heathily, people who are overweight, people who do not exercise regularly.
These people seem to be using more heatlh resources as a result of their ‘risks’
I think that they would have to go in the basket too.
And also people who do not have regular stress relief practices.
As stress is a big factor in many illnesses, accidents.
So..
that doesn’t really leave many people. (unfortunatly)

There are plenty of countries where the public health system is just fine. The more socialised countries. More tax money into public health, the better it gets. Im really not too sure why you think universal public health care, being that everyone gets the health care, is unfair. I tell you this though, im pretty sure if you had lung cancer and were a smoker, and were refused public health care, and also refused private because you were too sick, or couldn’t afford the extra premiums, then a whole new world of unfair might open up to you. Because you clearly are a model citizen that doesn’t smoke, or partake in any other activities by choice that potentially increase your chances of getting injured or sick, I ask that instead of just thinking ‘well it wouldn’t happen to me!’, replace ‘you’ with the name of a friend or family member that does do those things. How would you feel if they couldn’t get health care?

Its a bit of a catch 22 isn’t it? That people would have to be able to afford private health care because they can pay for their vice. So if they stopped paying for thier vice they could pay for private health care. However if they did stop paying for their vice they wouldn’t need private health care… The trouble here is one we have mentioned numerous times, people do drugs. People pay for the drugs. People will pay for drugs even if it means they can’t afford health insurance. This is a fact. So the question stands, what about people who can’t (or wont if you prefer) afford private health? What happens to them?

What does whether or not smokers get paid for their breaks have to do with the price of eggs?

Ok so day to day risks are fine. What exactly are they? everything except smoking cigarettes and taking drugs? Is skateboarding fine? football? squash? jogging? driving a performance car? motorbike? All of the above are things that people do, that statistically increase their chances of getting injured, they they don’t have to do. In all fairness people who do these things should be lumped in your category of inelligible for public health care due to lifestyle choices along with smokers and drug takers. What a wonderful world you envision. A real progressive step forward.

I wouldn’t be surprised if these bludgers are on welfare – report them to Centrelink and enjoy the ensuing entertainment at their expense 🙂

Day to day risks are fine, that’s what the public health system is for, but it’s failing the world over, especially in Australia, it’s not a bottomless well, it has limits and we have reached it. And as for if they can afford private health insurance, oh what about the poor people crushed by the inhumane capitalist society etc etc, my response is well if they can afford over $100 / month on various personal choices with clear risks, they can afford $50 / month on private health insurance. So the argument that they can’t afford it is silly. They just choose to spend it on health destroying vices, and pass us the bill for sick days off work, health costs and so on.

Smokers should not be paid for smoking time while the rest of us only go our for lunch or a quick morning tea. Tell me how this is fair?

Notice how there are no anti-discrimination laws in favour of smokers and drug users. There is a good reason for this.

Someone with a gene for cystic fybrosis or astmha, well that’s another story and I gladly pay taxes to support them. *That* is humane.

Back on topic…..

Cracker weekend presents a great opportunity to have some fun with the stoners. Get a Cd of Wagners Die Valkrie, a steel garbage bin and numerous bags of the biggest firecrackers you can find.

Wait until they are well into a weed session, put on the CD, (you will need huge speakers and preferably a sub woofer), and start setting off the firecrackers one by one in the bin. The confined space and the metal of the bin magnifies the noise and causes a nice reverberation of the sound. Watch for the ensuing paranoia. They will think the end is nigh.

It probably won’t solve your problem, but you’ll have some fun.

What about people playing a bit of footy in the oval on a saturday? Do they sign 3rd party insurance? What about someone using a ladder in the backyard to hang flower-pots from a patio roof? They all (presumably) enter their activities with some awareness of the risks.

The fact is, humans like to indulge. Risk tends not to stop them. Last time I checked, society was about humans. Therefore, allowances need to be made for the risky behaviors these human creatures like to indulge in.

I’m assuming there’s an inferred “arrrh, it be drivin’ me nuts” punchline somewhere…

The headline for this article reminds me of a joke:

A pirate walks into a bar. The bartender notices that he’s got a large wooden wheel protruding from his crotch.

“Why is there a wheel in your crotch?” he askes the pirate.
“Arr, I’ve been in a terrible accident,” says the pirate. “Can you call an ambulance?”

Oh and what if these horrible people can’t afford private? Nothing for them?

Yes because all smokers smoke cigarettes with the plan of getting cancer…

oh also, from another perspective, we never hear the end of nurse strikes and ‘bed shortage crisis’ – is it fair that someone takes up a bed for self inflicted harm, several times over an extended period, when say a child with luekemia required that care? Or an elderly patient?

Once health care hits 5 or 10% of GDP or whatever is much higher than now, you watch where debate turns its attention.

Then you will wish that these hooligans were forced to take out private health care and pay a higher premium. Then no one would care what they do 🙂 Perfect freedom.

As far as tobacco smoking and other lifestyle choices which arguably one would enter in to with an awareness of the risks, yes. Riding a bike is an accident. Lung cancer caused by smoking is hardly accidental. Whether we like it or not, with health costs rising steadily as a significant consumer of GDP, people will start asking these questions. Yeah sure technology will always improve, and the costs will continue to increase to get people access to that technology, to patch people up. Is it fair if someone spends 20 years pulling bongs on the back porch or drinking or smoking themselves in to oblivion, that the rest of us foot the bill?

CanberraCafe: What if these people don’t have private health insurance? They get nothing? ‘You rode the bike, you took the risk, don’t come complaining to us now that you have a broken leg.’ Maybe a quick watch of Michael Moore’s ‘Sicko’ (its got the usual stunts in it, but as some very interesting points) might put private health insurance in a new light. Not to jump the gun on the topic of health insurance…

Tobacco is much more of a risk, according to your idea we should not allow tobacco smokers access to public health facilities, and private should be allowed to charge whatever they want.

It’s called third party and indemnity insurance, people who play sports often do pay for it, and you have to declare it for life and health insurance (often).

Absolutely people should be able to do what they want, but their health and life insurance premiums should reflect this so we don’t have to pay the extra. That’s only fair 🙂 Tobacco is more of an issue than pot I know, but even so..

Prohibition is just going too far the other way – people should have *complete* freedom, to fund their own lifestyles and effects of which 🙂

Health insurance in the future will be an interesting topic.

CanberraCafe: Too bad the weed smokers of the world didn’t ask your permission first hey? Whether people should or shouldn’t do it is not really the point here, the fact is they do, and the question is given that fact, and the fact prohibition doesn’t work, then what?

Also with your user pays idea of health, is that consistant across the board? For example should people be allowed to ride motorbikes (a risky thing, can cost a lot medically if a person crashes) only if they first agree to pay for any injuries that may arise themselves first? Same goes for any type of sport, especially contact games and extreme sports? In fact anything that has the possibility of harm and therefore medical expenses?

No, just a drop in GDP and rise in welfare consumption? Still no excuse for it.

Just a quick note to Spideydog, There actually was a study done by the US FDA that backed up Roadrage77’s comment. The only problem was that the US government was not happy with the result and canned the study. The human brain stops developing at roughly 21 for most people and i am not saying that it does not have an effect after that age, but if a person started smoking after 21 and not before then they are less likely to develop issue’s later in life, but this is not true in all cases. Regardless, Marijuana does cause health issues, but not as bad as the problems that alcohol causes. We are possibly crimminilising the wrong one as there have not to my knowledge been any pot fuelled violent brawls.

nah, full riot squad, tape it and sell it to some tabloid magazine. Shock in Canberra. Paintshop a prominent politician in there and you’ll be on the gravy train for life.

I vote going and having a chat with them – nothing agressive and no threats – I’m sure they’re proabably pretty reasonable people – I smoke occasionally myself, and if I were to find out it was upsetting the neighbours, I’d change my ways (at least where and when I smoked).

I think while under the influence of cannabis, I, and most people I know who smoke would be very unlikely to commit any form of crime (apart from the smoking itself). Alcohol and other drugs on the other hand, seem to skew perception in such a way that negative ramifications of your actions are easily overlooked.

I think potentially ruining someone’s life through criminal charges (lessening their chance of obtaining employment, more contact with “true” criminals i.e. violent types) by calling crimestoppers is a bit over the top. Having a friendly chat with your neighbours will likely earn you a great deal of respect and goodwill. They probably don’t even notice the problem they’re causing. Good luck 🙂

At the end of the day, the human brain seeks balance like all other aspects of any organism – anything that puts it out of balance will ultimately have some sort of side effect unless technology was advanced enough to re-balance it all again. But even if that technology was around (which it will be some day) why should *WE* pay for their lifestyle?

I’m all for people doing whatever they want, if they fund their own health care. Smoke, drink, sit around watching TV for 50 hours straight, I don’t care. Just don’t present the rest of society with an invoice for your good time.

There is evidence that weed in high doses is harmful (tar etc in the lungs), much the same as almost anything in too high a dose is harmful.

Mr_shab: Yeah sure, but can they (medicalise normal behaviour and create drugs to treat it)? And how long would it take? Don’t get me wrong im all for the research, but I think that a recreational drug with no side effects is a bit of an impossibility. I truly hope to be proved wrong.

The other question is that if such a drug did exist, what are the chances of people using it all the time and never stopping? For instance an upper that you could be on at work, then just turn off at night sleep well and not be any worse for taking it sounds like the sort of thing everybody would want to do all the time. On the other hand i guess if this was the case, would there actually be a problem with that?

All im saying is that yes, this is an interesting idea, it should be looked into. However until the results of the research is found, the drug be given clearance, the drug mass produced etc, there is another solution that should be seriously looked into. Actual legalisation of drugs that are currently in existance. And anyway these are not mutually exclusive, both avenues can be travelled. Legalisation would also pave the way for new recreational class drugs being developed.

Don’t people get paranoid if they smoke too much? Seems like an awfully expensive habit too, bit like literally putting gold flakes in a pot and inhaling it, may as well be weight -for-weight by price.

Have you considered playing Slayer really loudly in their general direction? It would ruin their buzz man, like really heavy.

Ah and what research have you done to come to that conclusion professor Roadragee77 ??

That is by no means conclusive evidence. So much is still unknown and new evidence is coming to light all the time.

Pot is only phychologically detrimental if smoked heavily whilst the brain is still developing (i.e. before the age of 20 or so). This is an all-too-often overlooked factor by people wanting to sensationalize the issue.

Other than that the only dangerous aspect is a severe lack of motivation to do anything apart from eating nachos and being forced to watch re-runs of “Friends” because the TV remote isn’t within arms reach.

Darylk – there’s the disconnect. This drug isn’t supposed to have any more medical use than a football or an Xbox 360. It’s purely for fun. Whether you have to create new laws or anything is kinda part of the deal of this kind of paradigm shift (and my sincere apologies for using the words “paradigm shift”)

Tap – if big pharma can medicalise normal behaviour and create drugs to treat it, I’m sure they can come up with some decent yippee beans to address an actual problem.

Fnahh – we’ve already got one; it justs lasts a bit too long.

Yeah legalising wouldn’t destroy the black market in drugs completely, but vastly. Im sure there are smokers of illegal tobacco and drinkers of moonshine, but I just don’t know of any.

you can’t forget the hallucinogen… :p

Mr_Shab: That doesn’t sound like a bad idea, a bit of a long term solution though. I also find the idea of a perfect recreational drug a little far fetched, but if someone could come up with one, bring it on!

you can’t forget the hallucinogen… :p

I don’t think there’s anything stopping them from doing the research, but they might have issues in actually bringing things to market.

You need approvals to sell drugs, and usually only after a valid prescription from an auhtorised medical professional. If you were to create a product with no medicinal use other than ‘make you feel good’, you might have some issues getting it over the line.

That said, ‘make you feel good’ sounds like a reasonable medical objective in this day and age with depression and suicide being what they are. And certainly there’s doctors in places like California willing to prescribe marajuana for all sorts of ailments, so who knows? It could work.

Interesting idea, but is there actually anything that *stops* big pharma companies from researching recreationals now?

Oh, and you need a good hallucinogen too.

You’re all suffering from an appalling lack of imagination in the drug legalisation area. There’s a way to end the drug war; and it doesn’t involve legalising anything. It just involves accepting the reality of the market, embracing it and simply outcompeting the existing drugs.

The pharmaceutical industry can create a hell of a lot of very clever therapeutic drugs. Why not turn some of that capacity to the creation of recreational drugs?

For example; provide a legal permit, up for tender, for a suite of designer recreational drugs – say one to chill you out (a la pot/heroin/benzos) and one to make you happy, hopped up and sociable (E’s/speed). Put requirements in the tender brief that said drugs must have short half-lives (no need to be off your face for days at a time), have a predictable dose response (i.e. so it’s easy to tell how “high” you’ll get when you take x doses), be of very low toxicity (no hangovers), have a biochemical saturation point (i.e. taking more won’t cause an overdose, it’ll just make the effects last longer) and make sure it doesn’t tickle the dopamine pathways too much (less addictive than most of the stuff floating around). Provide permits to drug companies to undertake clinical trials and allow the patent system to provide the exclusivity for the manufacturer. Allow the company to advertise the product (unlike prescription medications). Regulate it like a therapeutic agent.

Don’t tell me the drug companies wouldn’t fall over themselves in the rush to create “the perfect drug”. Imagine the profits (hell – I’d take it!). Imagine bars serving the stuff dressed as drinks, knowing if you overindulged a bit, you wouldn’t have a horrid hangover to deal with; or you could pop out for one in your lunch hour, knowing full well that you’d be bright eyed and back at your desk 1 hour later with no impairment to your functions.

Now, I know it sounds a little Soma-esque, but I’m pretty sure something like that would annihilate the competition pretty smartly. Goodbye drug problem.

@tap

Agreed, hadn’t considered the extra revenue that the Govt would get from the sale and distribution of legalised drugs. I hope it would be enough to cover the costs of additional people accessing rehab etc. But then if the Govt taxes too much, there will still be the incentive to go for the illegal stuff. Tobacco is legal, yet Customs finds shipments of illegally imported cigarettes and even raw tobacco leaf. Just to avoid the taxes, duties and levies. So there will always be a black market for drugs even if they are legal, because it _may_ end up being cheaper.

I suppose most Governments try to strike a balance between being progressive (or what they believe to be progressive) and instituting laws designed to protect the people from themselves. It’s all in the perception, isn’t it? 🙂

Most pot heads are pretty chill.
Personally I think if you head over and knock on the door to explain the situation then Im sure they will tone it down….out of certasy or embarrasment but either way problem solved.
If you dont want to discuss it directly perhaps just keep sticking your head over the fence with a bible in hand asking if they would like to hear the good word…lol..that should send them inside.ha ha

Oh and did someone mention crimestoppers…I think thats a bit over the top.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayaGk0TMDc – its from the USA and doesn’t apply completely, but worth a look anyway.

Drug driving is certainly dangerous, and it should be pointed out that it happens right now. But you are right, legalising drugs would not be an easy thing to organise, a lot would have to go into it, one of which is figuring out legal amounts of drugs you can have in your system while operating heavy machinery.

But yeah, you have summed up the anti-legalisation argument quite well. It certainly has its points. This argument can only ever be about the lesser of evils.

I do conceed chances are people will do a bit of experimenting if drugs became legal. This is such an unknown though. What I do consider unlikely is that the amount of people who become hopelessly addicted to drugs, and who have to prostitute themselves or steal to get by would increase that much. I find it hard to imagine that a person who has never been interested enough to try drugs while they were illegal, and who has been living a stable non alcohol addicted life, will all of a sudden completely lose it because of drugs becoming legal.

I think that while its fair to assume there would be an initial jump in drug use, its also fair to assume that the amount of hopeless addicts wouldn’t go up too much. Hopefully the numbers of users would not increase that much at all. I’ve made this point before, but how many people do you know who want to use drugs but don’t because they are illegal? Because I don’t know a single person.

So there may be a slightly increased social cost. Although becoming a society that is progressive and willing to try new things in order to take control of a problem that is currently not being solved, but getting worse could actually be seen as a real social benefit, that would outweight the potential increase in drug addicts.

What there will not be is an increase in monetary costs, as stated above, the tax on legal drugs would be huge, which would more than pay for the increased health care and rehabilitations that might arise. Add on top of that no longer having to throw good money after bad trying to enforce the current laws (so much is spent on drug enforcement), and this is one economically sound idea.

So that is it i spose, the potential of an increase in drug addicts, and the problems for those individuals as well as society that the increase will bring versus the potential to keep the current (and future) drug addicts safe in what they take, taxing drugs to pay for better rehabilitation etc, no longer having to spends billions on trying to stop something that is going to happen anyway. Not to mention finally turning the vast majority of recreational drug users (responsible drug users) into good citizens again, instead of criminals.

Don’t bogart the point my friend…

That is pretty much what I was getting at.

I think before any legalisation of said drugs, there would have to be a reasonably reliable, fast and cheap method of doing roadside testing for such drugs. I don’t know that the current tongue swab tests are accurate enough. I think I remember a relatively high number of false positives being registered with those things. A blood test cleared these people’s names, but the inconvenience of being detained for testing purposes when you’re completely innocent is not good enough.

“Drug driving” would surely be just as dangerous as drunk driving… and if people are going to drive whilst off their heads, there needs to be a way of quantifying just how far off their heads they are, and punishing appropriately. We know that 0.05g of ethanol per 100g of blood is the most a fully licenced driver can legally have. Have legal upper limits been established for blood content of THC or any other drug?

Also, what of the increased social cost of legalising these drugs? If it’s legal, more people will be tempted to give it a go, just to experiment. Potentially higher numbers of people accessing counselling, rehabilitation and detox programmes. These people could potentially then also enter the cycle of long-term unemployment under the Job Network regime if they are unable to hold down a job whilst feeding their habit, being labelled as highly disadvantaged and being shuffled endlessly between mainstream employment placement services and boutique programmes. Potentially more families busted to bits as a result of drugs. Potentially more people, men and women, prostituting themselves to pay for their next hit (which admittedly would be cheaper than if it was illegal, but cheaper prices mean you can buy more of the stuff). Potentially increased numbers of people with STDs, which could mean more money being thrown at Medicare and the PBS to pay for AZT and other anti-viral drugs.

So, not only are we looking at an increased social cost, but also an increased monetary cost to the country as a whole.

End rant… 🙂

Reputable drugs company? Man, tap, you’re not the left-wing hippee I took you for!

Apparently, heroin taken in the right dosage, with no crap in it is not really bad at all. I’ve only heard this though. But it’s true that alot of drugs are worse simply because they’re made in backyards.

Oh and spideydog I used to agree that all drugs would have to be legalised for this idea to be effective, but now im thinking that just the legalisation of weed, speed, ecstasy, probably herion, and probably cocaine and then mushrooms and acid would be enough to basically put a stop to illegal drug use. Afterall would you prefer speed made by a reputable drugs company, or some backyard crap meth made by some random biker? I would choose the legal, safe stuff, I think most people would.

This is a hard issue. Both sides have valid points.

But we as a country need to reach the mature decision that as true as it may be, the whole ‘just say no’ thing to drugs isn’t working. Its true to say that people just shouldn’t take drugs, the reasons are obvious, the potential health problems, the potential money problems, the potential to become addicted and the miriad of troubles that come once a person is addicted to anything, but especially an illegal substance. However its just as true to say that they shouldn’t, but they do. People do use drugs, a lot (the majorty?) use drugs with very little in the way of serious side effects. It seems that the major health and societal issues that can arise from drug use often don’t. If they did often happen, then almost everyone would know at least one, and probably a lot more people who have died, or lost their mind, or become career criminals because of their drug use. I imagine that if this was the case, and a person could honestly say ‘out of the four people i know who have taken drugs before, one is dead and one is insane.’ they might not think trying drugs is a such a good idea. But regardless of all that, people do use drugs, and if the laws so far have basically stopped no one from trying drugs, then why will they in the future? What im saying is that drugs are not %100 bad, they can be a lot of fun, and they can serve practical purposes as well, they make boring work a lot more berable for one thing, who would really have a problem if a shelf stacker was stoned? Doctors, other professionals and students use of uppers to help through long hours of work is well documented. And this is while drugs are illegal.

Drug use is seen as cool by a lot of people. Whereas alcohol use is seen as cool only by underages, and people who are only recently of drinking age. The connection here is that not being allowed to do something gives it mystery, romance, rebeliousness, which is so attractive to so many. If drugs were legal a lot of this mystery and romance would be gone. For the record im not saying that drugs or alcohol should be made available to underages.

The vast majority of people who drink alcohol responsibly are a good bit of evidence that societty would not fall over if drugs were legal, it is resonable to assume that just as people have a relaxing drink at night, but do not get totally drunk at work everyday, people will have a relaxing joint or whatever at night, but might not be stoned all day. Of course along with alcohol, people will over use drugs of they were legalised, much like they do right now.

I am interested to know what new problems would be created by legalising drugs that aren’t already around?

It seems to me that legalisation is the way to go, as a lesser of two evils. Hell prohibition was tried, it failed, and was repealed. If drugs were legalised, society did fall over, then drugs could just be illegalised again. At this point, considering the total failure of stopping people taking drugs through the law, trying something new, legalisation is the lesser of the two evils. Plus with all the extra cash floating around in the governments pockets expensive rehabilitation ideas could be funded.

Decriminalising certain drugs will not “eliminate a great deal” unwarranted angst. The drugs price won’t change all that much and the majority of users that do burglaries to finance the “habit” aren’t doing it just for 1 drug. For your idea to be somewhat plausible, you would have to leaglise ALL drugs and then have a government “agency” manufacture the drugs to control the price.

I’m not sure how you reached those conclusions. The price of producing the drugs mentioned so far is a *very* small fraction of the “street” price. The profit margin is very very high, which combined with the demand, is why it is such an attractive business proposition for bikie gangs and other organised crime.

If, hypothetically, they were legalised, production would be controlled by licenses to private companies (analogous to beer/spirits manufacturers) and regulated by the FDA for content/quality standard. Free market competition would keep the price lower than anything the government could maintain, even if they were taxed at similar percentages to alcohol and cigarettes.

As an example of how cheap production can be, consider this: in the UK, MDMA pills have a street price of about 1-5 pounds, so i’m told, which is after the manufacturer and a few levels of distributors take their cut.

astrojax said :

People stealing, burglaries etc to get funds to enable them to support that habit is just a personal problem is it.

this isn’t a fault of the drug – it is the natural market forces at play while the drug is illicit. a great deal of unwarranted angst could be eliminated by decriminalising a number of commonly used drugs, destigmatising addiction and allowing straighforward access…

Decriminalising certain drugs will not “eliminate a great deal” unwarranted angst. The drugs price won’t change all that much and the majority of users that do burglaries to finance the “habit” aren’t doing it just for 1 drug. For your idea to be somewhat plausible, you would have to leaglise ALL drugs and then have a government “agency” manufacture the drugs to control the price.

Do you think the government would change the price of drugs that much….look at alcohol and cigarettes….it’s a huge money spinner for governments. Legalised drugs would be no different. (crimes are committed to finance cigarettes and alcohol as well you know, just not to the same extent)

The problem is far bigger than users commitiing burglaries to finance the habit…..it is the associated health issues, the associated behaviour and mental health issues etc etc.

A responsible government will never “legalise” drugs for the reasons I have stated above and the stigma of unleashing drugs on the community as a whole. We need to have more effective means of 1. stopping people getting on drugs in the first place and 2. More effective means of getting them off drugs.

I do see your points, however do not think that “legaisation” is the answer. I have seen what drug use does, on most levels (which goes beyond financing the habit) Giving people more access to drugs without fear of “prosecution” will in my opinion create more problems than it would solve.

What do we have to do to get em off drugs….I don’t know. Maybe put them in a “compulsory” facility to get them off the drugs then ship them accorss the country for an extended period (get them away from the peer group and environment of drug use) get them woring on a farm or something to teach some work skills, get some self esteem, self worth, doing things active and away from drug culture. Hopefully that time away and learning life skills would be enough to give them the motivation and the “real life evidence” that there is life beyond drugs to stop them going back to it……

By no means a golden magic “answer”. Just an idea. ??

Well said astrojax.

People stealing, burglaries etc to get funds to enable them to support that habit is just a personal problem is it.

this isn’t a fault of the drug – it is the natural market forces at play while the drug is illicit. a great deal of unwarranted angst could be eliminated by decriminalising a number of commonly used drugs, destigmatising addiction and allowing straighforward access…

grumpyoldman said:

Grumpyoldman said :

Get hold of a bit of dope, mull it up with some dry cowshit and put it in their letter box with a nice note saying, “thanks for your past hospitality, just returning the favour” and sit outback and wait for the results.

Oh that is so classic!!! Awesome. I love it. OP, please try this before you scare them with cop pamphlets.

Keh ??

Imaginative replies? Perhaps i should spend an hour in your back yard and then try and come up with my reply!

They do get women Duke, have you heard of “stoner women”

My experience is a very good friend of mine had parents that smoked dope, like people smoke cigarettes……very often. They did it in front of him and his siblings. They somewhat discourged it’s use to their kids, but they didn’t really enforce it (how could you really anyway when you do they did it themselves FREQUENTLY)

His father has since passed away from health issues related to smoking and my good friend (whom I haven’t had contsct with for some time now) is a full time stoney with no job or life and has followed the exact footsteps as his parents.

This, in my opinion is VERY sad. He was a great bloke growing up, but was heavily influenced by his environment. Unfortunately his life choices put him down the same path of his stoner parents. His life has effectively been flushed down the drain.

Hopefully some time down the track he may see his life for what it is and decide to change.

CanberraResident – though it sounds very mushy I agree with your High On Life philosophy.

A person really only needs three things in life to be happy – a decent job to feed, clothe and house you – hobbies to entertain, make life worth living – the love of a good woman/man with whom to share your life with.

Most of the long term dope smokers I know are couch potatoes who struggle to work, only hobbies are drinking beer and smoking cones and none of them can get a woman because they’re stoner losers! Just sitting around waiting to die!

Though I will say this for my neighbours – they are a couple, now own an expensive house and appear to be solvent – but from my experience this is not the norm for big choofers.

Yeah, no harm in “only” popping a few million brain cells, sending yourself paranoid and driving your neighbours nuts. No harm at all. You’re no doubt a drug user and your kids are likely to be diagnosed with “ADHD” coz the mother – that’d hypothetically be you – is too out of it to discipline them.

Marijuana does more harm than good. It’s not “only” pot smoking you ill-informed germ. Eh.

DO the words ‘suck my balls you crusty bogan fcktard’ mean anything to you? If not let me explain. You are stupid. Immensly stupid. To rectify this I suggest you go to the nearest gunshop buy yourself a peice and forcibly remove yourself from the genepool. WEe will all be better off.

Cut supply of all potato chips and two minute noodles at your local supermarket.

After a while the Stoners will be forced to move to greener pastures.

DMD and SD, I’ve been following your discussion above carefully over the last couple of days, and while you both have valid points, and this subject could easily be dissected into a million pieces, but the simple fact of the matter is, DRUGS FIRK UP THE INDIVIDUAL.

Why do people choose to place foreign substances into their bodies?

You know, my sister had a relationship with a guy who had been a marijuana addict since the age of 13. He was 30 at the time the relationship started. Over their time together, he developed PARANOID PSYCHOSIS (he thought she was a spy), he saw helicopters over his house (there were none), he threw himself infront of cars, and the list goes on. To this day, he still thinks the Government is after him for God knows what. He NEVER used other drugs. This was marijuana at it’s “best”.

So, good luck to all you marijuana users out there.

Oh, and I don’t smoke, don’t drink, don’t gamble, don’t harvest, cultivate, traffick, sell, use or buy drugs, but I’m as high as a kite every day.

They call it H.I.L.

High On Life. More people should try it.

Maybe, but it SHOULD happen, goddammit.

I don’t ever see that happening m8. I cannot see any government regulating and unleashing “drugs” on it’s population.

If what was put in them was controlled and regulated, that wouldn’t be a problem.

A big problem, is that these “drugs” are made in back yard labs – which aren’t the nice labratories you see on tv. They don’t have the stringent controls that commercial companies come under and can put “anything” in the mix.

Lots of people have died not just from accidental overdoes because they have been made stronger in this batch, but also from “other” additives in the mix.

It is not just the drug content itself that is harmful, it is also the strength and the “added” extras that go into the mix.

This may sound like a cliche, but taking hard drugs is playing russian roulette with your life.

And maybe with speed not having all the crap it’s cut with on the black market, it might mean it’ll give you a better high anyway.

DMD: Yes I think they are. Same as what spirits are to wine or beer, it takes different amounts, but they get you to the same place in the end. With that in mind I suspect that if ice were not legalised, there would still be a black market for it. Well, actually I don’t really know, if there is such a huge difference between speed and ice, and people are choosing ice because its so much better, and not because its just more available at the moment, then it follows that a person might still choose to buy illegal ice instead of legal speed. On the other hand if the high off ice isn’t really that different from speed, and the difference is in the ease of making it or whatever, then it follows that legal speed would wipe illegal ice off the map.

On the other hand, I can see how I could be wrong, a legal speed where a person would know exactly whats in it does have a lot of pros over illegal ice, even if ice is twice as good. Fair point.

Tap, with crack cocaine and ice, I’m not exactly sure about the science behind them, but aren’t they both just different versions of cocaine and speed respectively, designed to give a stronger high? If that’s so and if drugs were legal, then would they be able to pass any government regulations about the make of the drug? Considering how the gov. tries to control alcohol and cigarettes?

The idea that all drugs should be legalised except ice seems a little flawed. If you have decided that ice is just too dangerous and should be illegal, then why cant a person say weed should be illegal because its just too dangerous and be just as justified? Its just opinion where the line should be drawn. Ice is too dangerous but crack cocaine isn’t? Nah. Its all or nothing here.

The main idea behind legalising all drugs is that people take them anyway, so make them legal so at least they are more safe than what they are presently. Other fringe benefits include basically destroying organised crimes income (there still would be a black market, but how many people buy moonshine or chop chop? Not that many), making an mint on tax which could help pay for all sorts of rehabilitation clinics etc.

The possible risks are that the whole population could get high and stay that way if drugs were legalised. If the government legalises them people may think the government is condoning them. To this I have a question (god forbid): Do you know who has not taken drugs, and the only reason they have not taken drugs is because they are illegal? I don’t. I know many people who havn’t taken them because they are worried about their health and because they are worried they will freak out during the high, but never a person who is aching to try drugs but hasn’t because they are illegal. With this in mind I say that the increase in drug use would most probably be fairly marginal in real terms. The biggest increase would probably come from people who already take drugs, but do not admit it. The second conern about legalisation, about people thinking the government would condon drug taking, I say that cigarettes are legal, do you think the government wants us to smoke? They certainly make life fairly difficult for smokers, especially during the winter, if they wanted us to smoke why the bans in bars etc. They certainly don’t say no to the tax dollars, but why should they? They need money to pay for all the cancer treatments afterall. Legalised drugs would not be condoned by the government, they would still do everything in their power to warn people away from it, which in all reality is all they can do.

Yeah, Ice is one of those drugs, with my stance on the legalization of drugs, I’m still not sure about. I’ve had speed before, so I can understand how a better blast of that would be attractive. But I wouldn’t want to be off my head on that stuff for days straight, nor would I want to lose the senses that keep me from being a wild animal.

I’m speaking with very little knowledge of the actual background of this drug, but I think Ice could be more the produce of drugs being illegal, with manufacturers at free reign to do anything to get users hooked and bring in the money. Can anybody elaborate on this or correct me?

Unfortunately I have had to deal wih Ice users as well. I have seen some users in full flight with Ice and they are HIGHLY aggrssive, feel no pain, irrational and even some I have witnessed the closest thing to a wild animal I have ever witnessed a human being to be. I will never forget the look in the eyes of some that I have seen. These are really bad because they will lash out at whatever and who ever stands in thier way, even family and the ones they love. It is strange seeing and having to deal with them and they will persist with that behaviour for a couple of hours or so and then all of the sudden, like a switch goes off, they are normal. They remember everything they did and are highly apologetic.

Some of these people I have never met before and have thought, what a absolutely horrible person, (to put it nicely) but when they come off – that switch goes off, they are exceptionally nice and apologetic, a completely differet person to who they were 5 minutes before.

Very sad indeed.

I hear what you’re saying too.

As far as I know, the connection between pot and schizophrenia is that pot acts a trigger for a pre-existing condition. I’ve known and still know people with this condition and when the illness is at full bore, it’s very scary. At this point, I should mention that I’m not sure at all about Ice, with a friend of my family’s son now locked up for a very scary physical assault under the influence of it, which I won’t elaborate on.

It’s not an easy issue. To say that responsibility for using the drug rests solely upon the user is a little narrow, all things considered. However, it’s important to consider whether we, as a society, should be regulating every personal choice of every individual, or whether we should simply set rules for interaction and divide resources to ensure we can co-exist peacefully.

With the latter, it would probably be wiser to accept the use of drugs as something that will inevitably occur, as we already know so many people use them (the statistics of pot use alone is pretty high in this country, and even then, it’s not very reliable. Those who don’t want to fess up to it and have never been caught with it won’t be counted). If we accept that, then the best we can really do is to educate and inform, as well as providing reliable mental health and rehab services.

We have the highest burglary and car thefts per capita in the world (mind you, those statistics are an indication of how many the police know about, which usually reflects positively insurance and effectiveness of police more than it does actual occurance – although we still rank higher than a lot of wealthier nations in Europe etc). Considering many of these crimes would be linked to drug use and the high cost of drugs on the black market, I think our country would benefit more from looking at alternate laws regarding drugs.

I do hear what you are saying though.

More and more studies are showing a link between the smoking of cannabis and devoloping scizophrenia (sorry for spelling – on a ps3 typing this with no spell check) It is a horrible disease – imagine having to live with hearing and/or seeing things that don’t exist. I have had to deal with families that have a member suffer from this and have actually attacked them because they thought that they were alien invaders, mythical creatures, god etc. Lets tell those families to see if we can live with it. (if that is the context you meant in “live with it”)

If there is a fix for this/these problems, I’m all ears. Yes there is no easy answer. But with the jury still out on the full effect and implications of smoking dope, I don’t think that condoning it as a “soft drug” is the answer.

Sorry, first bit should have read ‘Yes, prohibition proved…’

Spideydog, you have an interesting point. However, prohibition proved that wiping alcohol off the face of the planet will never work. It claims a solid place in many cultures (barring, among other, many middle-eastern ones, however), the consumers are of all ages above (and under) 18, not to mention, being ‘responsibly’ drunk is a hell of a lot of fun.

Before you start however, I have had exposure to the darker side of alcohol. Many times.

With drugs, especially pot, their consumer range is smaller, but still substantial enough to fund an industry worth billions. That industry will always exist, regardless of where the law stands in regards to it. The problem with this industry being illegal is that it can funnel money into the hands of those who commit worse crimes, such as smuggling sex slaves, robberies and killings.

We can either keep trying to deny and ban something that exists, or we can look at it and see if it’s possible to live with it…

Considering the cost to the community and families that alcohol and it’s related problems are the direct cause of…. yeah, probably. Considering how much violence, property damage, health problems etc and the list to go on forever are attributed to alcohol related issues. Yes mankind probably would be far better off if we had never invented the consumption of alcohol.

I have no quarms in saying that if drugs and alcohol were wiped off the earth, 1/2 to 3/4 of crime problems would be gone in an instant….and thats being generous.

I love a good drop of alcyhol from beer to a good scotch, but lets face it if the world never knew of drugs or alcohol, there would be significant less problems, socially than what we have now.

In saying that, alcohol is here to stay, they tried banning it once which failed pretty dismally and it is and has been apart of human culture since for …well forever, so it is just something we just accept.

Just becasue as a society we allow one thing, deosn’t mean we should open the flood gates and say ” well lets allow everything else that is bad, cause we allow some other stuff”

So alcohol should be banned?

I am very well aware of it and deal with it’s negative side…..often.
It’s alot like alcohol. Alot of people can handle it ok, but a significant amount of people can’t and it’s not confined to one particular section of the community.

It’s not just a few that spoil the rest. Theres a whole more than just a few my friend, that I can guarantee.

Sure, some people use pot too much and it affects everybody else. Have you ever considered how many people use pot and don’t start doing that? There’s a fair few. In my years of frequent smoking (only occasionally now), the only times I did break the law (apart from the actual pot itself), it was usually petty delinquent sh-t under the influence of alcohol.

So many people smoke pot at all levels of society, yet it’s only a very few who’s actions affect the rest of the community and you’ll generally find them to be at a certain socio-economic level with certain issues affecting their lives.

As for stealing to get funds, I doubt that frequently happens with pot. With harder drugs, like heroin or ice, the price and purity is controlled by the black market.

So drug use, including “pot” is just a personal issue is it DMD ..??

So I suppose drug induced psychosis and paranoid dillusions is confined to thier personal home is it ? People stealing, burglaries etc to get funds to enable them to support that habit is just a personal problem is it. (and thats just a couple of examples)

Narrow minded tunnel vision approach eh. Drug use including cannabis is a society problem, not a “personal” problem, their drug use affects the community in lots of far reaching ways particularly when it’s harbitual/excessive abuse.

It’s normally the “law” that has to deal with drug users/abusers when they break the law to fund the habit or when the drugs cause mental health issues.

Get hold of a bit of dope, mull it up with some dry cowshit and put it in their letter box with a nice note saying, “thanks for your past hospitality, just returning the favour” and sit outback and wait for the results.

You’re an idiot missjack, sorry. Pot does do harm, but in this case, it’s only to themselves (apart from the smell, which can be rectified). Alcohol, nicotine, painkillers, caffeine arguments aside, what people do to their own bodies should be their problem, not the law’s. The law has much more serious crimes to deal with.

um the wind is blowing in HIS direction, so that won’t help..

depends where he goes to fart… 😉

Absent Diane said :

Crimestoppers. great idea genius – waste resources, time and tax payers money on busting a couple of people who are only smoking pot..

Yeah, no harm in “only” popping a few million brain cells, sending yourself paranoid and driving your neighbours nuts. No harm at all. You’re no doubt a drug user and your kids are likely to be diagnosed with “ADHD” coz the mother – that’d hypothetically be you – is too out of it to discipline them.

Marijuana does more harm than good. It’s not “only” pot smoking you ill-informed germ. Eh.

um the wind is blowing in HIS direction, so that won’t help..

I think setting dope bludgers on them will fix the problem. No dope smoker likes a dope bludger.

Stick a sign up at derro central across the road from Canberra Centre announcing cheap or free pot, or just dress up like a derro, let a few other derros know, and your problem will be fixed!

acquire a large rottweiler who hates dope and ‘accidentally’ damage the fence so fluffy can get through.

or fart in their general direction, these english pig-dog types…

A long shot, but worth it:

If you’re tech savvy, see if they’ve got a wireless access point. Stoners go for “cool internet stuffs”, so this is a possibility.

With luck, they won’t have figured out how to secure their wireless access point. At this point, either print out a nice anonymous note on their printer, or send them messages from God. Either should have the desired effect.

Or set their homepage to this thread.

Better yet, sit in a white van outside and look at them through binoculars.

Drop a note and say they may want to know that people are talking about them – make them paranoid!

I agree with those who say have a chat with them. Start with a ‘hi, how’s it going’ and a nice little chit-chat if you can get some out of them then just say, “Look, mate, I don’t mind what you’re doing, but I was wondering if you could do it in the garage or something. The smell is getting a bit much and I’ve got kids around. Cheers.” That may not be the best wording, but just be polite. Most good stoners will react well to that.

I think you should just go for the dropping a little note in their letter box. Explain that you don’t really have a problem with what they are doing but you can smell their smoke and suggest that they might want to be a bit careful because the other neighbours might not be as open mined about the topic as you and you are a little embarrassed when it happens and you have family over.

There is a large chance that they don’t even realise you can smell it. Kind of like when smokers don’t realise they smell like smoke when they come back in to the office.

I think if you phrase it like that nobody is going to get angry because it would not seem like you are “out to get them”.

Then if that doesn’t help go on to harsher measures like calling in a complaint or some thing.

woah you got me there. you are so clever 😉

there are far worse crimes that deserve far more attention than a bit of pot smoking. I understand the guys issue and to be honest if I i was in the same situation i would be inclined to write a polite letter asking them to be a bit more careful/considerate. however my point stands pot is not the worst crime and obviously there is school of thought that it shouldnt be a crime at all.

SAnta – that’s was I was thinking! and various other deviant things. hehe

I think VANDAM has a good point!

Absent Diane,

Would you prefer Police waste resources on stopping idiots at the Kangaroo Cull?

You are clearly one of those people that no one can please. I’m sure if you had pot smoking neighbours, you’d want something done about it.

Can’t help thinking your actually the stoned neighbour in question!

If it were me I’d ring crimestoppers every day for a month, noting the date/time of the phone call and the matters discussed. The cops likely won’t care.

Then I’d write a letter to the appropriate minister (Corbell?) suggesting that his department must condone illegal substance use, given that you have called crimestoppers every day for a month, aqnd nothing happened. Include a copy of the log you made ringing crimestoppers.

If a fluffy reply comes back, forward the entire thing to the Canberra Times.

Can someone put the results on RiotAct in a couple of months please?

Loud prayer chanting and drumming early of a saturday and sunday morning.

Followed by a nice round of Dolly Parton nice and loud.

AndyM,

Invite your noisy neighbors to an open house party at the dope smokers address.

As for the dope smokers, See if you can get a cutout of a Police officer like the one they had to stop shoplifters years ago (like what was at the back of Impact records), and place it at you back sliding door, so it is always looking at them. It would make me a bit paranoid to always see that.

nah, post something on the Internet too (facebook) – then a few rounds of party crashers will dampen their enthusiasm.

andym said :

How would you deal with noisy neighbours who insist on partying every Friday and Saturday night. I dont mind the party itself, but when you cant hear the TV inside your own home…..

Ideally? With genetically engineered ants that have a penchant for human flesh.

Realistically? Noise abatement order of some description. Drown them in paperwork, then they won’t have TIME to party.

take to their power box with a hammer Andy.

Some really good ideas here. I need to tap into your talents.

How would you deal with noisy neighbours who insist on partying every Friday and Saturday night. I dont mind the party itself, but when you cant hear the TV inside your own home…..

Post a message on bulletin boards saying that cheap (even free) dope is available at that address. They will be *hounded* by dope bludgers and be forceed to leave. It’s a dope smokers worst nightmare.

Couldn’t bring myself to post anything as self-indulgently boring as that Ant #15.

Hell, I may as well start a thread “where can I buy coffee in Civic?”

Ask for some every time you smell it, and never have any in return. They’ll recognise you for the leech you are, and hide it from you.

End result, no more smells wafting over the fence.

Some great suggestions, thanks all. Hamilton, if I lived in a rented student share house I would totally take your idea on board, but I own this house and live with family and your idea sound like too much effort to waste on these people.

Having my ‘cop’ mates over for a bbq is more do-able as is the AFP drug info in the mailbox idea.

I didn’t want to do the chat over the fence thing because if worse comes to worse and I do feel like calling the police, the neighbours are going to know it’s me.

My aim is to minimize the smoke (hey, they can smoke late at night when we’re in bed or smoke in the bathroom with the ceiling fan on!) without provoking a Today Tonight style neighbourhood feud.

I also have to say that Hamilton’s solution is ingenious (and that is not being my usual sarcastic self).

Brilliant!

Well, seriously, print out Dr Evil’s AFP thing about how illegal all drugs are, highlight the bits about it being illegal to have any cannabis, maybe even add your own note that the stink of their smoking is affecting neighbours and suggest they take it indoors and avoid (robocop) Trouble (/robocop).
Put it in letterbox.

I guess it’s nice to be all open and “talk to them” but let’s face it, people who are up to antisocial activities aren’t likely to be the kinds of people whose door you want to knock on with complaints. As someone else put it, Hagrid might answer the door. And once they know it’s you who doesn’t like it, they’ll know who to come after if anything happens.

Hamilton!!!!! OMG – legendary!

Crime stoppers – and mention you have suspicions about quite a lot of dealing/growing going on. The PooLice might actually attend the scene and have a little chit chat with them.

If you go and have a chat with them first, and then call the cops – they’ll know it was you in particular rather than another one of the close by houses – then buckle down to some neighbourly feud. Make sure you have the video camera out – could be some very amusing footage of stoners getting revenge. Something like out of Home Alone!

Seriously though, while I am also not a prude about others smoking weed, there is a line to be drawn if the situation is never-ending and your kid(s)are exposed to it, and I can imagine it is less than desirable having guests over when it’s Woodstock next door.

random firecrackers
throw frozen turd
attack them with wasps
cover their side of the fence in foil
install mirrors
attack them with an orange gun/ water hose barrage

Ozhair said :

So far NoAddedMSG and Hamilton get my gong for the best suggestions 🙂

Absolutely, thanks for the entertainment !

Get the kids to yell out loudly “mum – what’s that really funny smell in the backyard???”

Forget crimestoppers. I rang them about organised Heroin sales once and they couldn’t have cared less. They practically hung up on me.

easy…

Play Dark-Side of the moon backwards for 3 days solid.

Introduce them to lsd/heroin/other class A goddies….no semll / more crime – up to you 🙂

rgds
m

(2 post nutbag) Hold a party at your place, and ask everyone to come dressed as policepersons. Prize for most authentic/believable. Another prize for people who bring red and blue strobing lights.

Barking Toad said:

barking toad said :

Another enthralling thread for RA browsers.

Since the topics you listed got lots of replies, this suggests that many people don’t agree with you. So, rather than standing in the room complaining about what’s happening in the room, why don’t you go set up a forum that only allows topics you’re interested in?

Maybe you should make a list of proper topics vs ones you disapprove of, and let us comment on that.

So far NoAddedMSG and Hamilton get my gong for the best suggestions 🙂

Introduce yourself and make mention that a few of your mates in the AFP were over for a bbq recently and mentioned the smoke wafting over your yard….

Print this and drop a copy in their letterbox

http://www.afp.gov.au/act/drugs_alcohol/drugs_and_the_law.html

might be enough to give them the hint, especially if they are doing any serious growing…..

Duke,

What are you complaining about – You are obviously a glass half empty kind of guy. I see this as a huge opportunity to have hours of fun with these guys, and you can include your friends as well. A couple of suggestions below:

* Rent the movie Super Troopers and watch the scene where the cops mess with the Stoners heads when they pull them over for speeding (this will give you inspiration)
* Knock on their door and introduce yourself as their new neighbor who has just moved in, ask them if they can turn their stereo down (make sure the stereo is not on when you do this)
* wait 10 minutes and then go back over in completely different clothes and introduce yourself as their new neighbor who has just moved in (act as though you have never met them before), ask them if they can turn their stereo down (make sure the stereo is not on when you do this)
* Wait another 10 minutes and this time get one of your female friends to knock on the door and explain that she had met them 10 minutes ago and ask again if they could turn down their stereo.

This is just one thing that took 30 seconds to think up. With a bit of time, some creativity, and some inspiration from the movie Super Troopers you could turn this so called “issue” into hours of fun for the whole family.

Enjoy!!

Another enthralling thread for RA browsers.

Right up there with –

– “where can I go for breakfast?”
– “how do I find an electrician?”
– “how do I find a GP?”
– “how do I find a dentist?”
– “how do I find a school?”
– “does anyone know what went bump in the night?”
– “a dog dumped on my lawn, who can I tell?”
– “I saw a policeman in Civic, does anyone know what happened?”
– “Hi, I’m Troy McClure, you may remember me from…”

Shouldn’t some of you kiddies be inundated with Kev07 tasks? Or be busy leaking cabinet documents?

Bring back Crazy Chester!

Call that John Howard hotline thing, the one they set up for the old people. I hear it gets quite a priority in terms of actioning requests.

Special G said :

Crimestoppers.

Yep. I’m sure they’ll get their best detective on the case.

Install a really huge fan in the backyard which blows the smell right back at them. Construct a giant ring around it with glyphics on in. When they ask what you are doing, tell them you are building a Stargate.

Crimestoppers. great idea genius – waste resources, time and tax payers money on busting a couple of people who are only smoking pot..

Crimestoppers.

Maybe they have copious amounts of hydro inside and if you make a little phone call you can have new neighbours?

Seriously, though, I’d go talk to them…maybe over the fence if you’re concerned about agro, heh.

Seems to me like you might have to suck it up and go and meet them. Who knows how they’ll react (some pot-heads are a bit agro while others show barely any signs of life) but if you stay calm and non-accusatory while expressing your concerns about the kids, maybe they’ll be accommodating. If nothing else, at least you’ve made them aware of the impact on their new neighbours.

You could suggest they cure their pot with something that smells nicer.. maybe there is a chemical they can put in it that will smell nicer but also get them off chops a little more as well.