I have no problem with drug addicts. I believe they should have as much of the stuff they can shove down thier neck or up their, wherever. I fact they should have just a bit more. ;-) Then advertise the fact loudly on Radio, TV & in the Paper that another drug addict have passed on to Nivana. Whose next? That would cure the problem really fast.

It would be cheaper medically, less strain on society & resourses & the streets & your property would be safer. The solution is a little hard on the family but they'd get over it. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind. It would be a great example to anyone wanting to get into the drug game.

Anyone caught pushing drugs of course would be put on an deserted Island & left fend for themselves for the rest of their life.

No pity.

More drivel from another extreme right cultural warrior. Did you see that website family security matters, with links to the US religious right?

I note the writer mentions about addiction problems being man-made, well that part is right for the use of law to prohibit opiate use, particularly non-medical use. Perhaps many of the current consequences shown in relation to what cultural warriors describe as a "drug problem" could be done away with by no longer persisting with obsolete laws persecuting the one who indulges because s/he offends protestant puritan sensibilities or has opted out of being a cog in the machine or sycophantic drone.

I suppose but, fear is the stock in trade of a cultural warrior writer, Dalrymple probably pumps out this drivel through fringe publishers and crackpot websites as it would not stand up to peer review.

More drivel from another extreme right cultural warrior. Did you see that website family security matters, with links to the US religious right?

I note the writer mentions about addiction problems being man-made, well that part is right for the use of law to prohibit opiate use, particularly non-medical use. Perhaps many of the current consequences shown in relation to what cultural warriors describe as a "drug problem" could be done away with by no longer persisting with obsolete laws persecuting the one who indulges because s/he offends protestant puritan sensibilities or has opted out of being a cog in the machine or sycophantic drone.

If they want to [take opiate] then stand back and let them. We do the same for liquor and tobacco, both of which are intrinsically more dangerous, and in the case of the latter, dangerous even in modest quantities. However, opiate producers [not drug companies, the other lot] and their consumers don't have mates in high places like booze and tobacco pushers.

I suppose but, fear is the stock in trade of a cultural warrior writer, Dalrymple probably pumps out this drivel through fringe publishers and crackpot websites as it would not stand up to peer review.

SECOND HAND REPORTING OF OTHERS OPINIONS with the usual redneck specificy of singling out one drug

there are many addictive drugs[booze hound withdrawels are reportedly as severe as heroin] but then so ntoo the 'perscribed legal? drugs[noting asdverse reaction to PERSCRIBED medication alone causes the equivelent of 5 jumbo loads TO DIE each day [DEATH by perscribed drugs alone]

australian drug figures state 19,000 deaths by drugs[heroin caused 114 marijuana NONE
[but 48,000] busts for drugs[46,000 for dope[marijuana] puts the spin into proportion as does the ammount of inhjury caused by BOOZE

in 1999 37,000 drug convictions in qld alone resulted in 54 million REVENUE from fines[legal;'aid'? is a cash cow elitist lurk here too[300 for a guilty plea or for the whole court case [what would you as a lawyer do?

well they do [lawyers convince 20 out of 21 to plead guilty[asnd collect their legal; aid fee's at the rate of 10 perday[$3000] for a mornings work
[thats why no lawyer disputes that a plant is not a drug]just as asprin in willow bark isnt 'asprin'[the drug] a drug is a pure refined product[a poppy plant isnt heroin it contains opium that is refined into it]

but quote from post>>..To be sure, to use heroin is to invite many negative health consequences nbut is treating opiate addiction as a disease helpful?..>>

its an addiction [ie it IS a medical problem]

not a police problem [unless there is a victim

[no victim means no crime] but no lawyer is going to demand a victim on his/her big payOFF day, thus takes his share of the legal aid and shuts up ,while the state criminalises its own young for being dependant on a drug

who cares what selective delusions Dr Dalrymple states

drugs are a medical not a legal issue[and the real problem is the LEGAL deaths[prozac alone has killed over 10,000]

yes lock up the drug czars NOW, how long can this 'LEGAL ' murder be allowed go on?[and the debate held to silence]

What is the point of this rant?

Actually Dalrymple is an intelligent man who works in the psychiatric field in the UK, and has as such seen how awful it really is out there, especially amongst the demoralized down and outs in UK cities.

It is a pity that he keeps such bad company and is lauded by people such as terps and the appalling company that terps associates with at "family security".

I am very interested in the security of my family and circles of friends too. And I can assure you that they would all find the politics of terps and his friends at so called "family security" absolutely appalling---psycho-paths all the way down.

Their mind-set being the principal causative factor of most or all of our inter-relatecd troubles.

The wonder is that such an intelligent man as Dalrymple allows himself to associate with and be coopted by such nut cases.

Meanwhile our entire "culture" runs on drugs and our addictions to them. All of which are destructive of the bodies of those that use them---ALL.

Coffe, tea, chocolate, cola, tobacco, alcohol, prescription drugs and the entire cocktail of illegal drugs.

How much prime agricultural land is used to produce the raw materials for these common addictive drugs?

And what about the golden rule--those that have the gold make and enforce the rules. And define what is acceptable.

BIG PHARMA is one of the worlds largest and most profitable industries. And as such they have no interest whatsoever in encouraging people to take REAL responsibility for their health and well-being.

Which always begins by what you put in your mouth, especially on a regular basis.

Big-pharma always propagandises against "alternative" non-drug forms of healing which usually demand that people begin to take responsibility for their health by changing their life-patterns altogether. Exercise and diet for instance.

The white-coated big-pharma doctor says a few magic words, orders some hi-tech tests and then gives you some magic pills

End of story.

No demand either implicit or explicit to change what you are doing---especially what you regularly put in your mouth

Speaking of the "religious" right in the USA, I would argue that a NECESSARY prerequsite for the emergence of some kind of balanced sanity in the USA body politic (and the world altogether) is the breaking of their entirely pernicious and devisive influence.

Why and how is it that this entirely godless right wing religiosity is so noticable and seemingly entrenched in the USA?

There are right-wing religionists in other parts of the world including Australia (witness Bill Muehlenberg et al) but fortunately they never have the same pernicious influence.