Khat to be Banned

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by geezer466, Jul 3, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Aye, because everyone that uses it will stop because they've been told it's naughty.

    And nobody who runs rackets will start running khat now too, and make money that they might spend on... Oh I dunno, nice things, or Klashnikovs or something.
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Good. I got stuck with Oslo airport with a guy who traffics the stuff there for the Somalis in Norway. He was a nice old chap, invalided, but I didn't agree with what he was doing.
    I personally think the generation of Somalis swamping Europe are the main problem, not so much this leaf. But it doesn't help.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Ridiculous. It's about as dangerous as a double Espresso. More posturing from politicians with nothing better to do, creating more profit for the inevitable smugglers who will gain from the ban. Is strong cider banned? No. And look how a lot of people behave after getting that down on a Friday. What you put down your head should be your business, and you should take the consequences.
    • Like Like x 6
  4. shite.
    will they ban red bulls and other energy drinks?
    khat is well recognised, tested, harmless drug. no need for banning it
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Used to see locals in APL using it back in the day,wouldn't touch a tin of beer,mind,never mind drink it.
  6. "The decision goes against the recommendation of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), the government's official advisory body.

    In January the ACMD said khat should remain a legal substance, saying there was "insufficient evidence" it caused health problems."

    Says it all really.
    • Like Like x 3
  7. Alcohol causes a huge number of proven health issues, and the effects of alcoholism are widely known, but we don't ban that.

    Cigarettes are nothing but a slow and expensive way to commit suicide, but we don't ban them.

    Prohibition of a relatively safe substance doesn't appear to achieve anything. I think we should introduce a ban on banning stuff.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Well if they make too much noise they get sacked like Prof. Nutt.
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Too right. The experts have given their opinion, they should legalise cannabis too.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. So a teenager chewing the cud on some Khat is bad, but the same teenager amped out of his brains on 6 cans of Red Bull is OK?
  11. On the Housing Benefit reform thread, I mentioned the possibility that that the reforms were more geared towards making those who weren't fond of "benefit scroungers" feel all warm and fuzzy than in actually doing anything about "benefit scroungers" and the overall cost of the welfare state.

    Well, this legislation is going to annoy "certain folks" which will by default, make readers of a particular Associated Newspapers publication chortle into their real ale this weekend.

    • Like Like x 2
  12. Some people took a substance and did bad things, therefore the substance itself is bad. Your logic is flawless. If I drank 3 litres of coffee and butchered your family, would you sue Nescafe?

    Alcohol causes antisocial behaviour and results in puke and piss all over the place. I presume you advocate a ban on that also?
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Exactly.

    The ACMD once made a graph - it is as follows:


    If we take long-legal alcohol and tobacco as a baseline, I can't see any logical justification for banning anything that is lower and to the left of those.

    Not to mention that there's a significant justification for legalising substances - ecstasy for one would probably be much safer if it was controlled, so that it'd be pure and people would know how much they were getting.
    • Like Like x 3