UK: Legal Highs Ban, bye bye legal RC's

Welcome To

UK: Legal Highs Ban, bye bye legal RC’s

This topic is empty.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 37 total)

1 2 3 →

Author

Posts
August 20, 2010 at 11:24 am

#677584
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
“The Home Office has also confirmed plans to give ministers the power to ban new substance for a year until they have been properly assessed in a bid to combat so-called “legal highs”.

Minister for Crime Prevention James Brokenshire said: “The drugs market is changing and we need to adapt current laws to allow us to act more quickly.

“The temporary ban allows us to act straight away to stop new substances gaining a foothold in the market and help us tackle unscrupulous drug dealers trying to get round the law by peddling dangerous chemicals to young people.”

– BBC News – Drug addict benefit withdrawal considered
August 20, 2010 at 11:28 am

#762415
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
the Tories were mentioning this long before the election, Last I heard it was october 2011 before it would be implemented – although they might fast track it.

what I think will really put a spanner in the works is the Chinese government classifying mephedrone…
August 20, 2010 at 11:30 am

#762411
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
@General Lighting 395588 wrote:

the Tories were mentioning this long before the election, Last I heard it was october 2011 before it would be implemented – although they might fast track it.

what I think will really put a spanner in the works is the Chinese government classifying mephedrone…

I reckon they will do it soon the legal highs thing is always in the papers now and they need some good PR what with the cuts to come.

China classifying could be a good thing there will be more of an incentive to move back to MDMA and other more traditional drugs that they can charge more for. Dunno though.
August 20, 2010 at 3:28 pm

#762427
1

Clusterfrog

@clusterfrog

Member
i cant see how this will work. what about substances that have other genuine uses like GBL? they cant ban every substance that they ever hear about someone attempting to use for fun, it would presumably only work with things that are getting media attention like meow was.
August 20, 2010 at 3:29 pm

#762428
1

Clusterfrog

@clusterfrog

Member
regarding the plan to take away benefits from addicts, they need to try the carrot not the stick. taking away these peoples money will just make them commit more crime.
August 20, 2010 at 3:36 pm

#762416
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
@1984 395590 wrote:

I reckon they will do it soon the legal highs thing is always in the papers now and they need some good PR what with the cuts to come.

China classifying could be a good thing there will be more of an incentive to move back to MDMA and other more traditional drugs that they can charge more for. Dunno though.

they might get the law in before Xmas if they really work quickly, especially as other EU countries which have a reputation for being otherwise liberal have already got “catch all” laws and have made RC’s controlled as soon as their NHS equivalents sent in a single case report of harmful side effects. They are then classed as an “untested controlled medicine” and the Health Ministry is tasked with checking the actual harm and then allocating an appropriate classification.

GBL is already class C.
August 20, 2010 at 3:38 pm

#762412
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
@Iacchus 395635 wrote:

regarding the plan to take away benefits from addicts, they need to try the carrot not the stick. taking away these peoples money will just make them commit more crime.

seems likely to me too. I reckon they know people will do the rehab (rather than lose the money) but if they dont really want to be there then it wont work. Unless they throw you out if you dont succeed and then take away your benefit for not being there. It all sounds very expensive to me and most people with bad addictions have terrible mental health problems and there’s no way they can treat that, they can cope with what they have now.
August 20, 2010 at 4:03 pm

#762429
1

Clusterfrog

@clusterfrog

Member
@General Lighting 395639 wrote:

they might get the law in before Xmas if they really work quickly, especially as other EU countries which have a reputation for being otherwise liberal have already got “catch all” laws and have made RC’s controlled as soon as their NHS equivalents sent in a single case report of harmful side effects. They are then classed as an “untested controlled medicine” and the Health Ministry is tasked with checking the actual harm and then allocating an appropriate classification.

GBL is already class C.

Interesting but I wonder where they draw the line, what about petrol and glue? There are addicts of both in this country so presumably countries with ‘catch all’ systems also.
August 20, 2010 at 4:06 pm

#762430
1

Clusterfrog

@clusterfrog

Member
@1984 395641 wrote:

seems likely to me too. I reckon they know people will do the rehab (rather than lose the money) but if they dont really want to be there then it wont work. Unless they throw you out if you dont succeed and then take away your benefit for not being there. It all sounds very expensive to me and most people with bad addictions have terrible mental health problems and there’s no way they can treat that, they can cope with what they have now.

I think they should rescale benefits so you get a lower amount by default, then people who are looking for work get extra, and addicts who are getting treatment get extra

that way nobody would feel like addicts were getting paid extra for being addicts, and seeking to improve your situation would give a reward that wouldnt cost the country more in benefits than we already pay
August 20, 2010 at 4:11 pm

#762417
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
@1984 395641 wrote:

seems likely to me too. I reckon they know people will do the rehab (rather than lose the money) but if they dont really want to be there then it wont work. Unless they throw you out if you dont succeed and then take away your benefit for not being there.

even the last government abandoned this idea for the above reasons (it would also risk putting a lot of NHS staff at serious danger as they would be viewed as complicit in stopping peoples money). serious addicts are often physically and mentally ill – and it would be as pointless as expecting someone recovering from broken bones to work on a building site

however the govt might well have other tricks up their sleeve aimed at scaring “middle class users” who become psychologically “addicted” to party drugs, and who may have left employment because of this.

They do appear to be planning a wider clampdown on nightlife and entertainment as a whole, including the currently tolerated alcohol-related nightlife…
August 20, 2010 at 4:19 pm

#762418
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
@Iacchus 395644 wrote:

Interesting but I wonder where they draw the line, what about petrol and glue?

Sales have been age restricted in this country and I expect other EU nations since the 1980s.. though it still happens, solvent abuse is rarer in Europe these days as alcohol is way cheaper and easily obtainable even than the 80s and has a slightly cooler image than something even seasoned drug users consider to be a “gutter drug”!

Intoxicating Substances (Supply) Act 1985 (c. 26) – Statute Law Database

petrol sales and storage are very highly controlled and monitored anyway as its a dangerous chemical and extremely flammable (even a leak of traditional lighter fuel or camping stove/lamp fuel can endanger lives and businesses). its also expensive to produce and has much more legit use in society so worth guarding (this in fact applies to many organic solvents especially as oil prices rise and the risk of terrorism and incendiary bombs increases!)
August 20, 2010 at 6:12 pm

#762413
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
@Iacchus 395646 wrote:

I think they should rescale benefits so you get a lower amount by default, then people who are looking for work get extra, and addicts who are getting treatment get extra

that way nobody would feel like addicts were getting paid extra for being addicts, and seeking to improve your situation would give a reward that wouldnt cost the country more in benefits than we already pay

sounds sensible to me
August 20, 2010 at 11:39 pm

#762431
1

Voodoomonkey

@voodoomonkey

Member
@1984 395586 wrote:

“The Home Office has also confirmed plans to give ministers the power to ban new substance for a year until they have been properly assessed in a bid to combat so-called “legal highs”.

Minister for Crime Prevention James Brokenshire said: “The drugs market is changing and we need to adapt current laws to allow us to act more quickly.

“The temporary ban allows us to act straight away to stop new substances gaining a foothold in the market and help us tackle unscrupulous drug dealers trying to get round the law by peddling dangerous chemicals to young people.”

– BBC News – Drug addict benefit withdrawal considered

it had to happen eventually tbh, ill have to stock up on benzo tho just incase i cannot get hold of mdma
August 21, 2010 at 3:19 am

#762434
1

wipeout

@wipeout

Member
bye bye benzo fury then pretty much didnt take long to ban nrg-1 compared to meph so i suspect thisl be the same
August 22, 2010 at 9:57 am

#762423
1

p0ly

@p0ly

Participant
All the good RCs are banned in the UK anyway. CA ftw.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 37 total)

1 2 3 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.