Ducky Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 That picture reminds me of the old kids programme Nightmare! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberduck Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Quadders if you don't watch it, the guys that sectioned Gazza will be coming knocking on your door soon. By the way, sad to hear about Gazza. The guy has serious demons bugging him because he can't handle the fact he'll never play football again. It's upsetting really as the guy has so much to give to football still. He looks really ill on recent footage and he admits that he'll always be a recovering alcoholic . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Mayes Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Im not gonna lie i loved a good wipeout but now i wouldnt touch the stuff ever again its way to dangerous im sticking to afew drinks from now on, And as my dad passed away last week i couldnt bare the thought of taking anything @ some point and my dad watching over me. by the way 2 people have taken Heroin thats serious s*** i would have never of went that far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 f*** sorry to hear that buddy, I had a near miss with my Dad a few months ago and can't begin to imagine what you're going through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Mayes Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 cheer's mate it's not nice but i was relieved when he died the suffering's over now cancer is'nt a nice thing to watch and i hope to god i never have to see anyone go through it again... We buried him on thursday and i hope it's the last funeral im at for a very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsteve Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Sorry to hear about your Dad, Marty. I thought I hadn't seen you on here for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 I am also sorry to hear it Marty, thoughts are with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberduck Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Sad news there mate. Like I said before, my old dear died of cancer 6 years ago. Your right about it being horrid to see someone suffering like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Mayes Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Thank's for the support guy's yeah havin been on much because of the last few week's im just glad it's all over now il never forget my dad but id rather him be at peace than having to go through another second of pain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Kane Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Sorry to hear about your loss mate, all the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonman Posted March 6, 2008 Report Share Posted March 6, 2008 well well well, what an interesting set of result. Right, firstly, you're all nicked under Misuse Of Drugs Act 1971, secondly, who are your dealers... Seriously though, i never did/do any recreational drugs at all; i drink alcohol but that is by law considered a social drug and legal. Not even when i used to go Crasher back in 99-2000 did i ever drop. All the mates did but i just felt i never needed too. I have thought about it back in the day however. I'm not one to tell peeps what they should and shouldn't do, thats you're choice, live with it. Although being in my line of work, i have seen the damage some of those Class A's do to people; if you'd seen some of the infected wounds etc that i have it just might put you off, although these people STILL use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted March 6, 2008 Report Share Posted March 6, 2008 Right, firstly, you're all nicked under Misuse Of Drugs Act 1971. Not me I've been a good boy ^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Although being in my line of work, i have seen the damage some of those Class A's do to people; if you'd seen some of the infected wounds etc that i have it just might put you off, although these people STILL use. Errrrr, I'm not sure we're on about the same drugs here. I would struggle to get an infected wound from a couple of pills. And the only reason alcohol is a 'social drug and by law legal', is because it gets taxed. f*** any act that was brought in 1971, before pills were ever invented. The reason no one actually knows how dangerous they are is because its illegal to do research on them. Surely it would be more useful to have conclusive evidence? And errrrrrm, for the record officer, I've never touched drugs in my life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Also I refuse to believe that 3 out of the 22 people that voted have never tried alcohol. Ever?! Live a little at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonman Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Errrrr, I'm not sure we're on about the same drugs here. I would struggle to get an infected wound from a couple of pills.And the only reason alcohol is a 'social drug and by law legal', is because it gets taxed. f*** any act that was brought in 1971, before pills were ever invented. The reason no one actually knows how dangerous they are is because its illegal to do research on them. Surely it would be more useful to have conclusive evidence? And errrrrrm, for the record officer, I've never touched drugs in my life Hmm i beg to differ with your comment about Ecstasy. I have attended a "job" where someone had slipped into a state of unconsciousness - this was outside the local ritzy - we had to assist para's hence police presence. It was very stressful to say the least and a lot of panic ensued. It's alright saying it'll never happen to me but ask yourself this...how do you know a/ how pure that drug you're taking is and b/ what's it cut with? This is what makes X dangerous. It's a game of Russian Roulette. Granted i was on about the harder drugs, I'll give you that though, but 13 of you have tried Crack/Cocaine!!! and 2 of you the hardest of them all - Heroin! you're correct again, i guess the real long term effects of Ecstacy are still unknown, but i wouldn't want to put myself where I'm not in the position of being in control of myself - i guess that kinda contradicts as alcohol has the same effects and i "take" that, but i don't drink excessively. You're still in control of your intake. That one X could have god knows what in it. So i'll now do my bit for the vote and click "Alcohol". I don't smoke or have never smoked so haven't done Cannabis either. Yes you are right about Alcohol, its taxable, so therefore money can be made out if it, thus its legal. As an aside, if someone could tell me what a hit of Heroin is actually like (i know that now exposes you, whoever you are) but I'd really like to know. Thing is, I'll never be able to get in the mind of a junkie as i've never done it, so in a weird way, i'll never fully understand addiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Just out of interest Moonman, what are your thoughts on Cannabis - should it be legal or illegal? I'm intrigued to hear from a police officer about it because there's a lot of mixed opinions - form the general public, the police and MP's. As stated above, i've never tried drugs, and rarely drink - so from a fairly neutral point of view, I can honestly say that i'd rather hang around with people that smoke cannabis than people that drink. Cannabis, on the whole, mellows people out - they're safe to be around whereas i've seen even normally 'soft and harmless' people get quite aggressive when they've had too much to drink. If I was in control, i'd fully legalise cannabis - even to the extent where you can legally buy it in shops. Cannabis is relatively harmless, and just wastes police time and money by charging people for posession. They're wasting time filling in paperwork for someone having cannabis, when instead, they could be patrolling the streets as a deterent for burglars, rapists, and more severe drug crimes (the hard drugs), etc. OK, so it increases the chances of cancer - but thats up to the public whether they want to take that risk. Smokers know that they WILL die from smoking, but it doesn't deter them - again, they've chosen to smoke. Drinkers know that it causes liver damage, and if they drink excessively and become so drunk they lose control of themselves, they could quite easily get run over, be involved in a fatal fight, etc - therefore I regard alcohol as a bigger threat than cannabis. Excessive alcohol can kill instantly - whereas cannabis may cause cancer in the long term. At least a cannasbis smoker will still be here to read this tomorrow. An excessive drinker may not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Cannabis is less carcinogenic than cigarettes. And it was the cocaine, not the crack I voted for. Would never try that or heroin, would be opening up a whole new pandora's box, some things are just toooo enjoyable. Would have to have been told I have a day to live to try heroin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Kane Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Can't go wrong with good old alcohol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quadrant Posted March 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 This thread was a bad idea, I don't want to give the JJArchives a bad reputation! I'm sure we're all nice people on here really. :redface: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 Nothing wrong with freedom of speech. It happens, no need to sugar-coat it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonman Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 This thread was a bad idea, I don't want to give the JJArchives a bad reputation! I'm sure we're all nice people on here really. :redface: Lets be honest here, everyone has skeletons in the ol' cupboard. It's a valid question and drug taking does happen. As for my thoughts on Cannabis; i'd like to see it trialled in some form where it is legalized, just to see the impact. The dutch have it legalized as we all know, but i don't know what the crime figures are like for the dutch forces. Also, generally, the type of people that smoke cannabis usually have a means to pay for it without having to resort to theft; not saying everybody, just the majority. Also, if it was legal there'd be a lot less "cannabis factories" ; the way some of these are protected will leave you shocked. Some "experts" say that cannabis use leads to harder drug use, this is difficult to form an opinion on as i have never known a cannabis smoker to go and try class a's. Also, you have to look at the low death rate linked to cannabis, the fact there have been no reported overdoses of it. From a works point of view, its bread and butter stuff, usually expect a few seizures/street warnings a day. The paperwork isn't that tedious, and usually if you've got someone with intent to supply, you have reason to arrest then apply a section 18 search to their property, which usually yields some very interesting info. Also, bear this in mind, cannabis detections are a great way to massage crime detection figures too; whether you agree with that or not, it keeps the home office happy. They're quick, easy to deal leaving us to deal with more serious issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Mental Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 I'd say crime figures in Holland are a lot lower than ours, most stoners I know would rather sit about talking s*** than commit crime, and as for the having to commit a crime to pay for it shows how naive some policemen can be, it costs buttons. Giving yourself extra work, just to take a wee bit of weed of some folk, as you say, per day. How about tackling real issues first, like the public want, and maybe get an understanding of what they want, instead of trying to meet quotas for arrests that are harmless in the 1st place? Not getting at you personally as such, but from what I've seen in real life, on tv, in the papers, and what you just said, its pretty true...... Also, your "whether you agree to a search or not, keeps the home office happy" as a taxpayer hearing what you've just said makes it almost laughable. How the hell do cannabis detections help 'massage' crime figures? Explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 I'd say crime figures in Holland are a lot lower than ours, most stoners I know would rather sit about talking s*** than commit crime, and as for the having to commit a crime to pay for it shows how naive some policemen can be, it costs buttons. He didn't say people have to commit crime to pay for it. He said the type that smoke cannabis usually have a form of income to pay for it (ie, a job). Its the more hardcore drug users that resort to theft and crime to pay for it - which is why I feel it should be legalised. We're wasting time and money policing a drug that is less harmless that alcohol, when those police resources could be used on more serious issues. Of the small number of cannabis users I know, none of them would resort to crime to move towards harder drugs at all - ever. They're just normal everyday people. The problem is, the government are obsessed with statistics - they wants statistics from the police force, and they do the same with the NHS. Why can't they just let the appropriate forces use common sense and do the actions that they feel should be done. If the government want statistics, then perhaps the best place to start would be to count how many MP's are wasting our money on picking up fat salaries with even fatter "expenses". Those would make far better interesting statistics.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonman Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 Also, your "whether you agree to a search or not, keeps the home office happy" as a taxpayer hearing what you've just said makes it almost laughable. How the hell do cannabis detections help 'massage' crime figures? Explain? The police force is measured on detected crimes. Now, possessing cannabis is currently illegal. So, if someone is stopped on the street with cannabis then that right there is a crime. Now, an officer would deal with you how they see fit and depending on certain circumstances. This is set up/logged as a crime with a offender attached to it i.e matey boy who is dealt with there and then. This is then what we call a detected crime. We have the crime AND more importantly, we have the suspect dealt with. Bingo! a solved crime. Do you see? A similar circumstance is a shoplifter for example. The shoplifter is apprehended, a crime has taken place. Now we deal them via either arrest or PND (£80 ticket usually for first timers). Again, this is a crime on the premises with the offender dealt with. Thus, this goes toward detected figures. So technically, you could have 300 cannabis stops pass the figures that are set by the government and not detected any serious impacting crime ala burglary/robbery etc because you've been chasing figures. But hey, don't take you're aggression out on me. I do the job and more importantly I WANT to do it; i arrive (usually an hour early before shift actually starts to get a heads up on whats happening and get straight out there and stuck in). I take my orders and follow them and i like to think i take a proactive approach to my job. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame the courts (for some crazy decisions) and the government making us chase targets. If you take a sneaky peak on any police forums on the web, you'll see that targets really are a sore point for police officers. Don't you think we'd rather be catching robbers, burlgars etc etc rather than trying to hit targets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted March 9, 2008 Report Share Posted March 9, 2008 If you take a sneaky peak on any police forums on the web, you'll see that targets really are a sore point for police officers. Don't you think we'd rather be catching robbers, burlgars etc etc rather than trying to hit targets? Exactly mate! Thats my point. The government are to blame for the state of this country. The NHS is worse than ever despite having more money put into it than ever before, and Police statistics are holding back the fight against real crime. The police have to stop someone for possessing cannabis, drive them back to the station, and give them a good talking to, and then probably let them go with a caution. Even if the whole process takes ten minutes (which it obviously doesn't), that ten minutes could be spent driving to a burglary, or generally just spent patrolling streets acting as a deterrent - its wasted time thanks to the government. If I was Prime Minister, i'd get the police patrolling the streets again, arresting people for serious crimes - not smoking a bit of weed or doing 80mph on the motorway. Its no good the government saying they've put more money into policing if they're only dealing with silly minor crimes or filling in paperwork. That doesn't stop people breaking into houses, prevent paeodphiles snatching kids, or stop a drug den being set up. Police visibility does - and at the moment, this country hasn't got that. I can't remember the last time I saw police officers patrolling the streets on the beat. Does it even happen thse days? The police have lost respect from the public because it takes two days for them to come out after a burglary, or because they don't respond when your neighbours are harrassing you (been there! Its true!) - when in reality, its not their fault. Its the governments! All the government want is money - and unfortunately, on the spot fines for being drunk and disorderly, or doing 6 mph over the speed limit in a 30mph zone bring that money in. Solving real crimes doesn't. Its the sad state Labour have put this country in - and for some reason, some idiots keep voting for them to put them back into power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.