Thailand Concerned Over Growth In Young Drug Users

[anterian]

They don't use yaba in my village, it is too expensive, they use kratom instead.

Guess you're not long enough in 'your' village. They do use Yaba in almost all villages......:jap:

Sorry to have to contradict you but whilst the odd teenager may indulge outside the village there is none sold or used inside. Six years ago yaba was openly sold and used, since then I have worked with the police and civil authorities, and spent a fair amount of money.

Don't try and tell me I would not recognise yaba use either, I spent my formative years living in Soho and the Portobello road areas, That's in London for non Brits. I've met every drug you can name, from purple hearts to crack and speed.

[Bagwan]

It seems to me that those who control our lives yet again cannot or will not do the right thing. I have a leaning towards a degree of deregulation but would making murder legal, you know just those one or two that have got up your nose, cut down the number of unlawful killings?

To eradicate the drug problem would need a concerted worldwide effort - and cost trillions. The liberals and do gooders will get in the way of mandatory death sentences for suppliers, whole police forces would need to be finely combed to weed out the bad guys, politicians would find themselves out of work - or in reality being forced into work in a real job. Look at the current blood bath in Mexico and imagine that worldwide.

Isn't going to work is it? Doing the right thing is not an option it seems to me.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

If you can just stand back and look at the problem objectively then the answer seems obvious. Stop making drug possession for personal use a crime for all over a set legal age. Prohibition of popular drugs like Alcohol, Tobacco, Pot, Ecstacy etc never works and never has, it only promotes mafia gang type crime and corruption. All countries should legalising possession of all drugs or at least those that are no more harmful than say Alcohol (that includes Pot and Ecstacy from all unbiased reports I have ever seen) with a sensible limit of how much anyone can have in their personal possession to ensure they are not illegal dealers. Make such currently illegal "soft" and fairly safe drugs legally available to those defined as adults, just the same way as alcohol and tobacco, from licensed retailers and impose a fairly high tax on them too. This will also raise more revenue and give the police more available time to fight the illegal drug dealers particularly those trading in the deadly highly addictive hard drugs like Heroin. To me this seems the obvious and only sensible answer, whether you are an illegal drug taker or not. Otherwise the problems will just continue at the current high level and corruption and crime will be rife. Time we demanded Governments to stop trying being Nanny all us adult folk.

There is a lot of money to be made in the Nannying business. There is a lot of power to be generated in failing to Control a 'Controlled' substance. We won't see changes any time soon, I'm afraid.

Colabamumbai: A few european countrys took this path years ago, for example Portugal did it 10years ago..

Actually, no nation has attempted to Control a Controlled substance yet. Not even Holland with marijuana. Pot bars in Amsterdam have to deal with criminals still, to source their product.

It seems to me that those who control our lives yet again cannot or will not do the right thing. I have a leaning towards a degree of deregulation but would making murder legal...cut down the number of unlawful killings?

It's not deregulation that needs to occur. There is NO regulation whatsoever. That is the problem.

And the right thing to do is regulate not because banning a non-criminal act is creating 'problems', but because banning individual liberty is an outrage and any government that does it should be brought before (a non-joke) Hague.

To eradicate the drug problem would need a concerted worldwide effort - and cost trillions. The liberals and do gooders will get in the way of mandatory death sentences for suppliers, whole police forces would need to be finely combed to weed out the bad guys, politicians would find themselves out of work - or in reality being forced into work in a real job. Look at the current blood bath in Mexico and imagine that worldwide.

Oh my.

To eradicate the drug problem will cost trillions, yes. Trillions going into the pockets of corrupt public 'servants'. Eradicating the drug problem - in reality - would save trillions. The drug problems are created by corruption, which blossoms in the petri dish of non-regulation / prohibition.

Why would you kill the suppliers, after having fixed the drug problems created by Prohibition? The suppliers will be the same companies that produce your Aspirin, Tylenol, etc.

Whole police forces need to be combed for corruption NOW - what are you talking about? They won't have opportunity to be corrupted, once the prohibition has ended.

Why would Mexico be relevant? Mexico is the example of what happens when you PROHIBIT and fail to regulate; the entire industry is handed over to criminals in khakis (as opposed to criminals in lab coats / Big Pharma).

-----

You are correct, though. Doing the right thing is not an option...for the governments which rely on outrageous and criminal breaching of individual liberties, to stay in power and get Oprah-rich 'serving' the (largely idiotic and easily manipulated) public.

[Panhandler007]

Gov`t ought to make it harder to obtain the ingredients needed to manufacture all the synthetic drugs thats messing up the society. It s gonna get worse before it gets better...

[Briggsy]

Gov`t ought to make it harder to obtain the ingredients needed to manufacture all the synthetic drugs thats messing up the society. It s gonna get worse before it gets better...

It is manufactured on an industrial basis in Burma.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Gov`t ought to make it harder to obtain the ingredients needed to manufacture all the synthetic drugs thats messing up the society. It s gonna get worse before it gets better...

It is manufactured on an industrial basis in Burma.

The question critical minds should be asking themselves is, "Why isn't Alprazolam (Xanax) - or insert (select regulated / controlled drug dispensed by pharmacies instead of criminals here) - being cooked up by Burmese peasants working for pseudo-mafia/ military gangsters. Or Mexican warlord gangsters. Or whomever it is that finds themselves in the very convenient position of being able to profit so gratuitously, from the manufactured Supply / Demand powerball jackpot that is Prohibition."

I have had Alprazolam. That shit is so good, I'm terrified of it and won't touch it. It also helps that it's dispensed by doctors, via scripts and controls, on occasion my mind plays sneaky tricks on me, "a couple won't hurt, come on, don't be pathetic, you're being silly, etc". But too embarrassed to ask my doc, etc. If it was freely available, I'd be in some strife, I suspect.

Why aren't criminals making Alprazolam in huge dirty pots, full of chemicals of unknown origin, nature, or toxicity? Why aren't tragically victimised / addicted women & children selling their bodies for it on the street - I'm certain it's better than whatever it is they are addicted to. Surely! Why aren't there homeless people, who's lives have been ruined by Xanax addiction. My doc said 95% of users addicted in two weeks. Thank you, but no thanks. But boy, can I see how that could get sticky fast, through very little fault of one's own, if any...

I've asked this question of many, and received not even an attempted effort in response. Because from where I'm sitting, I see one dangerous, highly addictive, high potential for abuse substance...which is regulated heavily, and controlled. And I'll bet there are problems with it, but those problems are dealt with by doctors, who are the junkies' 'dealers'. And whilst criminals still make Alprozolam, they are educated criminals, in lab suits, with at least token regulatory oversight, and a brand name to ensure another level of quality control.

The problems wouldn't be from an uneducated peasant who's worked for 3 days straight, accidentally pouring in a bottle of gasoline instead of whatever he's supposed to - with bodies dropping down the line. As occurs with the uncontrolled substances, which destroy lives seemingly - from what I've seen, and I've seen a bit - not by nature of their addictiveness (which can be managed), but by the nature of the fact that when a junkie takes an illicit product, he has no choice but to accept a lot of criminals' word's, on their character (lol), that whatever dangerous substance they're hawking out to their victims, is something which resembles the drug they're after, and not rat poison instead. I'm no fancy doctor, but this is just not safe procedure, when it comes to pharmaceuticals products, which can kill or have serious side-effects, if only by innocuous contraindication. Which even the most incompetent doc, would be more attuned to, than a criminal panhandler.

And whenever I hear some 2-bit joke politician or public official or someone who should be able to add 2 and 2 together and come up with at least 3 or 5....attempt to spin the tragic results of prohibition, as justification for prohibition, I get a queasy feeling as if I'm staring right at a sleazy narco-pimp, or that surely they're on the take. Had I the courage, I'd make citizen's arrests on their filthy faces, and demand they defend themselves against charges of profiting from the deaths and suffering, profits created by their convenient failure to control 'controlled' substances.

Because surely, no one is actually that stupid? Surely.