Hard News: People Take Drugs
228 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 10 Newer→ Last
-
Sacha, in reply to
broadband is hardly a quagmire yet apparently our captains of industry need relief from regulation for a decade
As if to ruin my example, Joyce backs down on that plan in favour of a PPP risk-share arrangement suggested by the Maori Party. Still means taxpayers indemnify Telecom et al if the Commerce Commission sees a need to regulate prices lower than those contracted at the outset. Socialise those losses..
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
For example while I in theory have no problem with tinny houses, I can tell you it was very unpleasant for us when one set up next door to us.
Our experience was more in the "annoying" category, but yeah. Advice for young people who've just visited a tinny house:
1. Don't bloody skin up in the car outside the house.
2. Don't roar off and do a doughnut at the end of the cul de sac before departing.
The tinny house was, inevitably, busted.
The guy in the street who was making homebake heroin had a much better grip on being a reasonable neighbour. But he's dead now.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
You should write a soap: "Life, Death and the Chev" or, maybe "What's the Point?"
-
Andre Alessi, in reply to
Allowing a commercialised distribution of known problematic substances increases the overall negative outcomes because businesses have a habit of promoting their products with a view to expanding their use i.e. more use of problematic substances = more problems.
Not necessarily. I mean, I understand where you're coming from, and I agree in certain specific scenarios, but as a sweeping statement that's not correct. Assuming "legalization" means that businesses become free to exploit the sale of substances without consequence for their use strikes me as an overly pessimistic view of how legalization would work, to be honest.
As a general rule, the problems arising from drug use come in two forms: limited education on the part of the user (so consumers use drugs in ways that are harmful, when there are other options which minimise that harm) and the quality and nature of the drugs themselves (such as E cut with toxic substances, or the fact that some substances are physiologically addictive.) You can reduce the problems caused by the first relatively easily, and you can definitely make a dent in the magnitude of the second in an environment where these substances are legal and regulated, regardless of what pressures the commercial aspects of legalization put on producers and distributors.
I, for one, think it'd be a great thing to be able to be covered by the Consumer Guarantees Act when buying drugs. I think the only way complete legalization would work would be for the entire chain of production and distribution to be legalized and regulated. That's obviously a much more sweeping change than just legalizing consumption, but I honestly believe it's necessary (and call me an optimist, but I also think it's inevitable.)
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
You should write a soap: “Life, Death and the Chev” or, maybe “What’s the Point?”
But I'm too middle-class.
-
bmk, in reply to
Yeah, sounds similar to our experience. And you are right 'annoying' is probably better than unpleasant. But having cars parked up outside your house, with loud music blaring then tyres screeching as they leave while you trying to get a baby to sleep isn't very pleasant.
Yes, people who run a tinny house should have as a golden rule to all buyers 'respect the neighbourhood'. Go to house quietly, buy your drugs, leave the neighbourhood quietly. Also don't throw your fastfood rubbish all over the footpath.
-
3410,
As if to ruin my example, Joyce backs down on that plan in favour of a PPP risk-share arrangement suggested by the Maori Party. Still means taxpayers indemnify Telecom et al if the Commerce Commission sees a need to regulate prices lower than those contracted at the outset. Socialise those losses..
Awesome. </sarc>
-
3410,
But I'm too middle-class.
That could be the protagonist's catchphrase; sort of a "What you talkin' about, Willis?" for the millennium.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
As if to ruin my example, Joyce backs down on that plan in favour of a PPP risk-share arrangement suggested by the Maori Party.
Hmmm, maybe we can get the Māori Party to realise that the RoNS are no good either...
-
nzlemming, in reply to
But I’m too middle-class.
And Simon is not? bwahahaha!
-
Sacha, in reply to
maybe we can get the Māori Party to realise that the RoNS are no good either
The equivalent would be every transport sector org (other than the trucking one) also complaining publicly that the Minister has lost the plot.
-
Andre Alessi, in reply to
Yes, people who run a tinny house should have as a golden rule to all buyers ‘respect the neighbourhood’. Go to house quietly, buy your drugs, leave the neighbourhood quietly. Also don’t throw your fastfood rubbish all over the footpath.
It’s funny though. I lived in a flat in Grey Lynn for a year or two where one of the flatmates sold weed (that her father supplied to her-__long__ story there.) She was extremely discreet, and only sold to people she had met face to face in other contexts, so we wouldn’t just have randoms showing up at all hours of the day and night. The landlord lived next door, and would probably have been quite upset had he known, but she made an effort to avoid the kinds of customers that would have made it obvious-mostly guys in their late teens and early twenties.
(Contrast the generally admirable behaviour of these drug consumers with the absolute rudness I experienced when we made the mistake of advertising a garage sale in the Herald one day-people turned up on our verandah two hours before the advertised start at 8:30 am and chatted loudly the entire time until we opened the doors, then acted like they were doing us a favour by invading our home to haggle over a $5 lampshade.)
I wonder if the problem with tinny houses isn’t really the drug-selling, but the people who tend to use tinny houses to buy drugs? As in, the problem behaviours aren’t so much that there’s drug purchasing going on, but that young larrikins are just obnoxious wherever they are, especially in numbers.
-
Jeremy Andrew, in reply to
Honey, will you pop next door and ask the boys at the tinny house to keep it down, the baby's asleep.
Oh no, dear. I couldn't. I'm too middle-class!
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I wonder if the problem with tinny houses isn’t really the drug-selling, but the people who tend to use tinny houses to buy drugs? As in, the problem behaviours aren’t so much that there’s drug purchasing going on, but that young larrikins are just obnoxious wherever they are, especially in numbers.
You may have a point. I once talked to a person who pretty much only dealt to people over 30 -- and preferably over 40 -- who were subjectively adjudged not to be idiots. They didn't need the grief of selling to anyone else.
-
bmk, in reply to
Yeah I think that's totally the point. It wasn't the drug selling that annoyed us but the calibre of the people frequenting the neighbourhood. Had they had a better class of customers I would have had no problem.
But considering there always will be 'annoying' customers ideally there would be places for them to purchase drugs in non-residential areas.
-
mildgreens, in reply to
If excise tax works to reduce harms of tobacco and alcohol, what reasoning can be used to defend the case that it would not work for cannabis, bzp or jwh18, all identified as having lower harms than either licit drug used in isolation or together?
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
Other drugs can mesh with a fulltime employment/studying lifestyle but being up all night 3 nights in a row is not consonant with turning up for work on a Monday morning. You won't change this dynamic by making P more accessible, cheaper and decrimalised.
I don't disagree. However, there is some evidence that suggests amphetamine use is sometimes driven by working in an industry which requires long and unsocial hours.
For example, use of amphetamines is supposed to be rife throughout the US meatpacking industry, where the work is physically very difficult, and the wages are insanely low. As a consequence, many workers work back-toback shifts for long stretches of time in order to make ends meet.
See, for example: 'fast food nation', or 'methland'
It's not a coincidence that many of the meatpacking jobs in the US are filled by illegal hispanics, and that the meth trade is also largely controlled by mexican cartels. 'Big Meat' tacitly and sometimes openly encourages this in order to increase profits.
I have also heard that 'Yar Bar' (mis)use in the Thai fishing industry is widespread for the same reasons.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
Major "WTF?!" moment for me: a junkie repeatedly sticking an empty needle into his vein, compulsively, because he hadn't been able to get on for more than a day.
We should probably start legislating against the placebo effect.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
We should probably start legislating against the placebo effect.
Sometimes, you look at a blog comment and think "Dang! I’d like to retweet that!”
ETA I also think "Dang! I wish the colon wasn't next to the double quote!"
-
Sacha, in reply to
Sometimes, you look at a blog comment and think "Dang! I’d like to retweet that!”
+1
-
Hell, I consider anything I post on the internet as 'released into the wild'. So go crazy, you crazy kids, with your twitter and your blogging and your hip hop and whatnot. Use and abuse it how you like.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Hell, I consider anything I post on the internet as ‘released into the wild’. So go crazy, you crazy kids, with your twitter and your blogging and your hip hop and whatnot. Use and abuse it how you like.
I just tagged your house. Looks sweet, bro.
-
Rex Widerstrom, in reply to
We should probably start legislating against the placebo effect.
Funny you should say that. The Declaration of Helsinki has been moving medical research toward that very position:
The implication being that placebos are not permitted where proven interventions are available.
Which is kind of understandable from a humanitarian perspective - giving sick people drugs that you know don't work is something that only research doctors and Bond villains would dream of doing.
But OTOH if it's adopted it's going to make it damned hard to ascertain what does work. Enter scifi scenario of cloned beings used for drug research, organ harvesting etc.
Okay having now totally sucked the life out of a very witty comment, I'll slink back into my corner...
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Nah I think they basically thought asking folks to walk through a cloud of smoke to get into a public building was just rude.
I can't agree with this sentiment. If it's not shown to be harming anyone else, and it's a public place, this seems like undue meddling to me.
sometimes driven by working in an industry which requires long and unsocial hours.
For example, use of amphetamines is supposed to be rife throughout the US meatpacking industry, where the work is physically very difficult, and the wages are insanely low.
Yes, they're popular with long-haul truck drivers, for whom staying awake is a matter of life and death.
-
Jeremy Andrew, in reply to
Just like tagging, public place, don't hurt noone. It just isn't very pretty. Neither iswalking thru a cloud of smoke to get into a cafe.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.