One Million Baht Worth Of Drugs

[tropo]

As far as I am aware the news article didnt state that this drugs bust would prevent drug abuse!!!!

Well, at least you read the article. If you read my post you would have discovered that I was replying to Robski, not the OP.

Are you sure your brain is not shrivelled up? Too much alcohol perhaps?

Don't mention flaming here. You started that.

[tropo]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

[JacknDanny]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You seem to be a very angry little boy!!

Do you want to talk to us about it, we can be very sympathetic

[Robski]

Drug users are not the criminals here, they are the victims. Drug raids worsen their lives and intensify their suffering by increasing the street price. I already explained to you that increasing the risk of selling drugs makes them much more expensive and this makes the business as a whole far more lucrative and appealing for drug producers and wholesalers.

Well theres a hole big enough to drive a bus through, you say that drug users are not criminals, but actually under the laws of this country they are.

I see you don't wish to argue my point that taking large numbers of dealers and addicts off the streets will reduce crime in an area.

[tropo]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You seem to be a very angry little boy!!

Do you want to talk to us about it, we can be very sympathetic

You're just a troll here. You're even replying to my replies to other members.

You must be a little upset about this.

[Pattaya_Fox]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You know tropo you should be able to handle criticism...... It`s a sign of maturity you know.

[tropo]

Two things Tropo,

1.theres no need to resort to insults because I don't agree with you.

Give it a break. Read your reply to me before you start complaining about who's insulting who:

I don't understand you some times, in your rush to tell us how knowledgeable you are you forgot to engage your brain,

Edited January 20, 2007 by tropo

[JacknDanny]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You seem to be a very angry little boy!!

Do you want to talk to us about it, we can be very sympathetic

You're just a troll here. You're even replying to my replies to other members.

You must be a little upset about this.

Whatever you are on is also affecting your eyesight!!

I was responding to your comment TO Pattaya Fox.

Not upset at all, just when I see people like you with liberated drugs views coming on and spouting off absolute sh#te, it is apparant to me that in ALL cases they are not parents and in MOST cases have a drugs problem themselves.

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

[Robski]

I don't understand you some times, in your rush to tell us how knowledgeable you are you forgot to engage your brain, I'm not being funny, sometimes you make a lot of sense, but here you seem contradictory just for the sake of it.

I guess if you want to take it out of context then it is an insult.

Well theres a hole big enough to drive a bus through, you say that drug users are not criminals, but actually under the laws of this country they are.

I see you don't wish to argue my point that taking large numbers of dealers and addicts off the streets will reduce crime in an area.

So how about a credible argument then Tropo?

[tropo]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You know tropo you should be able to handle criticism...... It`s a sign of maturity you know.

Then grow up. Telling someone what they wrote is "cobblers" is not critisizm, it's flame.

If you want to flame me, then stand by for some return flame.

[solo siam]

"But just look at Liverpool, where 2,000 people of a population of 600,000 receive official prescriptions for methadone: this once proud and prosperous city"

I think I lost you at that last sentence. How about making drugs free and decriminalised but instituting drug checks at every level of 'working' society?

[Robski]

Well he's left the forum. to be continued at a later date no doubt. Ok laters.

Edited January 20, 2007 by Robski

[Pattaya_Fox]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You know tropo you should be able to handle criticism...... It`s a sign of maturity you know.

Then grow up. Telling someone what they wrote is "cobblers" is not critisizm, it's flame.

If you want to flame me, then stand by for some return flame.

Flaming who me? Ha Ha merely trying to point out that what you said was a load of old cobblers

[tropo]

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

You're not defending? You seem pretty defensive here.

FYI, I don't drink (ever), I don't smoke and I have never taken a single recreational drug in my life.

You don't understand simple economics, that's your problem. You just see drug addicts ruining their lives...you don't understand the trade.

You can't understand very basic concepts.

Are you a heavy drinker perhaps?

[JacknDanny]

What an absolute load of old cobblers! tropo you seem to have things the wrong way round old son.

Keep on adding and editing. You've got it wrong, but I'm not surprised reading half of your <deleted>.

You know tropo you should be able to handle criticism...... It`s a sign of maturity you know.

Then grow up. Telling someone what they wrote is "cobblers" is not critisizm, it's flame.

If you want to flame me, then stand by for some return flame.

Flaming who me? Ha Ha merely trying to point out that what you said was a load of old cobblers

You know what its like with these young lads, on holiday and feeling brave

[tropo]

So how about a credible argument then Tropo?

I'm still waiting for something credible from you. There's no point arguing with fools is there Robski?

"Oh yeah, marvelous, they got one million baht worth of drugs. That's going to help some people"

You call this credible?

[libya 115]

"But just look at Liverpool, where 2,000 people of a population of 600,000 receive official prescriptions for methadone: this once proud and prosperous city"

I think I lost you at that last sentence. How about making drugs free and decriminalised but instituting drug checks at every level of 'working' society?

Liverpool's history can be understood by definite fact easily online. It was, and still is to a great extent an important English city.

If you re-read my earlier post, it explains in detail why illegal drugs will never have a beneficial part to play in society. And, before you cite alcohol and nicotine, I agree that they are both negative drugs, to health and society.

Legalisation of all drugs, seems like the answer; it is not. What is needed is a 'soma', a kind of drug that releases man from the stresses of life. Aldous Huxley was preaching this in 1936.

We all enjoy escape. But I do not mug grannies for my Chang.

[Robski]

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

You're not defending? You seem pretty defensive here.

FYI, I don't drink (ever), I don't smoke and I have never taken a single recreational drug in my life.

You don't understand simple economics, that's your problem. You just see drug addicts ruining their lives...you don't understand the trade.

You can't understand very basic concepts.

Are you a heavy drinker perhaps?

You are reprehensible. You are saying that you have never taken a recreational drug in your life and yet you are telling other members that they don't understand what is happening in the drug trade, that they don't understand the economics of the drug trade or the perspective of drug users.

You insult us because we disagree with you and yet you don't wish to comment when we put up a reasonable arguement against your view.

Crawl back into your hole you troll.

Edited January 20, 2007 by Robski

[JacknDanny]

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

You're not defending? You seem pretty defensive here.

FYI, I don't drink (ever), I don't smoke and I have never taken a single recreational drug in my life.

You don't understand simple economics, that's your problem. You just see drug addicts ruining their lives...you don't understand the trade.

You can't understand very basic concepts.

Are you a heavy drinker perhaps?

I love a drink!!

I understand economics. More importantly, I understand the drugs trade significantly more than you do, having spent more than 10 years of my life in the UK involved in the Drugs Trade, and I do admit I did enjoy feeling the collars of the scum bags involved in this evil trade

[Robski]

So how about a credible argument then Tropo?

I'm still waiting for something credible from you. There's no point arguing with fools is there Robski?

"Oh yeah, marvelous, they got one million baht worth of drugs. That's going to help some people"

You call this credible?

Stick and stones Tropo, last resort is it?

As I said before; If the result of effective police measures removes drugs, and significant amount of drug dealers and drug addicts from an area, crime in that area will be reduced.

Thats my point, now come on then smartass, make a credible argument against that.

[tropo]

Stick and stones Tropo, last resort is it?

As I said before; If the result of effective police measures removes drugs, and significant amount of drug dealers and drug addicts from an area, crime in that area will be reduced.

Thats my point, now come on then smartass, make a credible argument against that.

And like I said. If you take a significant amount of drugs off the street, the prices soar. When the prices soar, the production of these drugs becomes much more lucrative. As their manufacture becomes more lucrative, more people get in on the business and produce even more drugs and the wholesalers and retailers debouble their efforts as it becomes more profitable. Basic economics.

You enforce harder, the problem gets worse. Who pays the high cost? The drug addicts. They will always find the money. When they need more, they find it through increased levels of crimial activity. You think if they put away a few dealers they will not be replaced. You're dreaming

Edited January 20, 2007 by tropo

[tropo]

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

You're not defending? You seem pretty defensive here.

FYI, I don't drink (ever), I don't smoke and I have never taken a single recreational drug in my life.

You don't understand simple economics, that's your problem. You just see drug addicts ruining their lives...you don't understand the trade.

You can't understand very basic concepts.

Are you a heavy drinker perhaps?

I love a drink!!

I understand economics. More importantly, I understand the drugs trade significantly more than you do, having spent more than 10 years of my life in the UK involved in the Drugs Trade, and I do admit I did enjoy feeling the collars of the scum bags involved in this evil trade

Well it's obvioius you've been drinking too much tonight. You can say what you like about your experience in the drug trade. On here that means zip. You're obviously extremely naive with regards to this topic which means you must be lying about your experience. Easy to do on an Internet forum.

[JacknDanny]

Stick and stones Tropo, last resort is it?

As I said before; If the result of effective police measures removes drugs, and significant amount of drug dealers and drug addicts from an area, crime in that area will be reduced.

Thats my point, now come on then smartass, make a credible argument against that.

And like I said. If you take a significant amount of drugs off the street, the prices soar. When the prices soar, the production of these drugs becomes much more lucrative. As their manufacture becomes more lucrative, more people get in on the business and produce even more drugs and the wholesalers and retailers debouble their efforts as it becomes more profitable. Basic economics.

You enforce harder, the problem gets worse. Who pays the high cost? The drug addicts. They will always find the money. When they need more, they find it through increased levels of crimial activity. You think if they put away a few dealers they will not be replaced. You're dreaming

You are mistaken!!

The more enforcement the more information is collated. The druggie gives up the dealer, the dealer is arrested and gives up someone further up the chain and so on and so forth. The problem is eased, particularly if the punishments are harsh.

There will always be users and there will always be suppliers. Prices do fluctuate, but only slightly. But it is far better to take an aggressive stand against it as opposed to do nothing

[JacknDanny]

Now I am not accusing you of anything, but you do seem to be getting rather defensive

You're not defending? You seem pretty defensive here.

FYI, I don't drink (ever), I don't smoke and I have never taken a single recreational drug in my life.

You don't understand simple economics, that's your problem. You just see drug addicts ruining their lives...you don't understand the trade.

You can't understand very basic concepts.

Are you a heavy drinker perhaps?

I love a drink!!

I understand economics. More importantly, I understand the drugs trade significantly more than you do, having spent more than 10 years of my life in the UK involved in the Drugs Trade, and I do admit I did enjoy feeling the collars of the scum bags involved in this evil trade

Well it's obvioius you've been drinking too much tonight. You can say what you like about your experience in the drug trade. On here that means zip. You're obviously extremely naive with regards to this topic which means you must be lying about your experience. Easy to do on an Internet forum.

Oh dear!!

I try to be reasonable with you but you still insist on stirring the pot. Please grow up and if you want to debate then do so in a mature way instaed of behaving like a juvenile delinquent

[Robski]

Stick and stones Tropo, last resort is it?

As I said before; If the result of effective police measures removes drugs, and significant amount of drug dealers and drug addicts from an area, crime in that area will be reduced.

Thats my point, now come on then smartass, make a credible argument against that.

And like I said. If you take a significant amount of drugs off the street, the prices soar. When the prices soar, the production of these drugs becomes much more lucrative. As their manufacture becomes more lucrative, more people get in on the business and produce even more drugs and the wholesalers and retailers debouble their efforts as it becomes more profitable. Basic economics.

You enforce harder, the problem gets worse. Who pays the high cost? The drug addicts. They will always find the money. When they need more, they find it through increased levels of crimial activity. You think if they put away a few dealers they will not be replaced. You're dreaming

I'll be honest with you, it's my business, but to prove a point I'll tell you that me and Jack'n'Danny come from opposite ends of the street, but we both disagree with what your saying, doesn't that tell you something? that maybe you are mis-guided in your opinion.

You are preaching from a great height, but you have neither the experience or the credibility to put forward a reasoned opinion. You don't know what you're talking about.

Would you rather that the police did nothing? as it's so futile. What about people that live in communities that have problems from drugs and crime, shall we codemn those people because the drugs are here to stay, so they'll just have to live in fear.

The police or the council don't have to try and stop drug crime in an area 'cos 'hel_l thy don't have to live there.', but they do because it affects the wider community, and it can be effective.

Pattaya isn't the Bronx or Hackney or Rio or Bogota, by taking the drugs and more importantly the dealers it stops growth and also stamps authority on the situation. Dealers want drugs to be cheap and plentiful, to create the demand and then keep up with that demand.

The thing with drugs, and this is the truth, first comes the supply and then comes the demand, if there isn't any drugs it doesn't matter how much more money you have, you aren't getting any.

Edited January 20, 2007 by Robski

[tropo]

You are mistaken!!

Obviously you will stick to the theory that you are correct. Why don't you do an analysis on how the drug trade has progressed in various countries where enforcement is strict. You'll find prices go up and drug use increases, always.

You're extremely naive to think your theory is correct when it's obvious failing right around the world.

Really, you'd do well to take you blinders off before you post. And cut all these school yard flames ie. "immature, juvenile, grow-up". It's like debating with a school yard mommies boy.

[Robski]

You seem to think you are very knowledgable, but have said nothing to prove that you are, what does make you such an expert Tropo?

[tropo]

I'll be honest with you, it's my business, but to prove a point I'll tell you that me and Jack'n'Danny come from opposite ends of the street, but we both disagree with what your saying, doesn't that tell you something? that maybe you are mis-guided in your opinion.

You are preaching from a great height, but you have neither the experience or the credibility to put forward a reasoned opinion. You don't know what you're talking about.

You've got to be joking right? You and Jack disagree with me and that proves that I'm wrong and you're right. Serious?

No point arguing with you. You're old school - kill all the drug dealers and drug users, or lock em up and everything will be fine.

You need to take you head out of the sand before you post.

[JacknDanny]

You are mistaken!!

Obviously you will stick to the theory that you are correct. Why don't you do an analysis on how the drug trade has progressed in various countries where enforcement is strict. You'll find prices go up and drug use increases, always.

You're extremely naive to think your theory is correct when it's obvious failing right around the world.

Really, you'd do well to take you blinders off before you post. And cut all these school yard flames ie. "immature, juvenile, grow-up". It's like debating with a school yard mommies boy.

I am just calling it as I see it tropo. You behave in a boorish and immature manner. If the cap fits wear it!!

[Robski]

I'll be honest with you, it's my business, but to prove a point I'll tell you that me and Jack'n'Danny come from opposite ends of the street, but we both disagree with what your saying, doesn't that tell you something? that maybe you are mis-guided in your opinion.

You are preaching from a great height, but you have neither the experience or the credibility to put forward a reasoned opinion. You don't know what you're talking about.

You've got to be joking right? You and Jack disagree with me and that proves that I'm wrong and you're right. Serious?

No point arguing with you. You're old school - kill all the drug dealers and drug users, or lock em up and everything will be fine.

You need to take you head out of the sand before you post.

Sure why don't you read a post before you try and argue against it, you might learn something, it would save you making it up as you go along.

If good ideas were gunpowder you wouldn't have enough to blow your nose.