XPost: uk.legal, uk.politics.drugs   
   From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   "Aidy"  wrote in message   
   news:7tKdnSPLCtbXIN7XnZ2dnUVZ8kadnZ2d@bt.com...   
   > "Cynic"  wrote in message   
   > news:55d7459c6opbsjg1hfi9ra0sbdofhig963@4ax.com...   
   >   
   >> When something is legal and regulated, the risks can be clearly   
   >> quantified and communicated, and advice on how to reduce the risk may   
   >> be given.   
   >   
   > It's like banging my head against a wall.   
   >   
   > The only way a substance can be "legal" is if it is studied and tested and   
   > blah like pharmecutical drugs are.  That process would render most   
   > recreational drugs unsellable to the public.  Look at this instance at the   
   > start of the thrad...do you think the g'ment would legalise something like   
   > that?   
   >   
   Why couldn't they be tested like a pharmacutical drug?   
      
   > Even if it *did* happen and drugs were legalised, new unregulated drugs   
   > would just take their place.   
   >   
   Then deal with them.  Having said that such arguments were used by   
   prohibitionists and that never happened.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)