The body that advises the government on illegal drugs is meeting to discuss whether ecstasy should be downgraded from a Class A drug to Class B.
At the same time, I am utterly unsurprised at this comment...
As part of the discussions, panel members will consider the submission from the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), stating that transferring ecstasy to class B would send out an "unfortunate message".
Yup. The unfortunate message would be that being happy is perfectly OK.
It isn't, alright?
Being happy might mean that you no longer look to the state to assauge your aching sense of loss and might just realise that the state makes you miserable.
Additionally, you might realise that taking Ecstasy will not lead to you begging on the streets to feed your hopeless heroin addiction within mere hours, and instead you might find yourself dancing, having fun and wanting to end your night hugging someone rather than bottling them.
No! No fun. You must not have fun, do you understand?
You must labour at the coalface and pay your taxes so that MPs can spend them. You must not be happy, and you definitely must not realise that taking a drug that enhances music and makes you feel a sense of community with your fellow man might, in fact, be a good thing.
Now, go to work, you drones: your government is in control...
UPDATE: I do love to post these sorts of things occasionally, just to bring out the reactionary fear that so many of you seem to have about drugs. It's actually pretty funny. Still, I shall attempt to reply (again) to the same old, same old objections that are raised every time that I post about drugs.
Let's start with Miss Snuffleupagus's first contribution.
The point is that happiness should come from that which makes life worth living. It should not be induced by a drug!
That's pretty much what I have said to my Prozac-popping mother.
And the Government should not be encouraging people to seek happiness in a packet of pills, instead of living decent lives and seeking a sense of moral duty.
Wow! I must say that the phrases "decent lives" and "moral duty" really don't conjure up images of happiness to me, I must say.
I think that most people do live their lives like that anyway—but some people like to have a bit of fun occasionally.
A staunch opponent of drugs is our old friend, Wrinkled Weasel.
Sorry DK but if you need drugs to be happy then I feel sorry for you. Oh, and you are also a knob, an arsehole and a wanker.
Well, thank you but I don't need your pity and I certainly wouldn't accept it after you have just wheeled out the lamest argument in the book. I am happy (generally) when I am not on drugs: it so happens that this particular drug induces euphoria. But drugs in general are good at providing an alternative perception.
Go to a rock gig sober, and then go on MDMA; in the latter case you will find the whole experience so much more thrilling and immersive and powerful. You can feel the music and the atmosphere in a way that simply doesn't happen when sober. Most people get drunk in order to recreate that feeling but not only is that nowhere near as good, but lots of drink and lots of people crowded together often leads to trouble.
Please get real. Everyone who has been through this knows you have to stop or it will fuck you.
Sure, and as I have consistently said before, I and those with whom I took said drugs have, in the main, given them up. We like to indulge occasionally, but not with the regularity with which we once did. Many drugs are somewhat self-limiting anyway.
The argument for legalising drugs to ensure quality control does not take account of the fact that 80% of the population are morons. If you want to drive to work, knowing that most of the other commuters are off their faces or that the guy next door might kill you because he is of his face or that you cant have a sensible conversation will a call-centre worker because she is off her face...etc.
That applies equally to alcohol. And your point is?
Back to Miss Snuffleupagus who plumps for the "won't someone think of the chiiiiildren" route.
You think children should be allowed to make decisions to take drugs so that they can be happy? Wrinkled Weasel is right about adults too. But even if you disagree with him about adults, you cannot possibly think that all children should be allowed to do anything they want without any restriction!
Do you think that children should be able to do whatever they like? No? Good: the law agrees with you. The clue is in the difference elicited by the words "child" and "adult".
Do we let children take the decision whether to smoke and drink as much as they like? No. Why then should we feel that the same applies to drugs? They are powerful, I have never denied that; I have always maintained that drugs should be treated with respect.
Yes, come downs can be bad but everything in life has a price, even in the most mundane way. You want to make sure that you are home to read to your child every night—then you won't be able to do the overtime and your career will suffer. Or, you want to focus on your career, and your child will barely know you.
Everything has a price, and that price is not always paid in money.
Freeman goes with the old "drugs help you ignore your problems" line too.
You see, you can always tell those who don't really have a handle on drugs because they always assume that taking drugs must be a habitual thing. The idea that you might treat yourself to drugs in the same way that you might occasionally buy a really good single malt as opposed to the bog-standard blended stuff just does not seem to occur to them.
They all assume that, in the same way that they will come home from work and have a glass of wine, a "druggie" will come home and have a pill. It doesn't work like that for the vast majority of those who take drugs.
These people all assume (many of whom will be sipping their glass of wine as they post) that one takes drugs to mask some deep unhappiness and dissatisfaction. This is a deeply pusillanimous way of thinking. Drugs are simply a different experience: you might go out to a party and get a little bit merry—would I then be justified in turning around to you and lecturing you about trying to run away from your problems?
I do wish you people would attempt to understand these things before posting comments. But then, I wouldn't have so much to laugh at.