December 16th, 2013

WATCH: The One Where Chandler Meets Peter Hitchens

“You are just a person who is talking who is wrong.”


180 Comments

  1. 1
    Drug policy is crap! says:

    Hash is less harmful than alcohol. Criminalising Dope heads is pathetic & well as costly. Legalising hash would create a multi billion industry with at least a billion in taxes for the treasury. Further, innovative can create products less harsh on the lungs too. Hash could be subjected to same laws as alcohol and education on moderate consumption would be useful too.

    All other drugs are too complex to legalise and unfortunately some people just do not know their limit.

    Like

    • 20
      CYNICAL OLD MAN says:

      Oh yes, legalising cannabis will only create unstable paranoids, create more mental illness as the toxins in the drug destroy many more brain cells than tobacco. A further drain on our rapidly failing NHS as it will have to treat many more cases of mouth, tongue, throat and brain cancer. There will also be many more driving under the influence, causing greater danger on the roads than drunk drivers. They’ll probably get away with it too an effective machine that can detect cannabis has yet to be invented.

      Oh yes, bring it on.

      Like

      • 143
        Peed Skills says:

        Cannabis use within 24 hrs of ingestion can be detected in a drop of blood, obtained by finger pricking, in the same way those with diabetes measure their glucose levels.

        Like

      • 163
        Cartman, killing all the hippies says:

        Cancer? Not with the speed vaping is taking off.

        Like

    • 48
      Mr Slotgob says:

      Power is the ultimate drug, isn’t it Cherie ?

      Like

      • 55
        Dave wants Turkish immigrants too says:

        If you could get paid £300 a day just for going to a local place and signing your name would you take the job? I would and so do hundreds of Lords who got to the HoL.

        And it is the same for all those MEPs in Brussels but probably even more lucrative.

        If old duffers in the Lords need the money so badly then they have obviously not been very good throughout their careers (if they even had any). So why does the taxpayer have to put up with this indulgence?

        I am not against the HoL but it should not pay people £300 just to turn up for one sitting and slope off.

        Like

        • 65
          Lord Muvva-Facker says:

          Piffle and balderdash my good man. Look here, I didn’t give £100k to the Tories for the good of my own health and all that.

          Like

        • 73
          Londoner says:

          There is a good case for saying we should abolish it because there is no point in having an upper chamber of a legislature which has surrendered to Brussels.

          Personally, I’d prefer to leave the EU and live in a reformed democracy with constituencies of more equal size, maybe half as many as we have now, and an upper revising chamber the public can have a proper say about: maybe with a system of renewable 6 year tenures and the public voting to ratify nominations and able to veto and weed out undesirables.

          Like

          • Democracy is not democratic says:

            I quite like the idea of not having anybody tell me how to live my life, under any system.

            Like

      • 91
        Anonymous says:

        I dont know Yvette, what do you think ?

        Like

    • 74

      Large Hadron Collider to monitor nanoscopic amount of work done this week

      CERN SCIENTISTS are using highly sensitive instrumentation to discover if any work is done in the week before Christmas.
      The Large Hadron Collider, capable of detecting tiny interactions between subatomic particles, will be trained on the UK to see if even the smallest productive action occurs over the next five days.

      Professor Helen Archer said: “Everyone will be at their desks, certainly, and there’ll be enough mouse-clicking to fool most forms of spectroscopic analysis and middle-managers.

      “But work, in the scientific sense of the motion of a system against a force or the colloquial sense of that shit you get paid for, is not thought to happen.”

      The study follows the 2009 invalidation of Executive Theory, which conclusively showed that senior managers aren’t in important meetings but are instead getting drunk over lunch.

      Risk manager Tom Booker said: “Our office is exceptionally busy at this time of year shopping online, writing each other Christmas cards and sticking tinsel around our monitors.

      “It’s so frantic, I barely have time to put my out-of-office email on before grabbing a double fistful of Celebrations.”

      Results of the observation are expected to be inconclusive because the scientists who should be taking down results are making a model of molybdenum’s atomic structure out of paperclips and Post-Its.

      Like

    • 102
      FFS says:

      I like a drink as much as the next man, but sadly I have to say that alcohol should be banned as well. The damage it does to society is out of all proportion to the benefits.

      So where does that leave your argument on weed? Nowhere…..

      Like

    • 147
      A. Handful. says:

      What’s so hard about making a healthy decision to refrain something that causes harm to the body?
      I used to wank ten times a day to a photo of Nadine.
      I knew this could be harmful and if my secret got out, could cause me some ridicule.
      I swapped the photo to one of Yvette and now I don’t wank at all.
      I consider myself cured.

      Like

    • 160
      Anonymous says:

      All the claims about the multi-billion potential ignore the very simple fact that it is very easy to grow for almost nothing.

      If it’s legalised then half the users will grow it themselves and the other half will have a friend who grows or a friend of a friend who does.

      If cannabis was legalised you’d still have to criminalise growing it without a licence, and in that case you’d be lucky to earn more in tax than you spend policing it.

      Like

    • 175
      pootle says:

      Who is that stupid woman? You prevent drug-taking by treating it??????????????????????

      Like

  2. 2
    Yankee go home says:

    Who is the yank and what are his qualificiations?

    Come to that, who are any of them?

    Like

    • 8
      Watcher says:

      One of them used to be a journalist

      Like

    • 16
      Yankee go home says:

      Googled my own question.
      He is a poor little rich boy who went to an expensive school who was in the US sitcom “Friends”, much admired by teenaged girls and took loads of drugs.
      I thought the Hitchins bloke was dead, but apparently there are two of them and this one is a public schoolboy who writes for the Daily Mail, much admired by middle-aged ladies in marigold washing-up gloves.

      Like

      • 115
        Cousin Japser says:

        You need to read a bit more of Peter Hitchins my friend and see why he is Dave’s nemesis his books the Cameron Delusion for instance is a very good start on what has gone wrong.

        Like

    • 35
      Fog says:

      He’s Canadian

      Like

    • 155
      Kick the foreign city of London out of England says:

      He’s a rich weakling who couldn’t stop taking drugs. We should always take advice from people who are weak enough to become addicted to drugs.

      Like

  3. 3
    Charlie says:

    Hitchens is the smuggest, wrongest man invented. What an arse

    Like

    • 12
      Richard says:

      Hitchens speaks good sense. Those that oppose him cannot refute his arguments and so merely resort to abuse.

      Like

      • 13
        Sue Brown says:

        Is Hitchens on something? Lets have it out!

        Like

        • 84
          Grodon Brwon says:

          Sue!

          It’s all your fault anyway.

          Like

        • 119
          Cousin Japser says:

          Look up his younger yearr, Peter Hitchins was a leading left wing student radical in the late 60s and 70s but saw the damage that left wing politics has done to this country and now has one of the most coherent counter arguments to our current situation. It’s not popular and never will be but it’s not wrong.

          Like

      • 18
        Monica says:

        How about they stop using taxpayers’ money to lock up drug-users and stop using taxpayers’ money to help drug users and stop letting them be classed as eligable for sickness benefits and therefore jump housin queues.
        We save money and they can do as they like.

        Like

        • 21
          Charlie says:

          Give them hard manual labour. British navy , when building canals shift 20t of soil per day. have druggies excavate 20T of soil per day , six days a week for 6 months,

          Like

          • Anonymous says:

            Try it yourself, Hunt.

            Great to see Hitchens destroyed.

            Like

          • Really? says:

            I’d watch that video again if I were you.

            Neither Meacher or Perry had a coherent, thought out, counter argument. Perry resorting to insults and Meacher quoting vague statistics, while failing to grasp that every right on, PC, position she has advocated her entire life, has ended in dismal failure.

            Like

          • radders says:

            Uhm, for ‘British navy’ no doubt you mean ‘Irish navvy’

            Like

          • The Royal Navy says:

            I expect so. There is no such thing as the ‘British Navy’.

            Like

          • FFS says:

            The problem with drug abusers is that, even once they are off the stuff, they can’t abide the thought of having their drug of choice taken out of their reach for good. A bit like Frodo and the ring.

            Asking a drug abuser if he thinks drug taking should be illegal is about as productive as asking a peedo if he thinks child molesting should be illegal.

            I worked with drug abusers on a voluntary basis for several years and the way their minds jump through all manner of hoops to justify their behaviour is astonishing to behold. They are manipulative and controlling. They are perfectly fine with subjects not related to drugs but never trust anything they say on the subject of drugs itself.

            Like

          • Charlie says:

            Mistake . Should have been British navvy or one could say navigator.
            When British navigators first went to France to excavate canals , the French could not believe how much work they completed in a day.

            If people say drugs is health problem, then six months hard labour with plenty of good food should soon sort them out. If plenty of men earned their living through manual labour until the mid 80s , then why cannot junkies be forced to work?

            6 months hard labour could turn the flabby faced ex -junkie into a fit and healthy man.

            Most junkies are full of self pity and resentment combined with a weak will. Being forced to wok out of doors in the sleet and rain would be excellent training for junkies : after all the navigators who excavated our canals laboured in these conditions.

            Like

          • Haribo Halfwit says:

            Irish navvies WERE British: enough of them gave their lives at Waterloo fighting in the British army to put the point beyond dispute, at any rate.

            Like

        • 37
          Judge Dreadful says:

          It is very very rare for someone to be sent to prison for using drugs. They are usualy sent to prison for criminal activities engaged in to pay for their life-style choice/medical condition: after a series of crimes such as shoplifting and burglary, and less, commonly, for violent crime.

          Like

        • 39
          Ma­qb­­oul says:

          How about they stop using taxpayers’ money to lock up murderers if it’s about money? Hang the fuckers – that’ll save a bob or two.

          Like

        • 164
          Don't call the doctor, I'm gonna get better says:

          And that is the most sensible comment about drugs you will find. Drug use is a lifestyle choice that costs money and time. Nobody holds a gun to your head and says “get high or else you bastard”.

          Those who use drugs and get on with their lives are fine by me, those that get used by drugs need to stop and mollycoddling them won’t help them stop. I will pay for my own drugs but I am buggered if I will pay for somebody else’s.

          Like

    • 117
      Cousin Japser says:

      But he’s right and our self obsessed ‘we’re all victims’ culture is not able to take it.

      Like

  4. 4
    Drug policy is crap! says:

    Hash is less harmful than alcohol.
    Criminalising Dope heads is pathetic &
    well as costly. Legalising hash would
    create a multi billion industry with at
    least a billion in taxes for the
    treasury. Further, innovation can
    create products less harsh on the
    lungs too. Hash could be subjected to
    same laws as alcohol and education on
    moderate consumption would be
    useful too.
    All other drugs are too complex to
    legalise and unfortunately some
    people just do not know their limit.

    Like

    • 9
      Amber says:

      Flashback?

      Like

    • 85
      Mr Nyce says:

      “Legalising hash would create a multi billion industry with at least a billion in taxes for the treasury”

      Oh yeah, because the criminal gangs who currently supply the stuff do so love paying taxes.

      As soon as you tax it, you create another reason to smuggle it.

      Like

      • 118
        gra smi says:

        IF A DRUG DEALER MAKE A THOUSAND POUNDS AND SPENDS IT ON BEER AND PETROL THEN THE GOVERMENT IS THE ONLY WINNER

        Like

        • 149
          Fink 'bout tit, yeah? says:

          Wrong. He doesn’t ‘make’ it, he takes it from someone else, who is then deprived of its use, thus depriving the Gov of revenue. The succesful dealer has to wash his money, thereby reducing revenue even further.

          Like

  5. 5
    Reverend Flowers on the road to ruin! says:

    Legalise everything and make it free for everyone. Lets Paaaaaarrrrrty.

    Like

  6. 6
    Nad's Nads says:

    Perry is a twat. Hitchens ripped him a new one.

    Like

  7. 7
    Goggle Box says:

    It is a divisive issue. The strange thing is, that all three of them were making a bit of sense. The silly thing is, they all fail to see the sense in the others’ positions.

    Like

    • 106
      walking into darkness says:

      Peter Hitchens is the only one of the 3 with a brain. Hate to sound like a kiljoy,but why do you think the drugs that are illegal are so, is it because someone wants to stop us having a good time or are they in fact dangerous? Spare me the sixth form jizzle about hash and alcohol.

      It just bores me shitelss that it’s typical of this country that if you make a total mess of your own life you seem to take about 50 people with you and the rest of us have to pay for it, yet the perpertrator is the victim. A decent machine gunning or two would solve the issue, matey in North Korea is on the right lines there.

      Like

      • 140
        Frank says:

        are you suggesting Kim Jong-un snorts like a wrong-un?

        Like

      • 151
        I am responsible for me says:

        Once you delegate personal responsibilty to a law enforcement agency you will lose all semblance of personal liberty. It is not the government’s job to make sure I do not mess up my life, nor anybody else’s.

        Once you give these pieces of shit an excuse for Iknowbestism they will bankrupt you and the nation.

        Look out the window for proof.

        Like

  8. 10
    Old Blue Rinse Brigade. says:

    We couldn’t handle a poof smoking a joint! Aaaaaargh!!!

    Like

  9. 15
    The 2 Dope Eds says:

    We come across as if we have dropped something dodgy!

    Like

  10. 17
    The 2 Dope Eds says:

    U have 2 be on drugs to watch newsshite!

    Like

  11. 19
    Casual Observer 5 says:

    Hitchens is right. The other two are wrong.

    Elephant in the room: How much money do the pharmaceutical firms and the courts system – lawyers in particular – make out of this b/s vs. effective deterrent and killing demand through education and cutting off the source ?

    Two cases in point for stupidity which does not help public debate on this:

    i) Nicotine chewing gum. Help you quit smoking ? Wrong: You just transfer nicotine addiction to a chewing gum rather than a cigarette.

    Treated the addiction problem ? No.

    ii) Methodone for junkies: Has it got the junkie off of their dependency on opiates ? No.

    Who makes the $ in the above moronic situations ? Those who manufacture and distribute the products.

    Are the end users really fixing their real underlying health problems ? (Addiction is a health problem – but is not an allergy despite what the mong yank was saying)

    But – what is really criminalized – and this is to Peter’s real point – is the act of distributing harmful substances to people who are vulnerable, and people who do not know better making uninformed life choices about what they put in to themselves.

    Drug Court is a dealers best friend. When it is understood what drug sales fund – terrorism through prostitution – it becomes clear why keeping criminal sanction in place is important.

    Until government figures out a way of taxing and controlling the distribution of illicit substances in such a way that is socially acceptable (methodone is perhaps a pilot…) then the blocks will remain.

    Like

    • 22
      Hoss Cartwright says:

      +1

      Like

    • 24
      NE Frontiersman says:

      Drug sales only fund terror and prostitution because illegality makes it highly profitable, and an illegal network can switch products quite easily. When the drugs are cheap as chips and you can get them from a GP or the dole office, crime does not pay. Buying opium direct from the growers breaks the supply chain and could be accounted for under overseas aid.
      The main deterrent to decriminalisation is the fear of what the criminals might find to do instead.

      Like

      • 122
        FFS says:

        Displacement theory. If you don’t get rid of the criminals themselves then the criminals will only find other ways of making money out of crime.

        Hence if you make drugs illegal or not will have no impact on the level of crime.

        The purpose of making drugs illegal is to protect those that are most likely to abuse drugs – the vulnerable, psychologically weak and depressives – from being permanently and irrevocably harmed by drugs.

        Prescription drugs can be just as big a problem as street drugs.

        Alcohol is a bigger problem than the whole lot put together. Al Capone wasn’t making money out of alcohol so much as alcoholism. We live in a society more or less based on alcohol abuse – from teenagers hoping to use it as “Dutch courage” in failed attempts to meet the opposite sex to middle-aged businessmen hoping to wash away the memories of failed ambition.

        Like

    • 27
      Timmy2much says:

      “Until government figures out a way of taxing and controlling the distribution of illicit substances in such a way that is socially acceptable”

      The post office;
      I’ll have some class A stamps please and a standard size envelope of your finest home grown.

      Like

      • 30
        Anonymous says:

        Seem to remember back in the seventies the Constabulary new all the heroin came in via Cities in Yorkshire yet nothing was done about it ( presumably to avoid offending favored groups.)

        Like

        • 132
          And now the news where you live says:

          I take it you are referring to the local scene in Yorkshire or are you suggesting Yorkshire was the main hub for the whole country ?

          Like

    • 62
      No Name says:

      The illegality of the industry is the only reason the profits fund dodgy individuals and causes. The spirits industry in America during prohibition was controlled by people like Al Capone.

      Like

    • 86
      Mr Nyce says:

      As soon as you tax it, you create another reason to smuggle it.

      Like

    • 111

      As usual, you get right to the heart of the problem in an incisive way.

      However, when you look at the issues that need to be addressed when dealing with legal substances and the difficulties which the politicos manage to get themselves in (plain packages for cigarettes for example), the thought that they could sort out something at this enhanced level of complexity is frankly doubtful in the extreme.

      This is how the mongs in society, like that bearded American wonder, manage to keep everyone back. I would like to hold his head underwater to see if he became addicted to that…

      Like

      • 120
        Master Mindless says:

        He reminds me of those snivelling smokers who claim that they are addicted. Wankers.

        I smoke (and drink far too much) because I love it.

        Like

    • 165
      Don't call the doctor, I'm gonna get better says:

      Ah, but the attraction methadone has is that it doesn’t give a nice high so the Calvinists are OK with it. Addiction isn’t the problem, having a good time is.

      Like

  12. 23
    Nasty cunt says:

    The wrong Hitchens died.

    Like

  13. 25
    The Oracle says:

    Hitchens is sound on every subject but God and blow. The former, since classical times “Ο ΘΕΟΣ Ο ΥΨΙΣΤΟΣ”, clearly advocating the latter.

    Like

  14. 31
    Anonymous says:

    Surely we need a decade of unlimited state supply of narcotics to ensure as many potential addicts as possible overdose to remove the weakness from the gene pool?

    Like

    • 34
      Mike P says:

      get Hitchens hooked on skag like Gene Hackman in the French Connection, make him do cold turkey then ask him if addiction is not a medical phenomenon.

      Like

      • 40
        Ma­qb­­oul says:

        French Connection II which was fiction.

        Like

      • 124
        FFS says:

        The short term phyisical impact of drugs is physical. Cold turkey usually lasts about 1 month. The longer term addiction is psychological. Some say it can never be cured, but in my experience somebody that has been clean for 10 years is no more likely to turn to drugs than anybody selected at random.

        Like

  15. 33
    Mike P says:

    I know a better addiction; bumming young Moroccans

    Like

  16. 36
    jack Droneby says:

    I have an addiction to big black cocks. My Missus Harriet has a strap-on especially for Wimmins Lib Day.

    Like

  17. 41
    Englland says:

    Unimpressive result in the Ashes.

    Like

  18. 43
    bill says:

    what a great clip.appart from the baroness playing the ‘you are both right card’,yawn.
    she is in power and messed up the whole drug policy,hitchens and chandler were superb.

    i had writen off newsnight as a ranting establishment programme with angry old people.

    maybe it has a future?

    Like

    • 112
      walking into darkness says:

      Hitchens was excellent, Chandler put in his worst performance since any episode of Friends

      Like

      • 138
        Camerclegband says:

        I’d spend time with Chandler, I’d rather stick pins in my eye’s than spend time with he self obsessed, droning bore Hitchens.

        Like

  19. 45
    Great political lies of our time says:

    Norman Baker and T May are best of pals and working well together on protecting our nation’s borders from the invaders

    Like

  20. 47
    Paxman's beard says:

    If you can remember the ’60s you missed out on some great weed, man.

    Like

    • 49
      This century says:

      One of the most boring and palbably untue cliches ever to be milked to death by members of a generation which entered a cultural dead end and rarely found a way out of it.

      Like

      • 57
        Congrats says:

        So you remember the great weed?

        Like

        • 58
          This century says:

          I don’t give a shit about the ‘great weed;’ which was actually smoked by a tiny group of very dull people. (Usually the same old same old silver spoon brigadem and their wannabe hangers on). The vast majority of people did not succomb to the nonsense which gets peddled about that period by the lefty propagandists.

          Like

    • 81
      Village Idiot says:

      ……Remember the 60’s,not much weed,more resin from all around the globe back then! ….Lebanese,00moroccan,Black shirash,nepalese.thai sticks..Much more variety back then!

      Like

  21. 54
    HDB111 says:

    I was an addict and now I am not its been over 40 years since my last fix, I came out cold Turkey because of the fear of being caught and a small window where I saw what my life and I were becoming. I can take a drink without becoming drunk so the idea that it is a disease is simple not true. It is people who cannot deal with problems finding a way to make those problems go away.

    We either legalise and deal with the fallout or we make the use a real crime with real sentences, no more warnings. For me I wish that those 5 years of my life had not been lost.

    You will all understand that I cannot give my name it would probable cost me my marriage and my job and that is the fear that I have to live with.

    Like

    • 82
      Village Idiot says:

      ….In my opinion,Alcohol and tobacco are the most damaging drugs,being socially acceptable! …I gave up alk in 1987 and baccy in2011!

      Like

      • 121
        Ed Miliband says:

        But if the others become socially acceptable, would that still be true? Not convinced making crystal meth a normal, legal vice is a great idea.

        Like

      • 125
        FFS says:

        Agreed. We should move to put tobacco on prescription so that young people don’t get addicted and start clamping down on alcohol. Gambling is another area that needs to be addressed.

        Like

  22. 59
    Ric Holden CCHQ says:

    Disillusioned Tory supporters choosing to punish Cameron either by voting Ukip or switching to Labour – 4 new polls

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/16/conservatives-ukip-assault-marginal-constituencies

    What am I going to do now ?

    Like

    • 61
      Londoner says:

      Get off your backsides and do some work. I never hear anything from the Tories from one end of the year to another in my constituency. They do no recruitment, no activities, deliver no leaflets, hold no fundraising events and make no efforts to take on local political issues.

      Like

    • 71
      Dave wants Turkish immigrants too says:

      “Ukip is becoming the official opposition to Labour in parts of the Midlands and north and a real opposition to the Conservatives in many parts of the south. Voting Ukip offers the best chance to defeat incumbents in these places.”

      Exactly.

      Like

    • 107
      Tosser Dave says:

      All the LGBT mutants will vote for me. I am sure to be re-elected in 2015.

      I got same sex marriage legalised.

      Like

  23. 60
    Man from the street says:

    If we do legalise dope, will it be sold in plain packets?

    Like

  24. 63
    Eminem says:

    Taking drugs is cool, bitches!

    Like

  25. 64
    Non taxable pikey says:

    Singapore Rules, the only way.

    Like

  26. 67
    A shitter says:

    VESA
    If you have been stupid to work for as long as possible and pay your taxes and N.I. and also be stupid enough to put a little money aside each month for your old age, you really are a Pratt, because if there comes a time when you need help from the state,due to ill health they will say no, you cant work but you have some money in the bank, it doesn’t matter that you have paid in for decades you get nothing.
    A good analogy would be winning the lottery going to the office to collect the money and find that they have looked at your finances and say you have got enough money so we aren’t going to pay out.
    It seems that paying in counts for nothing, but if you are a scumbag with multiple kids from multiple , unknown fathers you are fawned upon and provided with all your needs (alcohol, fags etc.) .
    It’s a great system no wonder the country is on its backside.

    Like

  27. 68
    Dave wants Turkish immigrants too says:

    Hitchens is partly right in that dissuading young people from taking drugs in the first place is the best option. Therefore drugs have to be kept criminal. Plus possessing illegal drugs should also be a crime because you only need some twat like Nigella Lawson (who is allegedly intelligent) who allows their kids to take the same drugs to see just how dangerous and damaging it can be.

    But he is wrong about addiction. This is a real problem rather than a simple lack of will power. So rehab is more useful than prison.

    Drugs are dangerous, even alcohol and tobacco. The evidence for that is overwhelming and if we had known of these dangers before they became so popular I reckon these would have been prohibited too. But once the genie is out of the bottle the damage is done and he can’t be put back. But let us see what happens in Uruguay where cannabis has been legalised and wait 5 years for the evidence to prove who is right and who wrong about legalising drugs. I will be happy if I am proved wrong. The corporate drugs companies must be cock-a-hoop that they are going to make a killing from legalised drugs.

    Like

    • 77
      An Italian au pair says:

      if you want to dissuade young people and the likes of that Lawson woman from taking drugs then you do not make the drugs legal.

      What you do is keep the offence and harden up the sentence. There should be mandatory prison sentences for all offenses with cameras allowed to film without restriction in Courts.

      Then you would get a reaction.

      Like

      • 78
        Tory Boys are best says:

        The riots of a couple of years back would look like a stroll in the park.

        Like

        • 79
          Tory Boys are best says:

          As long as you have good insurance in place you will have nothing to fear.

          Like

        • 88
          uno iztru says:

          Nah, not enough people could get excited about it, and anyway even the recreational takers know it’s wrong really, and part of the thrill is doing it illegally.

          As for the previous riots, the plod could have stamped them out in the first 5 minutes if they had shot a few looters instead of just standing and watching.

          Like

        • 176
          Charlie says:

          Riots happened because Police too soft. Hit someone in the shins with a scaffold pole and they will riot no more.

          Like

      • 92
        Taxpayer says:

        Locking the stupid fuckers up just costs a lot of money.

        Give them as many drugs as they want free, and let them kill themselves.

        Problem solved.

        Like

  28. 83
    An awkward bastard says:

    Have they hung that drug smuggling British granny in Indonesia or wherever it was yet?

    If not perhaps they could do it over Christmas and televise it live.

    Justice not only has to be done but seen to be done.

    Like

  29. 89
    Cato Street Conspirator says:

    Legalise them. Quality will go up, price will go down, the criminals will be shut out.

    Like

    • 93
      Err says:

      Totally agree, but don’t expect criminals to give up. They will find other ways of ‘ making a living’.

      Like

      • 97
        Dave wants Turkish immigrants too says:

        …. like becoming a politician.

        Like

      • 98
        JOSE MANUEL BARRARSEHOLE says:

        People trafficking is a lucrative business , i know Dave says you will get life in prison , but our fantastic European court of human rights will make sure you get legal aid , a community service order for your crimes and full compensation for any time spent on remand with full rights to stay in Britain and have as many children as you like at the tax payers expense

        Like

    • 128
      FFS says:

      If you think that selling drugs should be legal then presumably the people selling the drugs are not “criminals” in the first place? So why are you so worried about them?

      Conversely, if you make it legal then do the people selling the drugs suddenly stop being criminal, or do they stay criminal like many people consider the tobacco companies?

      To put it more succinctly – if selling drugs of any kind damages people, will it always be considered immoral even if it is legal and will those doing it therefore really be considered “criminals”.

      It is a bit like “Wonga” “Ladbrokes” and “British American Tobacco” – all doing stuff that is legal s but considered immoral and dodgy.

      Like

      • 142
        Cato Street Conspirator says:

        Excellent point Mr Wittgenstein. I refer you to prohibition in the United States – what had been legal became illegal and criminals moved in. What had been illegal became legal when prohibition ended and criminals had to find somewhere else to go. The substance, alcohol, and its effects remained the same.

        Like

  30. 90
    Mother Nature says:

    1. Prohibition doesn’t work
    2. Legalise all drugs.
    3. Sell clean stuff through pharmacies.
    4. Destroy the criminals markets.
    5. Let anyone who wants to poison or kill themselves with drugs just get on with it. Evolution at it’s best.
    6. Simples.

    Like

    • 96
      Darwin says:

      Agree. We are interfering with Nature’s attempts to address over population.

      Like

    • 103
      Dave wants Turkish immigrants too says:

      Well Mother nature’s recipe certainly worked for all those who have died and suffered from alcohol and tobacco and it has also included many innocents who have been subjected to car crashes and physical, mental and sexual abuse as a result.

      Like

      • 113
        Mother Nature says:

        I am in control. Evolution has, and will work. Unfortunately there is collateral damage, as your politicians would call it, on the way.

        Like

        • 177
          Charlie says:

          Any employer should have right to sack employee on drugs. No-one allowed to drive car or use machinery on drugs. No welfare for anyone on drugs.

          The problem with junkies is they expect others to support their lifestyle.Who wants to be on plane flown by a pilot on drugs or any where near a police officer on drugs who is driving a vehicle at high speed?

          The reality is that the War on Drugs has never been fought. If Italian Army actually executed all members of organised crime it would not exist. Mussolini imprisoned organised crime members .The problem was when the American Army invaded Sicily, they released organised crime members and even supported them as they considered them anti- Mussolini . The problem with organised crime and terrorism is that countries provide areas where they can create support networks . The cooperation between terrorists and third world countries from 1968-1980 with training from Soviet Union enabled them to evade western countries except for Israel. After The Munich Massacre of 1972 , The Israeli Government set special hits squads who hunted Black September members throughout the World and killed 12 of the top 13. If there was serious war on drugs , then western governments would emulate The Israeli Government in eliminating Black September . However, this means interfering with other nations sovereignty

          Like

    • 130
      FFS says:

      1. Prohibition DOES work. Drug taking in the UK is in decline.

      3. Why clean it up when you believe in 5

      4 If druge selling should be legal then the people selling aren’t really criminals are they?

      5 I can at least see the sense in this one, except that alcohol abuse and Class A drug abuse tends to be a very slow burn and a lot of innocent people get harmed in the process.

      6 Simples? Yes you are.

      Like

      • 154
        Anonymous says:

        It rose during the worst of the prohibition. It’s going down because
        people are aware of the health risks – and its expensive after QE. Drinking is also going down for similar reasons.

        Your point 4. shows little understanding of economics. The black market would disappear. Criminals wouldn’t be able to compete.

        5. is true but it’s still not the state’s business.

        Like

  31. 94
    JOSE MANUEL BARRARSEHOLE says:

    The English cricket team = more limp dicks than a Buddhist monastery

    Like

  32. 99
    Joe Public II says:

    So the Beeb sent 3 times as many staff to the Mandela love-in as all the othe broadcasters put together.

    WTF are you doing to sort this ludicrously expensive biased monolith out Dave?

    Fuck all as usual , you weak gutless tosser.

    Like

    • 108
      One Term Dave says:

      I am too frightened to deal with the BBC. I prefer to go to Afghanistan for a photoshoot with soldiers and say Mission Accomplished!

      Like

      • 116
        All the dead and Injured Squaddies says:

        Thanks Dave. We really appreciate you taking the time to pose in Afghanistan.

        We are so grateful for the opportunities given to us by you politicians to get killed or injured. All for fuck all — except to allow all you bastards to ponce around pretending to be international statesmen.

        P.S. Thank St.Tone for us as well next time you see him.

        Like

    • 137
      Its not called white city for nothing says:

      Please stay on topic as I cannot see any connection between drug taking, drug dealing class A drugs like cocaine and the BBC.

      Like

  33. 100
    Immer Wieder says:

    It’s not a disease. But otherwise Chandler is right.

    Like

  34. 101
    Pollee Tuscanee says:

    Chavs on benefits should be able to have as many brats as they want. I would willingly pay more taxes to support them……… Where’s my medication?

    Like

  35. 127
    RickB says:

    The idiot yank stated that the taking of drugs and alcoholism are diseases when in fact they are self-inflicted addictions. Why do the anti-cigarette do-gooders never claim that smoking is a disease ?

    Peter Hitchens – a beacon of common sense in a mad mad world.

    Like

    • 134
      FFS says:

      Looking at the way drugs works actually shows why legalising drugs is wrong. Many of them operate by replicating the behaviour of naturally occuring “drugs” like serotonin that makes us feel pleasure. However, because they are not the genuine article, they often damage the receptors in the brain that react to those drugs. This then requires more of the drug to work as well as the first time.

      People, especially young people, tend to take drugs when they are in a period of depression in their lives. They take drugs to self-medicate but justify their behaviour publically (like Perry) because nobody likes to admit they were wrong. Sadly, the drugs not only mask the underlying problems allowing those very real problems to get worse, they damage the brain’s natural response to pleasure and happiness, causing the depression to be ingrained.

      People like Perry are part of the problem. Because he was a drug abuser he self-justifies his behaviour. This gives young people the feeling that “Drugs are bad” is a matter of opinion, rather than fact. Thus young people feel that if they choose to self-medicate on drugs they can always justify it somehow. The law should prevent drug abusers having a platform.

      Like

  36. 148
    fitbad the tailor says:

    Not long ago I visited a nearby town. Finding myself caught short I went to the nearest public toilets only to discover there was a manned kiosk demanding 20 pence to enter. Searching my pockets I couldn’t find anything less than a £10 note. Normally I would have apologised for offering a note for such a small sum, but the attendant was absorbed in reading something and didn’t even look up, so I said nothing, just slapped my £10 down on the counter and awaited the reaction.

    Still without looking up the attendant snatched my note, reached beneath the counter and placed a small packet in front of me. Taken aback, I stared at this packet for a few seconds before mentioning that I just wanted to use the toilet. At last the attendant looked up, snatched the packet, put it back under the counter and searched for the £9.80 change.

    Like

  37. 161

    A PACKET OF THREE FOR TEN POUNDS ?? NEXT TIME TRY POUNDLAND .

    Like

  38. 167
    MandyPickleSniffer says:

    Chandler, and that ridiculous woman who kept talking over everyone else, were completely wrong and they had no coherent explanation other than trying to make Friends’style quips and jokes, like calling him Santa.
    Bottom line, it’s just typical of the pc-brigade’s attitude (adopted by Labour) that people can’t be held responsible for their own actions and that the STATE needs to step in to make decisions for them, to HELP them, and that by doing so the government is doing the noble thing.
    Bollocks!
    Thirteen disastrous years of Labour has caused this complete relinquishing of self-determination and self-reliance and has created a generation of hopeless “vicitms” who are dependent upon the State for everything. Oh, how convenient, by the way…as it means they’ll keep voting for the Labour wankers who give them their daily fix. This whole “I can’t help it, I’m an addict” mantra reached its pinnacle when Michael Douglas proclaimed that he couldn’t help fucking anything that had a pulse because he was a “sex addict”.
    Gimme a break. What a load of poppycock and claptrap.

    Like

  39. 168
    HEARDITALLSEENITALLBEFORE says:

    The next time you are in pharmacy queue and some malodorous skinny little rat faced stunted moron is ushered to the front to receive his methadone fix remember, YOU are paying . If the criminal law had been properly applied initially this problem would never have got out of hand . The rot set in when cannabis became universally available through political correctness and pandering to certain minority groups ………..innit !!

    Like

  40. 170
    Nemesis says:

    Well done Peter you made the other two appear like exactly what they are – a pair of fucking clowns.

    Like

  41. 178

    Why is Hitchins even on these shows! He is a nobody with no relevant qualifications.His own opinions are based on his hatred off his brother and resentment that as a homosexaul drug taker he was still considered a better journalised. His views are bigoted self possessed crap filled with hatred and spite against others. He has no medical standing, no political standing. Stop bringing this nasty right wing drug fascist with his politics of hate into this debate. He is a piece if sh*t who works for a newspaper dedicated to lies and bullsh*t that is ruining the lives of many people; The Daily Mail should be used as toilet paper and he should be ignored not continuously wheeled out to spout lies and prejudice. If he was talking about Blacks or gays in the manner he speaks of drug users he would be prosecuted.

    Like

  42. 179

    Why is Hitchins even on these shows! He is a nobody with no relevant qualifications.His own opinions are based on his hatred of his brother and resentment that as a homosexaul drug taker he was still considered a better journalised. His views are bigoted self possessed crap filled with hatred and spite against others. He has no medical standing, no political standing. Stop bringing this nasty right wing drug fascist with his politics of hate into this debate. He is a piece if sh*t who works for a newspaper dedicated to lies and bullsh*t that is ruining the lives of many people; The Daily Mail should be used as toilet paper and he should be ignored not continuously wheeled out to spout lies and prejudice. If he was talking about Blacks or gays in the manner he speaks of drug users he would be prosecuted.

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

What Will Happen if Scots Leave? | David Aaronovitch
Why Are Radicals Like Carswell Leaving Tories? | BBC
Danczuk: Rotherham Abuse Imported From Pakistan | Telegraph
Ashya King Case Shows How Authorities Get it Wrong | ConHome
The Carswell Show | Jon Craig
Cops Seized Journalist’s Phone to Out Whistleblower | Press Gazette
Chuka’s £2,500 Tax Avoidance Donation | Times
Another BBC Stitch Up? | David Keighley
Divided, Pessimistic Tories Expect Defeat | Alex Wickham
Labour Suspends Rotherham Council Members | Sky
PM Used Terror Crisis to Deflect From Carswell | Rachel Sylvester


VOTER-RECALL
Get the book Find out more about PLMR


George Osborne rejects the Ice Bucket Challenge from Ed Balls:

“I’d rather pay the money to charity and pour cold water on his policies.”



Owen Jones says:

We also need Zil lanes.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,441 other followers