Once again, those that subscribe to the idea of us succumbing to "addiction", foolishly ignore the fact that heroin "addicts" have acquired an expensive HABIT which they enjoy but which also proves hard for them to break. Like Col Rouge says, TOUGH!
There is no such thing as addiction, only weak-willed individuals who refuse to curb(self)destructive HABITUAL behaviour. A pox on them all. If we left them alone, the process of natural selection would soon give cause for thought to any potential future users.
To all the socialists out there that would naysay me, a rather large wet raspberry. You are self-deluding at best.
Heroin addicts make a CONSCIOUS choice. Simple solution. Deny them access to any sort of government assistance other than those designed to slap the stupidity out of them. This may hammer home the concept of "consequences". If they ignore that then the gene pool gets reduced. Simple.

(..sits back and waits for foaming lefties...)

Well the addict gene pool was reduced by another one on the weekend. a Young DH high on ICE got himself topped. I bet the Socalist Left Politically Correct crowd & the addicts try to make a victem out of him & give the police a hard time.
I'm with Col Rouge & tRAKKA on this issue. Stuff 'em.

Fester “My understanding is that even with legalised and unregulated drugs, it is unlikely that 5% of the population would be drug addicts.”

That might be what you understand.

What I understand is if you made the cost of a hit of heroin the same as a cigarette, you would end up with addiction rates in line with the wide spread use of cigarettes.

Similarly, 20 years ago Victoria did not have a “Gambling Problem”.

Since fat Joan Kirner legalized poker machines, we seem to have acquired a lot of supposed “gambling addicts” who steal, lie and cheat their way through other peoples’ money.

I have no problem with people gambling, I do myself, occasionally, even had a bet at the races Sunday and actually financed 1/3 my income when a student through regular card schools but we have some folk with (for want of a better term) an addiction gene, which makes them totally incapable of resisting whatever their tiny minds fixate upon.

But we come back the decriminalizing the use of narcotics and the empirical evidence remains the same, regardless of your “understanding”,

If it is addictive and if you make it cheap and make it legal -

There will be a high proportion of dingbats who will spend their every effort trying to get high, ignoring their responsibilities and becoming a parasite on the rest of us.

Someone close to me is doing the tough love with her son. He has burned his bridges more times than is healthy for his mother. He has smashed walls in her house in his drunken and cannabis inflamed rampages, verbally abused, terrified and intimidated her.

She deals with him now the only way she can, to disconnect the phone and refuse his multiple calls for money and to vent his anger at the world, through his alcohol and drug addled delusions,

Tough love is not only the best thing which works for the addict,
it is the ONLY thing which works for the people who love the addict, despite the addiction.

tRAKKA and Jayb thanks for your words of agreemen

Col

"That might be what you understand."

From your own comments you seem to give much weight to the opinions of some 19th century missionaries. Good that you bring up gambling, though. What percentage of the population do you think at risk of becoming problem gamblers? Do you think that Kirner's pokies will lay waste Victoria much like the missionaries claimed that opium would destroy China (and then the Christian world)? Curiously, this website suggests that for the United States, there are 5.5 million pathological and problem gamblers out of a population of over 300 million. 15 million are believed vulnerable to problem gambling.

http://www.clearleadinc.com/site/gambling-addiction.htm

Perhaps you could provide some stats to give some credability to your sermon?

My interest is in maximising benefit and minimising expense, with the proviso of respecting human dignity.

"tRAKKA and Jayb thanks for your words of agreemen"

Can I assume from this that you are advocating extermination for drug addicts, Col?

Hey Fester,

Please try and removing the idea of "addictiveness" from your head.

I repeat, there is no such thing as addiction, merely lack of self-control resulting in destructive habitual behaviour. You probably engage in habitual behaviour yourself everyday. Getting up, preparing for your day which may involve travel. Car, train, ferry or bus, it doesn't matter. Travelling everyday on a bus doesn't make you a bus addict, does it? It's just habitual behaviour which is not so uncomfortable so as to be unbearable.

I'm not for dumping on people's rights to do as they wish, just as long as they know there are consequences.

What people mostly forget is that the claiming of "rights" obligates the "rights" taker to engage in responsible behaviour according to the socially prevalent norm.

I do not condone the idea of exterminating drug users. If they are able to conduct their business without harm or drain upon others in society, then all fine and well. If they cark it, so be it. Self-inflicted injury brought about by poor choices, in my view. So sad, too bad...

tRAKKA

"there is no such thing as addiction"

Does this mean that you are against drug prohibition? Surely the idea that society comprises loads of potential druggies is the foundation of prohibition?