Wednesday, October 7, 2009

HOW MUCH?





According to the Sun, each junkie in Scotland costs the tax payer £63,000. A total of £3.5 billion is spent dealing with and looking after these dregs of society.

Just take a moment to absorb that figure. £63k for every drug 'addict'.

I'm in no doubt that each proper junkie costs the tax payer a lot more, because it looks like they include those who enjoy a spliff or two and the weekend disco sweets crew as 'addicts'.

I wholeheartedly object to money that has been stolen from my hard earned wage packet being used to tar these people with the victim brush. They are not victims. They made their choice, end of. Stop pissing money away on stupid detox programmes and schemes. It clearly doesn't work.

All drugs should be legalised. What you decide to pump into your own body is entirely up to you. Just be prepared to take responsibility for your actions.

Or, failing the legalisation, each junkie should be given fifty grand in cash and a one way ticket to the destination of their choice.

Simples.

.

16 comments:

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Well yes and no.

I have a friend who is an ex-heroin addict. This friend was introduced by her father to drugs in her early teens. The drugs were not even half of her appalling story. She didn't chose the gutter, she was pushed into it by an abusive father, who also managed to make sure all his children became addicts. (He was a dealer). Well, she eventually realised that there was only one way to get off the drugs and that was to stop, which she did. For good. Her life now is vastly different to what it was then, very much for the better.

On the other hand, druggies are devious and will take everything you have. Yes, they are a drain on society, but the reasons they end up the way they do are complex and not necessarily a matter of choice.

Rab, you are looking at this from the wrong perspective; that is, from the point of view of an intelligent, relatively sane person who takes his responsibilities seriously. Drug addicts rarely begin with such a set of values.

What I do think is that the Methadone route is a failure. It merely prolongs the inevitable. The inevitable is that the only way out of drugs is to stop. It is at that point that society should step in, and then only in a very limited way.

I have to ask myself, what would I do if my kids became addicts? Well, for a start, they are intelligent and they know, in no uncertain terms, what a life of drugs means. Secondly, they have been warned by me. If I suspected, for a moment that they had a problem, I would confront them straight away and if necessary kidnap them until they were straight. Failing that, I don't know. There is a point with all the families of druggies when they have to give up.

By the Grace of God, I am not in that position.

Ed P said...

So, are you advocating sending the heroin addicts to Afghanistan & coke-heads to Columbia? Where shall we send the E generation - a laboratory in Switzerland?

WW is half right - people only stop taking drugs when their personal choices dictate it, not due to state intervention. Then they need lots of (state) support.
But decriminalising all drugs could help to break the links between organised crime and addicts, which would benefit society greatly.

I am Stan said...

I think your dead right rab...if you take drugs whether its alcohol,coke or e it your body and your choice.

If you end up addicted thats your bloody fault...take responsibility for your own actions..dont look for others to blame or bail you out .

If the state stopped throwing money at these losers and left them to get on with it people would think twice about overdoing it

I wish they would stop wasting my taxes on these bums...

The Economic Voice said...

Take the money out of drugs....

These have been 100% effective schemes set up where Heroin addicts go to a named center in their town or city and are administered with as much skag as they want in the clinic.....the dealers have no more customers and leave the town and the junkies are contained and don't steal because its free....and because the dealers leave the town there are NO more first time users....

How much does this cost?

Next to nothing!!!!!

Heroin is so cheap for the NHS to buy its not worth mentioning...cheaper than anti biotics!!!

There would end all our drug problems...

Same goes for meth

JUST TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF DRUG DEALING AND THIS DOES IT!!!!

As a footnote...meth is one nasty fucking drug.....

hermit said...

I've commented here before in favour of legalisation.
Economic Voice: I fully agree.

"....fifty grand in cash and a one way ticket to the destination of their choice."
I have dreams like that.

Dramfineday said...

Yes I can just see it now - step forward and be recognised "Lord Gangster of Crook" - for services to the drugs industry.

Well, that's what happened with the whisky industry didn't it? All the bandits that ran that got legalised and within a blink of a eye were lording over us (and still do in some cases).

Free drugs? Probably a lot safer to the general public than free booze because if alchohol had to be licensed for human consumption it would never make it

aljahom said...

What the fuck is a 'problem' cannabis user.

Does he piss everyone off at Tesco by buying all the Krispy Kremes and Ginger Biscuits, FFS???

And 10,000 of them? No wonder you can't get a proper biscuit in Scotland and have to make do with lard cakes and Tunnocks shite.

Oh and yeah - decriminalise the whole lot.

Dazed and Confused said...

I like the one comment from the article itself, which goes:

Posted by: matt88008

Utter garbage from David Liddell the Director of the Scottish Drugs Forum. I live in a country, Thailand, which is much much poorer than the UK and yet has a minuscule crime problem abd drug problem by comparison. It also has NO welfare state to support those indigents who elect to self-destruct. Consequently even those who might otherwise be tempted to indulge in substance abuse have to work to survive. The problem is SOCIALISM and the all embracing nanny state culture embodied by the likes of David Liddell, no doubt drawing a large taxpayer funded salary for spouting this Marxist nonsense. The solution is simple. Cut ALL funding from the addicts and those that make a living off them like Mr Liddell and return the 3 1/2 billion to the taxpayer from whence it was stolen.

Joe Public said...

A one-way ticket to a destination of OUR choice - Singapore

SteveShark said...

Spot on, Rab.

Shame no-one in any position to achieve an end to this futile and expensive 'war on drugs' has the will or the bollocks to do anything about it.

Wormit Steve said...

As sent in to BBC Radio Scotland's Morning Extra show

[As emailed in]

Morning,

Whilst there are much harder, more addictive drugs cannabis and its source is one that should be looked at again. Hemp was once used for the creation of ship sails, can be used as an effective bio-fuel and has been used as a polymer by Henry Ford for a car shell tougher than steel but much lighter. Hemp is also used as a form of sustainable paper. Copies of the Declaration of Independence were produced on hemp.

When considering the war on drugs we must look at the causes and uses. We must also consider how much is being spent to enforce laws for less addictive and more recreational drugs that pose no threat and, when actually legally taken in favour of harder drugs, reduces the issues faced. We must also not forget that the person who takes said drugs are responsible for their lives and are not the responsibility of the public at large. As pointed out by other contributors on your show, other countries have proved the exception to the rule... or the laws.

I might suggest readers look into hemp as well as looking at the following site:

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/



Steven J. Sexton
LPUK Scotland Party Secretary

[Upon realizing that I missed a point...]

In my haste to post the above I failed to include an article also worth the read.

http://mises.org/story/3736

Steven J. Sexton
LPUK Scotland Party Secretary

Wormit Steve said...

One final point to make you think...

63,000 is the cost, which is ironically similar to that of the basic M.P. salary.

scunnert said...

The major negative health consequence of heroin addiction is constipation.

banned said...

Wrinkled Weasel "she eventually realised that there was only one way to get off the drugs and that was to stop, which she did. For good. "
Good for her, that is the point at which I would be prepared for the state to step in and help. Accomodation, food vouchers, frequent tests, education and assimilation back into Society.

At present in a small town near me, and another near you dear reader. Monday early AM all the local junkies parade at the local Surgery for their weekly benzo and meth fix ( side effect, those thinking of quitting are faced with their co-addicts, incl dealer, who will do all they can to stop them ).
Next, off to the chemist before the normal people arrive at the surgery.
Lunchtime. Hang around the usual place for the schoolkids to arrive, they have expert knowledge about the relative potency and street value of the various Benzos on offer ( which cost the NHS a few pounds per 10,000 ) ranging from 50p to a couple of quid.
Sorted, got some meth, got enough cash for the real thing, probably enough to last most of the week topped up with a bit of thieving and skanking.

This has gone unchanged for decades and everybody from the GP to the Chemist and the Drug Rehab Outreach Worker wins, not to mention the benzo and meth producers.

Point is, many many youngsters join the ranks of the junkies precisely because of the way the NHS currently tries to deal with the problem.

put them all in detention said...

There are too many well paid outreach workers who have little to gain from helping people off drugs. Why would turkeys vote for Christmas ?
Thailand is awash with drugs. The junkies are thrown into centres and don't get out until they come off drugs. Most prefer to die.

Jill said...

I think legalise (for all the blindingly obvious reasons that the great and the good seem too retarded to grasp), tax to high heaven (I may diverge from you here?) and use the proceeds to support the inevitable casualties. Just see the tax as a legally-required insurance policy against person X being one of the casualties!