Battalion of Soldiers fail drug tests

The 7th county of NI?
Yes. Something I noticed about the old jock Bn's was they seamed to be very sectarian.

I remember being on Ex a Salisbury , once prior to BATUS, and they had a footy match in Westdown and it was the KOSB Celtic v the KOSB Rangers.

I heard in certain jock Bns if you were a catholic, you had no chance of getting past full screw.

Don't know how true that is and maybe it's just an urban myth?

Heard a similar dit about if you were a black bloke in the Green Howards you had little chance of making it past full screw as well.
 
Not all Jock Battalions were sectarian. Being raised in SW Scotland which was very sectarian I was surprised to find it wasn't an issue in other parts of Scotland or Battalions. It wasn't an issue in 1 Gordons in my experience.

As for Jocks sticking together violence was the norm between the Infantry Battaions when they crossed paths.
 
I was on tour the same time as the KOSB once, although never really worked in their AO or with them directly.

Funny you mention the QM though. Two of our lads got booted from Abu Naji by him, causing a bit of a mare for our head shed. The 2 lads had managed to get hold of some booze and proceeded to get turbo rat arrsed.

They nicked a random bike and trashed it, turns out it was the QMs and he was a bit upset about it.

Was in BATUS the year before with their battlegroup, and to be fair to them they were a pretty solid bunch of lads and liked getting stuck into a scrap down town.

The Black Watch had been out just before them and apparently caused loads of shit.

Was certainly no love lost between the KOSB and the Black Watch! Which at the time I thought was strange, as I imagined all the jocks would stick together.
The Scots stick together? Only as long as there is someone to hate more. They'd fight over football, religion, area, town, end of town, being a cousin, having the smaller bedroom than the elder brother.
Groundskeeper willy summed it up in the Simpsons nicely. If I had better internet id pull up a link. "damn Scots, they ruined Scotland"
 
If you're in a plane and you're losing speed and height, you wouldn't suggest 'crashing into the ground' as a 'alterative that could work better', even though technically you would gain speed doing it.
I'm not a pilot but I think you'll find that if you crash a plane into the ground then technically it will lose all it's speed within a couple of seconds rather than get faster...

Bad examples aside, what problem do you see in a legalised, properly regulated system for purchasing some drugs rather than the ineffectual clusterfuck we have now?

I wonder who indeed... this is what David Nutt said (well some of).

That sort of comparison generally means that the arguing party hasn't got anything better.
I reckon a much higher percentage of the population regularly take Es compared to riding a horse, so the fact that three times as many people die riding horses over dropping a pill seems a fairly reasonable comparison to make.

Maybe we should ban these killer horses for the greater good?
 
Last edited:
I'm not a pilot but I think you'll find that if you crash a plane into the ground then technically it will lost all it's speed within a couple of seconds rather than get faster...

Bad examples aside, what problem do you see in a legalised, properly regulated system for purchasing some drugs rather than the ineffectual clusterfuck we have now?



I reckon a much higher percentage of the population regularly take Es compared to riding a horse, so the fact that three times as many people die riding horses over dropping a pill seems a fairly reasonable comparison to make.

Maybe we should ban these killer horses for the greater good?

Ban them slowly, I can't eat one very quickly, let alone a whole stable full.
 
On one hand we have you, a man with a long history of being a bit thick. On the other we have a man who, presumably, is quite clever and has spent most of his working life researching this topic.

Government drug adviser David Nutt sacked

I wonder which might be the one who has the right opinion on drugs?
The right opinion? but in whose opinion is that right? apparently not the control freak in government who he showed up as being a retrograde intellect fit only to wipe down tables at McDonalds?
 
Bad examples aside, what problem do you see in a legalised, properly regulated system for purchasing some drugs rather than the ineffectual clusterfuck we have now?
Well for starters how can you tell folk drugs are bad, if you've legalised them? It was brought up in a post above.

MMMkayyyy.

Drugs are far more potent than alcohol, tobacco or horses.

Unless we follow you down that rabbit hold and start banning road vehicles...
 
Well for starters how can you tell folk drugs are bad, if you've legalised them?
The same way we tell people that fags and booze are bad even though they're legal?

Drugs are far more potent than alcohol, tobacco or horses.
Yet horses apparently kill more people than Es, booze is probably responsible for more street crime, vandalism, deaths and injuries and vehicle crime than most if not all drugs combined and fags probably cause more disease than all drugs...
 
Was certainly no love lost between the KOSB and the Black Watch! Which at the time I thought was strange, as I imagined all the jocks would stick together.
I had the misfortune of being with a Rear Link Detachment in Werl in 1985, when the Black Watch handed over to the Royal Scots. We had front row seats watching the sheer animosity and hatred on display between a Highland and Lowland Regiment. I shit you not, it wasn't Army banter or dark humour, it was nasty, vindictive behaviour and there was very little respect shown on either side - it was a real eye opener to witness another side of the Army I had little experience of before then.
Unbelievable to think we were all in the same Army! :-?
 
Last edited:
The seismic survey companies I worked for recently seemed paranoid about drugs testing and we had a couple of failures a week, usually amongst the drivers, cooks and what have you. The managers and supervisors used to save it up for the weekend and go on the lash on sat night if they had Sunday off. The odd man out was the project director who was usually as pissed as a parrot every evening. No one ever tested him.
 
The same way we tell people that fags and booze are bad even though they're legal?
Exactly. And that doesn't work very well, so why on earth would we want to bring more drugs in to the mix?

Yet horses apparently kill more people than Es, booze is probably responsible for more street crime, vandalism, deaths and injuries and vehicle crime than most if not all drugs combined and fags probably cause more disease than all drugs...
That's because when people get drunk they do it in a social context.

Junkies just sort of smell bad in the corner of some dank bedsit or trendy night spot.

Besides which, how much is blamed on alcohol because it is more obvious the individual has been drinking than popping, snorting or mainlining whatever sh*te they are in to?

Will you still be trotting out this line of b*llocks when the longer term effects of drugs like Es start to be recognised?

We're fine the way things stand. Alcohol and tobacco legal, other stuff not.
 
Exactly. And that doesn't work very well, so why on earth would we want to bring more drugs in to the mix?
Because if they were legalised and regulated then not only would it stop organised crime controlling an industry worth billions it would also raise billions in tax for the government.

Either that or we should ban tobacco and alcohol, by your standards?

That's because when people get drunk they do it in a social context.

Junkies just sort of smell bad in the corner of some dank bedsit or trendy night spot.
What is a night club if it's not a social place?

Of the drug users I've known I've never known one to smell bad because of their drug use. You're not calling people who smoke weed 'junkies' are you?

Will you still be trotting out this line of b*llocks when the longer term effects of drugs like Es start to be recognised?
Es have been a thing since I was in primary school and I'm in my mid 30s now. I reckon we can be fairly sure of the long term effects by now...

Ecstasy is both less addictive and less physically harmful than both alcohol and tobacco.

We're fine the way things stand. Alcohol and tobacco legal, other stuff not.
Yes. Our current drug policy is a great success and means that the UK is virtually drug free...
 
Because if they were legalised and regulated then not only would it stop organised crime controlling an industry worth billions it would also raise billions in tax for the government.
It wouldn't do anything to stop organised crime controlling the industry. Unless you plan on giving them away.

Billions in tax for the government? See point above.

At best you'd just force the OC controlling the industry at the moment to make 'efficiencies'.

Es have been around since the before the start of the 20th Century IIRC. And was at one point used by psychologists to help 'loosen' folk up. It was looked at by the US Army as a weapon, along with LSD and similar.

Still long term affects are not fully understood, because E's are gateway drugs and the users use other stuff too.

But depression and lack of co-ordination and cognitive skills are listed in mild form.

IIRC on the film 'Human Traffic' it was E that the character 'Jeremy Factsman(?)' was describing. A possible risk is the permanent or longer term loss of serotonin. We know that taking E exhausts the brain supply of Serotonin for a time (up to days) where you feel rather depressed. Now imagine a total loss...
 
In 16 years of regular and reserve service I've only been tested once.

Which is probably a good thing because my entire mess was on the Chico on one of my ships.
I Googled that and was not surprised that matelows like a bit of Chico
 
Still long term affects are not fully understood, because E's are gateway drugs and the users use other stuff too.

But depression and lack of co-ordination and cognitive skills are listed in mild form.

IIRC on the film 'Human Traffic' it was E that the character 'Jeremy Factsman(?)' was describing. A possible risk is the permanent or longer term loss of serotonin. We know that taking E exhausts the brain supply of Serotonin for a time (up to days) where you feel rather depressed. Now imagine a total loss...
Again, alcohol and tobacco both have serious long term medical risks too (both cause more physical harm than drugs such as ecstasy, cannabis, methadone and LSD). Why aren't you discussing how the users of both of them are losers and calling for them to be banned?
 
Again, alcohol and tobacco both have serious long term medical risks too (both cause more physical harm than drugs such as ecstasy, cannabis, methadone and LSD). Why aren't you discussing how the users of both of them are losers and calling for them to be banned?
Because the long term damage caused by alcohol and tobacco are caused by long term and heavy use.

Besides which most people have shied away from heavy drinkers over the years, the social taboo is already there.

Tobacco is going the same way.

You mention physical harm of drugs, what of the emotional or mental harm?
 
Because the long term damage caused by alcohol and tobacco are caused by long term and heavy use.

Besides which most people have shied away from heavy drinkers over the years, the social taboo is already there.

Tobacco is going the same way.

You mention physical harm of drugs, what of the emotional or mental harm?
Alcohol is a depressive and can cause mental problems, learning difficulties and dementia along with social problems such as unemployment and family/relationship issues.

All drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, can cause physical damage to the body. Some can also cause mental or emotional damage.

Many of the medical problems caused by currently illegal drugs are caused by the substances used to cut the purity to make more profit for the dealers (there is an issue in Northern Ireland at the minute with heroin that's been cut with Fentanyl that's believed to have killed a few users, for example). If some or all drugs were legalised then many of these problems would be reduced because there would be controls on production standards as there are with all other consumer goods in the UK. Some would still exist but given that we already accept those risks with some drugs (alcohol, tobacco and many prescription drugs) I don't see any reason why they can't be accepted for others too.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top