AFL Players and recreational drugs: Don't ask, don't tell?

Remove this Banner Ad

LOL

It can happen to people who already have a natural tendency of being prone to psychosis (as in their physiological make-up makes them susceptible to it) and to get to that stage it would require many, many years of heavy usage. That's like saying I've seen someone get lung cancer after having just one puff of a ciggy or someone suffer liver failure from drinking one beer.

Outright lie.
Can you prove this to me? Instead of just laughing and being condescending ?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Don't lie!

In my younger days I worked as a bar manager at the old Warehouse nightclub before it became Salt and yeah, sure, I used to see dicks snorting coke off the bar, the one upstairs at the back. But apart from that, no, not really.

The reality is that it's only a small minority that do it.
 
So we should all rally the Australian government to remove all laws that limit our personel freedoms, drugs or otherwise. You are drawing a very long bow by holding the Australian government to account for the 100,00 cartel inflicted deaths because of the prohibition of cocaine in this country. What do you propose, we make it legal and the Australian government buys cocaine on the black market from the Cartels and then explicitly supports the murderous industry?

The personal freedoms we enjoy are because our laws are reflective of the vast majority of Australians morality and beliefs. And contrary to what you'd believe by reading this thread, most people are against having cocaine, heroin etc available for sale at the corner store to our children.

You mean like alcohol?
 
In my younger days I worked as a bar manager at the old Warehouse nightclub before it became Salt and yeah, sure, I used to see dicks snorting coke off the bar, the one upstairs at the back. But apart from that, no, not really.

The reality is that it's only a small minority that do it.
I was being facetious - you left out the bit where I said some people were pulling more than their fair share of the load.
 
I was being facetious - you left out the bit where I said some people were pulling more than their fair share of the load.

Ah sorry, in typical BF fashion I just saw the bit I wanted to reply to and ignored everything else ;)
 
Love the part from the OP where he says, "everyone is doing it".

Yeah, righto
JEtxh96.png
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You mean like alcohol?

This debate isn't about alcohol, keep your focus on the topic at hand. Our society is based around what the majority of people consider to be a fair and reasonable way to live ones life and treat ones fellow man. Most of us do not support the notion that people should be free to peddle destructive drugs that are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands a people a year within our community, whether they have chosen the life or had it forced down their throat by a murderous cartel.

Chief has clearly distanced himself from his comments about drugs only harming users, it's ok to be enlightened and admit your ignorance. You may even feel good about it.
 
Disagree.

The prohibition of substances is an incursion on freedom. Taking these substances is not an explicit endorsement of the situation that prohibition leaves us with.

To take a stand against the people and actions that threaten the fabric of free society should mean taking a stand against the prohibition which enables the cartels to do the things they are doing. Without prohibition these thugs would just be your typical local arseholes.

Probably. But unless you're a complete fruitcake, everyone agrees there's a line. Should meth or heroin be available at the local supermarket? How about cyanide capsules? Anyone that wants to top themselves can do it quickly and easily. Should anyone be able to stock these?

So the question is, where do you draw the line? Or perhaps do you have a line? Should every substance to which there is a demand be freely available?

And the problem remains the same arseholes just getting something else to supply, unless you make absolutely everything legal and available.
 
this is for the people who can't ask the questions and don't want to know the answers...

surely you know that people would love to say something but just for whatever reason can't say hello at least.

Just a bit of grovelling or at least testing the waters and we will grow a bit..
 
Prohibition hasn't worked. Shaming hasn't worked. Australia is the highest per-capita user of cocaine.

They might want to examine why Australia has developed a drug culture, but that doesn't mean law enforcement should cease.
 
It can happen to people who already have a natural tendency of being prone to psychosis (as in their physiological make-up makes them susceptible to it) and to get to that stage it would require many, many years of heavy usage.

Rubbish.
 
They might want to examine why Australia has developed a drug culture, but that doesn't mean law enforcement should cease.
Because drugs are awesome and everyone should do them and if you don't you are stupid and drugs never hurt anyone at all.
 
I never made that comment.
It's the ignorant foundation of this whole thread.
Is it any of our business what substances other people put into their bodies if they do no harm to other people while on the gear?
Cocaine is responsible for over 100,000 deaths in Mexico since 2007. But who cares right, it's just Mexicans?
 
10,000 people were killed last year in Mexico alone due to the cocaine trade. This includes raping children and then beheading them because their family refused to get involved with cartels. The s**t that the cartel do to people makes IS look like choir boys. And you are legitimising and supporting it. I'm astounded you have publicly endorsed rape, execution, beheadings, disfiguring of women by pouring battery acid on them and tattooing their face, burning people alive and countless other grim ends to innocents lives.
There is a very strong argument that those who support prohibition are indirectly supporting aforementioned atrocities.

You don't see such acts taking place over the production and distribution of alcohol and tobacco.
 
There is a very strong argument that those who support prohibition are indirectly supporting aforementioned atrocities.

You don't see such acts taking place over the production and distribution of alcohol and tobacco.

If there is a very strong argument, as you point out, then please enlighten me. I'm all ears.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top