The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well, the drug is being (or has been) downgraded to class C. What does this mean? The government are keen to point out that it is still illegal, that those in possession will still be arrested.
On the news tonight, they used the phrase "Cannabis, a drug tens of thousands of people choose to smoke each week". I think they are seriously underestimating how widespread its use is. I wager everyone on here knows somebody who smokes it, I certainly do. Could decriminalizing the drug work in this country? There are huge benefits for the government in the way that it would free up a lot of police time, which could be used for catching those dealing/possessing harder drugs.
Is there any point whatsoever in downgrading the drug as they have done?
Do you have any views on the drug, or the questions I have asked above?
On the news tonight, they used the phrase "Cannabis, a drug tens of thousands of people choose to smoke each week". I think they are seriously underestimating how widespread its use is. I wager everyone on here knows somebody who smokes it, I certainly do. Could decriminalizing the drug work in this country? There are huge benefits for the government in the way that it would free up a lot of police time, which could be used for catching those dealing/possessing harder drugs.
Is there any point whatsoever in downgrading the drug as they have done?
Do you have any views on the drug, or the questions I have asked above?
Page:
aye, fair enough, and you did warn the guy more than once, so there's no excuse. I guess I always assume that the laws will be enforced with a zero tolerance approach.
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> If someone is shouting swear words, they are disturbing the peace,
> which is fair enough, but if you are chatting to a friend, and you
> like to use, shall we say 'colourful language', why shouldn't you be
> able to?
It is unlikely you would ever be arrested for that. Because, why would you? Unless a cop is talking to you, or you're shouting the words, how are we to know you're swearing?
> If someone is shouting swear words, they are disturbing the peace,
> which is fair enough, but if you are chatting to a friend, and you
> like to use, shall we say 'colourful language', why shouldn't you be
> able to?
It is unlikely you would ever be arrested for that. Because, why would you? Unless a cop is talking to you, or you're shouting the words, how are we to know you're swearing?
I can understand the law about swearing at the police, that's out of order, but swearing in general should be every mans right!
If someone is shouting swear words, they are disturbing the peace, which is fair enough, but if you are chatting to a friend, and you like to use, shall we say 'colourful language', why shouldn't you be able to?
And do you have a list of words that are considered swearing, or is it down to each officer? Some ned flanders type officer might find the words friggin, crap or norks to be swearing ....
If someone is shouting swear words, they are disturbing the peace, which is fair enough, but if you are chatting to a friend, and you like to use, shall we say 'colourful language', why shouldn't you be able to?
And do you have a list of words that are considered swearing, or is it down to each officer? Some ned flanders type officer might find the words friggin, crap or norks to be swearing ....
Memorandum! wrote:
> Ever sworn in a public place?
>
> Stupid law. Seriously, what a pointless law. What's the
> punishment?
It is using language or behaviour, which could cause harassment, alarm or distress.
I arrested a guy for it today actually, my first, "aggressive", arrest. You have to give a warning before you arrest for it, but it is an offence to use such language. I warned this guy twice and my colleague warned him once. My last warning was telling him he would be arrested if he swore again. He did, I arrested him and because of his "other" behaviour of which I'm not going to go into, I put his arm up his back until my colleague was restraining his other arm and I could get the cuffs on.
> Ever sworn in a public place?
>
> Stupid law. Seriously, what a pointless law. What's the
> punishment?
It is using language or behaviour, which could cause harassment, alarm or distress.
I arrested a guy for it today actually, my first, "aggressive", arrest. You have to give a warning before you arrest for it, but it is an offence to use such language. I warned this guy twice and my colleague warned him once. My last warning was telling him he would be arrested if he swore again. He did, I arrested him and because of his "other" behaviour of which I'm not going to go into, I put his arm up his back until my colleague was restraining his other arm and I could get the cuffs on.
having a law against swearing in a public place is ridiculous. If I want to call one of my friends a complete c*** outside debenhams, atop a hill or moor, or 100 yards up from esso on the A6, I should be free to do just that.
So if you bash your knackers on the cross bar of your bike, and shout "YOU F****** B******!!!!!!!!!", you'll be carted off by one of the feds?
it's a sick world we live in ;D
So if you bash your knackers on the cross bar of your bike, and shout "YOU F****** B******!!!!!!!!!", you'll be carted off by one of the feds?
it's a sick world we live in ;D
English_Bloke wrote:
> Memorandum! wrote:
> I don't think I've ever broken a law.
>
> Ever sped whilst driving?
I'm 16. So no.
> Ever dropped a piece of litter?
Surprisingly, no. I always put crap in my pockets until I see a bin. Maybe when I was like 6 or something though. Damn.
> Ever sworn in a public place?
Stupid law. Seriously, what a pointless law. What's the punishment?
> Ever used someone's still warm intestines as a skipping rope having
> slaughtered him because he stole your seat on the bus?
2/4 ain't bad.
> Memorandum! wrote:
> I don't think I've ever broken a law.
>
> Ever sped whilst driving?
I'm 16. So no.
> Ever dropped a piece of litter?
Surprisingly, no. I always put crap in my pockets until I see a bin. Maybe when I was like 6 or something though. Damn.
> Ever sworn in a public place?
Stupid law. Seriously, what a pointless law. What's the punishment?
> Ever used someone's still warm intestines as a skipping rope having
> slaughtered him because he stole your seat on the bus?
2/4 ain't bad.
Belldandy wrote:
> The entire british medical establishment disagrees with you there,
> you actually have a greater risk than smokers if you are a long term
> user because the smoke is inhaled more deeply than that of cigarette
Yes, I know that, but like I said, even if a joint is inhaled twice as deeply, then thats still 6 joints compared to the 20 cigerettes a day people smoke...
> The entire british medical establishment disagrees with you there,
> you actually have a greater risk than smokers if you are a long term
> user because the smoke is inhaled more deeply than that of cigarette
Yes, I know that, but like I said, even if a joint is inhaled twice as deeply, then thats still 6 joints compared to the 20 cigerettes a day people smoke...
Goatboy wrote:
> http://www.doheth.co.uk/profiles/cbg.gif
>
> "Worst discussion ever"
Excellent! :D
> http://www.doheth.co.uk/profiles/cbg.gif
>
> "Worst discussion ever"
Excellent! :D
Belldandy wrote:
> I'm also going to point out that Insane Bartender labelled cannabis
> users as wasters also. Before me.
Waaaah!! Please sir, someone else started it! Don't pick on me, please!!!
If you had half the brain cells you like to imagine you do, you'd have noticed that IB got picked up on this point as well. And he hasn't sat here twisting himself in knots trying to justify himself. You, on the other hand, have.
> I'm also going to point out that Insane Bartender labelled cannabis
> users as wasters also. Before me.
Waaaah!! Please sir, someone else started it! Don't pick on me, please!!!
If you had half the brain cells you like to imagine you do, you'd have noticed that IB got picked up on this point as well. And he hasn't sat here twisting himself in knots trying to justify himself. You, on the other hand, have.
Belldandy wrote:
> Timmargh wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> You really want to check out the meaning of that phrase because
> essentially you are saying me and Light are both as bad as each
> other. Whilst I would agree with that I don't think he
> would....unless you'd care to clarify...
Heh. What a rather tawdry effort to sow dissent and distract people away from ripping down your pants and rasping verbal brutalisation up your metaphorical ringpiece.
If you weren't pretending not to have read my earlier 'tirade', you'd note that I confess to an awful lot of the character traits you accuse others of and deny in yourself. Hence, Snuggly is quite correct to make the Pot and Kettle comparison. However, there are 2 differences:
1. My insults show a lot more imagination than yours
2. I actually think about what I post, and can back up my arguments.
You get all that sweetness? Or are you still hiding from me?
> Timmargh wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> You really want to check out the meaning of that phrase because
> essentially you are saying me and Light are both as bad as each
> other. Whilst I would agree with that I don't think he
> would....unless you'd care to clarify...
Heh. What a rather tawdry effort to sow dissent and distract people away from ripping down your pants and rasping verbal brutalisation up your metaphorical ringpiece.
If you weren't pretending not to have read my earlier 'tirade', you'd note that I confess to an awful lot of the character traits you accuse others of and deny in yourself. Hence, Snuggly is quite correct to make the Pot and Kettle comparison. However, there are 2 differences:
1. My insults show a lot more imagination than yours
2. I actually think about what I post, and can back up my arguments.
You get all that sweetness? Or are you still hiding from me?
Page: