Man jailed over fatal road smash

Roll around as much as you like. It's a fact.

JL

 

Yep; I've got no problem with that.

 

Should we then stop sending our troops to fight in or protect countries
and alongside allies who may impose the death penalty on them?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

Tell us about the effect on babies born to addicted mothers.

Boxer

 

Why? To demonstrate his ignorance?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

How has we been proving that?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:35:54 +1100

In the main. I thnk there is some evidence that it can muck up the
dopamine receptors in some people - that it has effects on their
brain's natural chemical reactions. But due to the illegal nature of
the drug good information is hard to come by,

As you noted, heroin users can hold down jobs and be productive, the
UK experience with prescribing heroin shows that it is possible for
those who have committed crimes to feed their habit to continue using
the drug while holding down jobs and raising a family if they don't
have to spend every waking minute trying to raise money to score.

Zebee

 

Biggus La Great. wrote:

I do wonder if the AFP might have passed on the info to the Indonesian
cops because they were fed up seeing Ozzie courts doing too little.

regards,
CrazyCam

 

As they had not committed an offence in Australia, Australian courts had
nothing to do with it.

Boxer

 

As I think you well know, that was not what I was getting at.

If the AFP knew who they were, when they were going, etc. about the
deal, they could have waited on the offenders' return to Oz, and let
Ozzie courts deal with them, but, I could certainly understand the AFP
_could_ feel that the Australian court system might well be very lenient.

regards,
CrazyCam

 

By not having the death penalty Nev and by not having a difference in
deterence since 1974 after the death penalty went away.

The main argument for the death penalty was as a deterent, since
statistics in countries that have banned the death penalty show that it
isn't then the death penalty becomes pointless.



G-S

 

Really bad I would imagine(1), just like alcohol(2) and camembert
cheese(3). Better get Abbott's hands off RU486 while we're at it.

Has making Heroin illegal stopped babies being affected by any of the
above to date ? Will making it legal significantly increase the risk ?
Particularly given the quantifiably higher probability that an abortion
will be performed, and also the fact that many heroin addicts become
quite underweight as they tend to eat less(4), which also stops them
ovulating.

Oh and you forgot to say

<plaintive wail> "Think of the children" !!!

JL
(1) I don't know either way, a quick google seems to give similar
impacts as smoking cigarettes - low birth weight, failure to thrive,
potential for brain damage plus risk of baby being addicted
(2) http://www.healthinsite.gov.au/topics/Foetal_Alcohol_Syndrome
(3) http://www.babycenter.com/expert/pregnancy/pregnancynutrition/3175.html
http://www.ext.colostate.edu/PUBS/FOODNUT/09372.html
(4) It's a Tranquilliser hence also an appetite suppressant

 

Indeed - quite plausible given the nature of the way it works however
last I read that was an untested supposition not actually evidence based
(or to put it another way, a small number of people presented with
certain sypmtoms and this is the most probable theory put forward to
explain the available evidence, causality or even correlation is not yet
tested or proven)

Yes.

JL

 

I think that's how Bobby came about ;-)


G-S

 

No because people in this debate are either pro or anti death penalty,
and Minx hadn't stated if she was pro or anti. She'd expressed her
feelings about the issues (and that's fine), but not her views on the
penalty (which is after all what the debate is about).


G-S

 

Not if they agree to remand our troops for trial in a country without a
death penalty. If not, then yes.


G-S

 

If that were the case, they'd have none of the physical evidence which
had been gathered in Indonesia. Presuming the Indonesian police got it
right, and the people carrying the drugs were found to be mules and the
people without the drugs found to be the "Mr Bigs", the Australian
courts would no doubt have convicted the people carrying the drugs, but
possibly acquitted the two who have received the heftiest penalties,
because without the physical evidence gathered from their hotel room,
the cases against them would probably be based largely on speculation
and hearsay. I'm sure the police would see no satisfaction in that
eventuality. And then there's still a presumption that the Indonesian
authorities wouldn't have detected 8.3kg of heroin passing through their
airport.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

Yet surprisingly A.B.S. data shows that in the 20 years following the
hanging of Ronald Ryan the trend for the homicide rate was upward, not
downward or level, and the homicide rate has never returned to as low a
level as it was in 1967.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

Errm the Opium wars were because the Chinese tried to outlaw the sale of
opiates, which pissed off the guys selling it (Poms). It was as much an
issue about trade as anything else - the Chinese had a heap of things
Europe wanted, but they weren't selling anything much to the Chinese
which was making the whole thing rather one way, when the Qing dynasty
tried to outlaw the one thing that WAS selling well into China the
Pommies got narky

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_wars

Why on earth would you expect reward from the addict ?

The community's reward is the several billion dollars you save from not
having to spend it on prisons, the court system, the health system etc
Not to mention the indirect savings from the rate of burglary and etc
dropping (and hence insurance premiums dropping)

The addict's able to take their substance without having to enter a life
of crime to do so. If they choose to do nothing else and as you say "end
up dying in a pool of vomit" then the only difference between now and
post legalisation is the community saved a fortune in the process.

The trick is, if it's legal, it doesn't HAVE to end up that way - if you
think about what causes them to end up dying in a pool of vomit you'll
find it is almost invariably an overdose, and under the suggestion of
pharmacy controlled dosages and govt. managed shooting rooms, the
overdose rate should plummet - it'll never be zero but it should drop
dramatically.

Indeed, and those substances would be illegal for underage people hence
it's alluring because they're not allowed to do so, but adults are, and
most teenagers desperately want to prove how grown up they are.

Remembering also that alcohol and tobacco have many years of positive
advertising, at no time did I (or would I) suggest that allowing it to
be provided by private enterprise in a competitive market would be a
good thing.

Absolutely, and preventing people making choices that harm no one but
themselves takes away that sense of responsibility. The loss of that
sense of self responsibility to be replaced with a "nanny state" that
wraps you in cotton wool in case you hurt yourself is a very negative
direction for western society in my opinion. I don't want to be told I
can't ride because I might hurt myself (for example)

....snip bit about "if you're dumb enuogh to break the law in another
country you'll get hit with their penalties."

Agreed no argument. Their choice, their consequences. Not much sympathy
here However killing them won't make anything but a trivial impact on
the availability of heroin here (as per Tim's original note)

JL

 

Why is it necessary for anyone be labelled for or against? Are you just
trying to avoid arguing against people who have the same viewpoint as
yourself?
Would that make you feel silly? Can't you identify which side of the
fence people are on by reading what they write?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX