drugs

i don't use drugs. i don't approve of drugs.
i may have mentioned that i have been stopped in the streets as a drug pusher, but nice mr plod was polite about it and well i still smile when i tell the story of it.
but it did help clarify and change the way i think about drugs. just because i don't like them, don't use them and don't approve of them doesn't mean to say they shouldn't be available. so i have gone from being staunchly agin 'em to hell legalise them, sell them in tescos (would have said sainsburys but they are so awful they would end up putting the narcotics in with the baby food), and let the chancellor get lots of dosh back in the form of taxes.
we all know that the moment the government finds the courage to buck the desire to please middle england and the sun/ daily mail readers and say that drugs are legal, that is the moment when the cigarette and drinks companies will have their cannabis ciggies and cocaine spritzers on the market.
and i reckon they would have them out in the shops within weeks - if not days.
you know they are itching to do it.
make it legal and most of the problems associated with it go away. it will become easy to get hold of, it will be come cheap, it will be safe. so no more gang troubles (frees up the police to do real work rather than chase down a few stoners), no more od'ing on bad stuff, no more having to find money for the next fix (after all you don't hear quite the same stories about alcoholics and smokers having to knock down grannies to feed their habits).
i am sure at the start people will get all silly and get of their tits permanently and then the novelty will wear off and it will be come like any other social substance.

best of all we can then dispose of all the drug doping stuff in sports.
(though my solution to that is easy. you let everyone who wants to take performance enhancing drugs take them, but the only records that count are those posted by clean athletes and to be clean you have to say you are clean and be tested regularly.
you could then have a drug league and clean league - and occasional crossovers.
the public could decide which to go to see and which to support).

after all aren't we told the market is the best regulator there is ?

anyway why am i wittering away like this?

well it is nice to see science and especially genetics coming to the aid of the drug barons.
apparently GM'ed cocaine is being grown in colombia. it means that the yield is up by 8 times and this means that although USA and colombian forces are trying their best to destroy plants and fields - the price in the states has stayed low.
though:
"A spokesman for the US embassy in Bogota said there was "no scientific proof" that "transgenic coca" had been developed, although rumour of its existence were rife.

you have to wonder if it has anything to do with monsanto ? if they the plants are indeed transgenic whether or not the "creators" still have the patent and are making the drug barons pay through the nose (excuse the pun) for the stuff and then off course tying them into a deal where they can only use one type of seed to grow the plants.
or does that only happen to peasant farmers who have to grow crops to live?
it does go to show though that where there is a demand for the item the market will find away to get the stuff made. if only it worked on crops that the world needed... oh hold on they are not profitable in quite the same way.

one thing i am betting on is there will be no warning on the pack that these drugs are GM'ed drugs.
so at least the drug user is no better off than the rest of us if they want to know if their drugs are "natural".

won't be long before they are in the shops now that the GM crew have gotten on board, as soon they will have the cocaine that works but is not really addictive (sort of like ciggies *cough*).
that they can sell with the slogan cocaine hit that gets you high but leaves you dry or all the rush but not the crash. or some such marketing bollocks.