Gordon Brown overruled by EU on banning of dangerous drug

[GommeInc]

It's best to make it illegal so people will at least understand the implications of taking it, ie it's illegal because of the risk of damaging your health.

Depends how you see it really. Banning it may seem a pointless measure, when proper education would teach people that these sorts of drugs are hazardous/dangerous, but obviously that theory died out years ago where people would rather find out the effected themselves.

[Catzsy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8592103.stm

home secretary to ban the drug 'within weeks'

Yes I think this announcement has pretty much killed this thread as they seem just to be carrying on to ban it.
Nice little publicity campaign though.

Mephedrone to be made Class B drug 'within weeks'

Alan Johnson: "I am seeking cross-party support to swiftly ban these dangerous drugs from our streets"

Home Secretary Alan Johnson is to ban mephedrone and other synthetic so-called "legal highs" within weeks.

It comes after the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs recommended they be classified as Class B drugs.

Class B drugs, which include cannabis and amphetamine sulphate, carry a maximum sentence of five years for possession or 14 years for supply.

There has been recent pressure to ban mephedrone, linked in media reports to at least four deaths in the UK.

Mr Johnson said he would be introducing legislation in Parliament on Tuesday and hoped to get cross-party support.

[alexxxxx]

Yes I think this announcement has pretty much killed this thread as they seem just to be carrying on to ban it.
Nice little publicity campaign though.

i don't honestly see how this has anything to do with eu in the first place, as you could make it illegal to consume a substance or be in possession of it with intent to use or sell without damaging technical standards nor am i sure how mephadrone fits into any EU technical standard. i'll correct myself and take it back if i'm wrong but i think nigel farage has been telling porkies.

[Catzsy]

i don't honestly see how this has anything to do with eu in the first place, as you could make it illegal to consume a substance or be in possession of it with intent to use or sell without damaging technical standards.

Exactly but any publicity is good publicity I guess

[-:Undertaker:-]

why shouldn't drugs come with issues like the DP? there is a lot of public support for the legalisation of certain drugs. who picks what goes up for referendum? it's an incredibly flawed system. if the government were to ban the sale of mcat tomorrow, i'm sure the EU commission wouldn't have an issue with it plus they should have had other ways of banning the drug, better safeguards. it's frivolous to blame the EU for this..

I'm not arguing about the legalisation of drugs, thats a totally different topic and yes if there was enough support for a referendum on that issue then it should be put to a referendum so its not a flawed system, its only a flawed system in your eyes because it gives people what they want. Switzerland is living proof that a system like that works and delievers the best for its people. The peope of Switzerland for example had a referendum on the European Union, they voted no as we would also do so.

As for the European Union and the Commission in this issue, maybe not but the fact our government has to wait for the EU to give the go-ahead is unacceptable. Let me ask you this; who is supposed to run this country alex?

The unelected EU comission or the British government which was elected?

Are you suggesting that the public are capable of making a decision about the outright killing of other human beings but not about substance trafficking?

If there was enough support for a referendum on the legalisation of drugs then it should be put to a referendum although I would not expect it to pass - thats democracy and its how it should be.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8592103.stm

home secretary to ban the drug 'within weeks'

Gordon Brown also said it would be banned but Farage kindly pointed out that EU legislation prevents him from doing so without EU permission.

i don't honestly see how this has anything to do with eu in the first place, as you could make it illegal to consume a substance or be in possession of it with intent to use or sell without damaging technical standards nor am i sure how mephadrone fits into any EU technical standard. i'll correct myself and take it back if i'm wrong but i think nigel farage has been telling porkies.

It has something to do with the European Union because as Farage has found out, the EU requires the final say on whether or not a drug is banned henceforth why it has not yet been banned. Now let us think this through logically; who is more likely to be telling the truth?

A man who gave up his job to fight against the unelected European Union?
A government which is desperate to seem in control and wishes to hide the fact the EU creates most of our legislation?

While they are all politicians, I know what the logical answer is.

[Catzsy]

I'm not arguing about the legalisation of drugs, thats a totally different topic and yes if there was enough support for a referendum on that issue then it should be put to a referendum so its not a flawed system, its only a flawed system in your eyes because it gives people what they want. Switzerland is living proof that a system like that works and delievers the best for its people. The peope of Switzerland for example had a referendum on the European Union, they voted no as we would also do so.

As for the European Union and the Commission in this issue, maybe not but the fact our government has to wait for the EU to give the go-ahead is unacceptable. Let me ask you this; who is supposed to run this country alex?

The unelected EU comission or the British government which was elected?



If there was enough support for a referendum on the legalisation of drugs then it should be put to a referendum although I would not expect it to pass - thats democracy and its how it should be.



Gordon Brown also said it would be banned but Farage kindly pointed out that EU legislation prevents him from doing so without EU permission.



It has something to do with the European Union because as Farage has found out, the EU requires the final say on whether or not a drug is banned henceforth why it has not yet been banned. Now let us think this through logically; who is more likely to be telling the truth?

A man who gave up his job to fight against the unelected European Union?
A government which is desperate to seem in control and wishes to hide the fact the EU creates most of our legislation?

While they are all politicians, I know what the logical answer is.

Its not going to stop them doing it though is it. EU or no EU. Just another publicity stunt.

[alexxxxx]

right.... i've actually gone to find proof that this is completely false and i have:

http://62.95.69.3/SFSDOC/08/080908.PDF

here is the PDF of the law passed by the swedish, which left less than a month from publishing to the enactment of the law. Last time i checked sweden was in the EU. I've also read parts of the EC directive that supposedly makes Britain wait 3 months and I can't see how it'd be required as methadrone isn't a standard.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...8L0034:EN:HTML