• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

Should heroin addicts be forced to pay for their own 'treatment'?

Another short-term proposal which would reduce the harm caused by drug dealers is community taxation; effectively a duty on each and every transaction, paid by the drug dealers themselves. All monies would be levied by representatives of the Community Justice Project and channelled into community welfare schemes, with a percentage going towards the wider class struggle.
 
In other words, a vigilante protection racket? Nice. I believe you might have competition there already though.
 
Again, an unnecessarily extreme reaction, though it begs the question; would you rather unaccountable criminal gangs continue to make money and wreck lives with impunity?
 
So long as those wealthy gangs then spend their ill gotten gains back into the community is it really a bad thing? In tough economic times you want money flowing through all sorts of businesses, from real estate, car dealers, electronic stores and even arms dealers. If the government is crying poor, why not let the black market stump up people's businesses instead?
 
The gangsters' money rarely filters back into the community, and certainly does not begin to address the harms caused by the presence of the drugs they push. Instead, the majority of the money is frittered away on sportswear, jewellery and high-powered vehicles. Hardly putting anything back.
 
You have obviously never been entertained by a gangster. Fine Japanese whiskey, Cuban cigars, nice cars have to come from some where.

Are you saying the jewellers, adidas stockist and range rover dealers don't in turn pay tax on their profits?
 
One Thousand Words said:
You have obviously never been entertained by a gangster. Fine Japanese whiskey, Cuban cigars, nice cars have to come from some where.
Click to expand...
The usual crass and common tastes of the wealthy-yet-unrefined? Please, enough already. The petty bourgeois concerns may profit from the dealer's patronage, but the real money is absorbed by global conglomerates, and any taxes paid go to a centralised neoliberal government which cheats and victimises the working classes. Not directly into the community's pockets. Would you defend post office robbers using the same rationale?
 
No because the post office owner takes a hit. Robbery is not a victimless crime.

I paid my dealer $1000, 75% of which is probably pure profit. I'm not upset if her daughter in turn receives an iPad because mummy has a good month slinging Ching. Even my cardiologist will see some benefit from this drug transaction long term.
 
Drug dealing is hardly a victimless crime either, especially when you consider the collateral costs of the crime it inevitably engenders, to say nothing of the scandalous cost of heroin maintenance. Your cardiologist may well profit from your cocaine usage, but thousands of innocents in South America will not.
 
Thousands more on South America will profit though, from the guys selling fertiliser and agricultural equipment to the hardware store selling construction materials. A workforce, no matter how illegal still needs to be fed, and people will make a living from supplying this food. The same people who are exploited in the drug trade would just as easily be exploited by sugar, coffee or chocolate barons if they had no other means to support their families.

Heroin is cheap to produce, there is no reason other than black market economics why it should be expensive.
 
Some people will inevitably profit out of the slave trade. Does this make the plight of the slaves acceptable? I've already proposed a pilot scheme whereby heroin addicts are able to legally purchase (not be provided with) heroin at rates lower than those of the black market, so I agree with your analysis, though I would much prefer to see heroin use eradicated in the long term.
 
A very interesting discussion, sorry but I don't find this trolling, just provoking intelligent debate.

Sitting on the fence both sides of the argument are actually saying the same? IE heroin abuse and the methods of dealing with it are not working?

The proposal of Mr community or whatever he wishes to call himself is sound in logic. IE decriminalise and make available as a controlled and assured quality at a fair market price. Reinvest the money back into community. NHS would see huge reductions due to contaminated supplies or OD due to unknown potentcy

I'm not sure anyone could really argue about such a scheme. Providing that to get supply you have to register and supply has to be controlled carefully IE daily to avoid anyone attempting to sell on to anyone else.

Of course such a theory is generalisation and as such leads to argument.

Also one persons reason for becoming an addict is very different from another. Which Ms community does not appear to understand, easily done as it appears Ms community has not faced the pressure life can sometimes throw at you nor the easy temptation of what can sometimes be the easy and only way to deal with the head noise life can and does create. Or simply Ms community is simply adept and skilled at dealing with life's pressures.

Ms community does appear to think that we are all the same or at least should be, when clearly we are not either through nature or nurture. Communism reduces productivity and reduces unique thought both key factors needed for sustained survival and growth.

Self control is clearly documented in young children and greatly differs. Although agreed, as per the Marshmallow test results, self control can be taught. Perhaps to add to Ms community mandate they should consider education at a very young age about self control. Those taught self control or showing self control at a young age have been proven to face life very differently and succeed way beyond those who show poor self control. Once the brain develops trying to teaching self control becomes a much harder task (as per rehab).

I think from the EADD general view this is perhaps what is trying to be stated. IE some choose as a way of life others as a way to forget life. Self control is difficult to master. Therefore any policy Ms Community wishes to propose needs to consider root causes first being clear on how education is the key to change, before sweeping statements and generalisation can be made.
 
I must emphasise the fact that I have not only experienced pressure and temptation first hand, but I have personally witnessed the heartbreaking descent of friends and loved ones into the mire of drug abuse, so I know the conditions which foster such destructive behaviour. This is part of the reason for the depth of my disgust with a society that allows dealers to prey on the weak with impunity.
 
Community Justice said:
I must emphasise the fact that I have not only experienced pressure and temptation first hand, but I have personally witnessed the heartbreaking descent of friends and loved ones into the mire of drug abuse, so I know the conditions which foster such destructive behaviour. This is part of the reason for the depth of my disgust with a society that allows dealers to prey on the weak with impunity.
Click to expand...

If that is your story then I fully sympathise with the reasons for your posts, unfortunately rushing headlong into a community that not only uses but enjoys and defends drug use is not going to get you or your views anywhere. Its a shame as you actually have made some good points that are unfortunately buried underneath your reactionary and agressive approach to the Bluelight Community. I'm not going to debate you any further but I just want to respectfully point out that this forum is not a suitable place to air any more of your views, and as you come across as an intelligent person I would suggest that you use your energy to make your point elsewhere - unless you enjoy trolling your views are going to fall on deaf ears around here, as despite the fact that many of us are fucked in the head, we all, for better or for worse, love drugs and do not subscribe to anything or anyone who thinks they have the right to tell us what poisons we are allowed to put into our bodies and those that we are not.

All drugs are potentially harmful but anyone with half a brain can see that controlled, legal access to all drugs is much safer than leaving the whole economy in the hands of criminals.

I wish you all the best Community Justice as I would like to believe that you have a genuine agenda against drug use, its associated harms and predatory suplliers, but you wont get anywhere on here with the attitude you have displayed in most of your posts.
 
Thank you for your honesty, and for being more constructive than to simply label me a 'troll'. The reason for my presence on this forum is simply because of the rampant pro-drug agenda, which appears to be encouraging and excusing problematic drug usage patterns, sometimes at the cost of one or more lives. It would be easy for me to take our message to those inclined to agree. It is more of a challenge (and an achievement) to at least question some of the dangerous ingrained sentiment on this forum. Not that I tar all posters with the same permissive brush, you understand; there just seems to be little in the way of actual debate around here.
 
ps..

Thank god Mr Hankey has a temp ban, even if it only gives us a few days respite. I know Im a sad humourless git but his crap goes beyond what I believe must be his sense of humour. 'Random' clart talk is only funny when your actually off it with a group of like minded folk, and is SO 1999. Its the sort of rubbish that mixmag used to publish on there 'mongo hotline' feature and to be frank it gives me a headache just reading it. I know my posts are far from entertaining but has he seriously made over 11,000 posts along those lines? Its quite impressive that so much crap can come out of one brain but since he popped up the other day hes done my sweede completely, something I have never brought myself to say about any other bluelight member
 
I don't think you're gonna persuade anyone to give up drugs given that you're on a drug forum and I suppose it takes a certain degree of drugginess for the most part to spend your time doing that or else a dedication to a cause, but I do find the debate at hand interesting and honestly can't say I think it's trolling, although I agree with Stee that the approach was a bit heavy-handed at first. Can't really argue with questioning stuff, it is making me consider what my own views on the effectiveness of drug treatments are with regard to my own experiences so.
 
Last edited:
steewith2ees said:
ps..

Thank god Mr Hankey has a temp ban, even if it only gives us a few days respite. I know Im a sad humourless git but his crap goes beyond what I believe must be his sense of humour. 'Random' clart talk is only funny when your actually off it with a group of like minded folk, and is SO 1999. Its the sort of rubbish that mixmag used to publish on there 'mongo hotline' feature and to be frank it gives me a headache just reading it. I know my posts are far from entertaining but has he seriously made over 11,000 posts along those lines? Its quite impressive that so much crap can come out of one brain but since he popped up the other day hes done my sweede completely, something I have never brought myself to say about any other bluelight member
Click to expand...
Me too brother. I really dont get his "humour". Posts about minors of a sexual nature have no place on a hr forum though sprout quickly snipped that one. He has changed the tone of EADD in the last few days. I dont like it personally.

Mr Citizen. While you are intelligently debating i think most here find your views or some of your views offensive. I agree that heroin should be supplied to addicts. At a minimal affordable price is alright by me. But forcing people addicted to benzos into dangerous short tapers is in no way harm reduction.

I am sure you enjoy the debate but coming here pushing your views to me is trolling and under your other banned usernames you were quite aggressive. You seem to have toned it down now but your still here to argue. I dont find that is what EADD is about. Others may disagree with me and probably do but thats my opinion.

I dont think anyone here denys that there is harms associated with drugs. I am a registered nurse. I have seen plenty but i also know people who have used drugs for many years and led productive lives, myself included. Not all drug use is harmful. I find psychedelics in particular offer many benefits to the user if used respectfully and in moderation. So to paint all drug use as harmful is a fallacy.

Not all dealers are bad people or involved in organised crime. My LSD connection has been selling LSD for over 30 years and does so because he firmly believes that it is a substance that can change lives for the positive. He doesnt get rich off it, he sells it for very reasonable prices and it is always of the highest quality. He is a good man and a great father and husband. Its too easy to paint people with one brush.

Like Stee i wont be debating you on any of this. I dont really care what you think. I will still use my LSD and mushrooms two or 3 times a year. Same goes for cocaine. Your views wont change my behaviour or make me feel guilty. I wish you well as i can see you believe in what you are preaching but as far as i am concerned you are wasting your breath and energy. Others may choose to engage with you but i dont see that you have much to offer a drug harm reduction forum. Peace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top