Safe Speed Forums

There for a good reason though with stats to show it.

What to prevent a bunch of emo kids from ODing on paracetamon because they want someone to give them attention.

If someone wants to commit suicide, making them tour several outlets soon isn't going to stop them, it just makes things a pain in the arse for the rest of us.

(Actually the drug that gives me problems purchasing in sufficient quantities is Sudafed (proper Sudafed I mean, not pointless Phenylephrine), damn that 12 pill restriction. There is more than one person in this house that needs it)

People who are suicidal are usually not thinking rationally, and it is usually a temporary feeling which soon passes.

Your comment is rather ignorant, you might as well say that someone with a broken leg just wants attention, since depression has clear physical causes.

Agreed Zamzara

As we say in the health service: Suicide - A permenant solution to a temporary problem.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Well my understanding of it is that things like ODing on paracetamol dont work that well and for most people just make them very ill. I generally see it put in the same bracket as people who cut their wrists horizontally rather than vertically.

Besides if the same logic were to be used elsewhere, we should ban the sale of rope in lengths longer than 5 foot.

An overdose of paracetamol, even a small overdose, can easily be fatal.
Yes, it'll make you very ill. Due to your liver being danaged. But if your liver is already damaged (alcohol use, liver disease, unknown hep C) it can be fatal very fast.

It was intended to work as a coagulating agent. It got a patent but not a licence as it fail criteria in early trials in 1910s.

It has halucogenic, exciting und dehydrating poperties... but if you want whoopee then this not the drug to get a climax with.





No. It not so simple to say legalise und go to chemist .. you would have to sign for it anyway just as they used to sign the "poison books" when buying rat poisons..


On prescription? I do not think any GP will just prescribe on demand just because the patient wish to use it. He may prescribe if already addicted .. to control und help wean off if legalised. But person still has to get hooked first .. und so they still remain slaves to the organised Mr Big Time Criminals all the same as they do in Switzerland where the drugs are not legal but a Holland-esque tolerance exist.


It just pure "wannabe in the papers again as no one readin' the blog" withdrawal symptoms of "delusions of his own grandeur"






Cannabis.. sigh. It can be used beneficially with some ailments .. like MS. But only the "normal" version und under close supervision like any other treatment..


But enhanced or abused as it ist being because now "perceived as safe" ... we now find more KSI caused by such fuddled drivers und various other nasties. for a beleaguered NHS to cope with.




Nope. Under prescription to treat an illness .. not as some leisure cum pleasure substance und there little fun in living a life as a dope anyway.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

It why your doctor need full patient histories und why you must disclose anything which you think will affect treatment too...

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

One of the problems with the drug debate is that there is a lot of hysterical bullshit flying around, possibly even more than with road safety. Also, as with road safety, too many people (including those who are supposed to know what they're talking about, such as politicians) tend to believe what they're told if they want to hear it, without doing any research themselves to verify what they've heard.

One of the most famous and (in my mind) telling examples is the Brass Eye incident. In one part of their "Drugs" programme, they got a series of gullible celebrities and politicians on the show, told them about a fictional drug called "cake", and got them to say all this sanctimonious crap about how bad the drug was, which they willingly did there and then. They even got them to say "Cake is a made up drug". The best part is that David Amess MP subsequently asked a question (near the bottom) about "cake" in parliament. Very funny, but it irritates me the way that these people and many more like them are obviously far more concerned with furthering their own careers (through appearing "tough on drugs") than they are about the facts. As with road safety, people are dying because of others' selfishness and vested interests. We need to remove the hysteria, self-righteousness and moralising from the drug debate, and work with dispassionate honesty, facts, pragmatism and an aim of harm reduction.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

What I don't understand is how on the issues of speed enforcement and drug enforcement, someone can be very prohibitionist about one, and very libertarian about the other.

And that applies to anyone, not just Brunstrom.

In his case I think it's a cynical assessment of what's easy & lucrative to enforce.

I also heard this news, but what I heard on Radio 1 was RB stating E's
were better than alchol and tobacco, sorry I never heard of aspirin being
quoted, I originally posted a reply referring to RB about Scameras and
it was positive in favour of RB, after hearing this news and reading the
posts since I hearby, PUBLICLY Retract my last post. Where is this guy
getting his facts, all drugs are harmful in the long run whether it be
tobacco or crack, Is he saying he wants ecstacy legal or is he just a
popper himself?!

_________________
Eu quis ajudar, para ajudar destruir o mundo que eu quis ser aquele, para ser essa menina especial

I'm sorry to disagree, but that isn't true at all. To the contrary, many drugs are extremely beneficial, both in the long and short term. For example, some illegal ones are powerful pain killers with fewer side-effects than the legal ones.

But unfortunately, we have allowed politicians to dabble in this. They don't need illegal drugs to get muddled up! Drug policy should be based on real outcomes, not on the opinion of band-wagon hopping politicians. We want policy based on potential harm caused(or benefits accrued, in some cases). After all, who but a weirdo would deny harmless pleasure to themselves and others?

I am inclined to agree. All prohibitive policies and laws should be outcome based and that certainly applies to the motoring laws.

It was touched on earlier, its amazing how Brunstrom can apply such different logic to the two policing issues that he has become infamous for.

Perhaps the distinction is that, with driving offences, you are primarily involving others in your activity. With drugs, you are primarily involving only yourself. If you went around making other people take drugs, that would be more wrong than simply taking them yourself.

Your missing my point.

Outcome based policies!

Brunstrom has taken a leap of faith wrt automated speed enforcement in the belief that it will in some way reduce KSI.

With Drugs he appears to be taking the line that we must look to the facts then devise policy.

I accept that and agree there are major benefits to people who are ill, terminally ill, who take cannabis or extra strong pain killers, personally this is ok for me and with fewer side effects a bonus for the user! Sorry Missed that point!

Drug policies should be based on real outcomes defo, having never done crack and I would say it will mess you up and tobacco will eventually get you but I cannot agree saying E's are better, I heard one story on the news of a girl dying after she took her first E and I never thought about it again! Real story - Real outcome.

Dya Reckon RB has had as little as a bong (Course he has, he came out with this remark)

_________________
Eu quis ajudar, para ajudar destruir o mundo que eu quis ser aquele, para ser essa menina especial

It seems odd to me that dope is banned, yet keeping viscous dogs and poisonous snakes is allowed. It's odd that "chasing the dragon" is deemed illegal, yet climbing sheer rock faces is fine and dandy. Nothing is discouraged about engaging in sado-masochistic sex-acts, or diving though dark, deep, water filled caves, or tattooing and piercing every inch of your body. Yet take a line of coke, and the Daily Mail acts as if an ax killer is on the loose! I think we have to remind people to keep things in proportion.

I'm not quoting this to poke fun at the OP's spelling, it just gives me a wonderful mental image!

No drug ist for leisure or pleasure .. apart from booze which ist fine so long as you know how to quaff intelligently It not make compulsive addictive behaviour so quickly und Richard Madeley in Sexpress .. he talk sense beyond what you think his capability when on telly.. but when he write .. WOW


But if you want a real buzz for your money.. do as Dingo the Austrian labrador did. Down a pound of yeast. You are inebriated quickly und your farts make an ambience of "Schnaps distillery" per the vet who treated the three year old cuddly bundle of doggy fun . who was farting und running out both ends pure fermented booze apparently

You also not able to walk straight und will see quadruple too .. but Dingo was fine afterward und wagging his tail.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

your own comment isn't much better, depression/suicidal thoughts are far from temporary feelings that soon pass.

The counter drug limit though, there's a condescending joke, as if there aren't a million other ways to do yourself in. And especially hypocritcal, given the nhs' standard, and for the most part only treatment for depression sufferers is a cocktail of far harder drugs...!

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction