Originally Posted by DozyBint

Singapore's investment in the protection of Singapore and its people cannot be doubted and I wish our government had even a quarter of their enthusiasm and ability to protect us and our borders.

Agree 100%. Had the pleasure of a tour in Singapore in the 60's - safe, well run and, like other small countries, needs to keep things under control. So Lee Kwan Yew played hard-ball ... so, where was the greater good? There was a threatened dock strike ... Lee told the dockers "This will cripple our economy." They said "Tough luck", he said "OK, that's treason, you will all lose citizenship and be deported." No strike, prosperous Nation, good luck to them. Many of Lee's ideas would be well placed in your country and on my adopted little rock.

Originally Posted by Cutaway

Singapore's a place about six and a half thousand miles from the UK and of which you have no experience

Saudi Arabia's a lot closer. I also have no direct experience of it, but I do perceive that the place operates through fear, division, barbaric 'justice' and is corrupt to the core - all with implicit backing from the West. (I ask again - do I need to have visited a particular location to be 'qualified' to form and express a valid opinion??). I believe and trust Patrick Moore when he gobs off about the moon, and yet..........................(fill in the blank).

Incidentally, Saudi is proof that you don't need to hitch a ride in a t.a.r.d.i.s. to find yourself suddenly arriving in the Middle Ages. Singapore is not quite so retrograde, but who knows where it'll end up as more civilised nations advance and leave it to flounder?

An estimated 75% of police resources are spent sorting out drug related crime. In cash terms alone, how many hundreds of billions is that? Not to mention the lives affected by the muggings, gang warfare and thefts from shops, homes and sheds? It's probably incalculable.

One thing is for sure though, put drugs on pescription and you wouldn't increase drug use one iota. Kids of 12 can buy drugs as easily as Mars bars and just as cheaply at the moment anyway, the ones that currently do take drugs are stupid and will stay stupid. The ones that don't at the moment, still wouldn't.

All that would happen is that millions of existing addicts wouldn't be living off crime to feed a habit, they would be openly receiving real help in clinical conditions and the police will probably have so much spare time they'd start getting bored.

Originally Posted by Anothermedalwonderer

Originally Posted by rickshaw-major

I do however object to picking up the NHS tab for the damage caused in a great many cases by these drugs and I do object to the fact that a lot of minor (and not so minor) crime is associated with drugs.

The cost of illegal drugs is artificially high because they can only be brought into the country or manufactured in relatively small amounts at great expense.
If they were legalised, they would be cheaper, and could be taxed, and the revenue collected would more than pay for health costs of addicts and even provide for NHS addicition clinics to help those who want to come off them.
Just as an example, the tax revenue on ciggarettes is ten times greater than the cost to the NHS of treating smoking-related illnesses. Drug addicts would probably be paying for their treatment and then some if they were legalised and taxed.

I'm afraid You have it all wrong.

Repeated heroin use results in a rise in tolerence, which means heavier use. Many addicts spend over £1000 on drugs every week which means to be sustainable their net income would have to be 52 grand. This obviously means that the average addict will still have to steal to maintain his habit.

In my opinion drug addicts should be given free drugs which they will have to take within a observed environment. This will cut down the cost to British society in may ways, less drug related illnesses (most are due to needle sharing, dirty environs and the agents used to cut the heroin), no ODs taking up hospital beds and time and no crime

Originally Posted by Sven

In my opinion drug addicts should be given free drugs which they will have to take within a observed environment. This will cut down the cost to British society in may ways, less drug related illnesses (most are due to needle sharing, dirty environs and the agents used to cut the heroin), no ODs taking up hospital beds and time and no crime

Sven,

You're on drugs yourself if you think that this is cure. Your own post discounts it, FFS

You wrote:

Repeated heroin use results in a rise in tolerence, which means heavier use

The only way I'd agree with you is if they were allowed to overdose and remove themselves from the population base. Certainly one way of removing the problem

Originally Posted by in_the_cheapseats

Originally Posted by Sven

In my opinion drug addicts should be given free drugs which they will have to take within a observed environment. This will cut down the cost to British society in may ways, less drug related illnesses (most are due to needle sharing, dirty environs and the agents used to cut the heroin), no ODs taking up hospital beds and time and no crime

Sven,

You're on drugs yourself if you think that this is cure. Your own post discounts it, FFS

You wrote:

Repeated heroin use results in a rise in tolerence, which means heavier use

The only way I'd agree with you is if they were allowed to overdose and remove themselves from the population base. Certainly one way of removing the problem

Where did I say it was a cure - it is a holding strategy - but it does do everything I said, the trials in New York do seem to support that.

And yes, I can believe that You would rather see people dead, that does fit in with the person You portray Yourself as

Ah - so it is a holding strategy now, eh? This is an add on to what you said earlier. Sounds like you are making it up as you go along.

I still prefer the Singaporean answer to the problem.

I'm presuming you will now tell us about the cure policy as well - as succesful as the one being run out at the moment?

Originally Posted by in_the_cheapseats

Ah - so it is a holding strategy now, eh? This is an add on to what you said earlier. Sounds like you are making it up as you go along.

I still prefer the Singaporean answer to the problem.

I'm presuming you will now tell us about the cure policy as well - as succesful as the one being run out at the moment?

As I said on another thread - I can well believe You to be that sort of person, going on Your posts.

A really good, moral upstanding character - then

Better than you, sycophant, better than you

Originally Posted by in_the_cheapseats

Better than you, sycophant, better than you

I honestly don't think You would know a moral stance if it bit You on the arsse, at least, not going on the posts You submit