1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP
  1. geministar2008
    Hello everyone.

    What does everyone think to the new Pablo drug mule dog advert?

    I think the ad is a little far fetched.
    The guy with the gun is going a bit far, i know alot of people or deal with the stuff and do not carry guns. Also "everyone is not doing it". Taking the stuff off a dirty toilet seat is also a bit much, again not something myself or friends do and so on. The nose bleed is also over the top, i have never even had a nose bleed.
    As for the dog being used as a mule. Does this actually happen? Or is that a way of trying to effect us animal lovers. I thought when an animal is flown from abroad they have to be put into quarantine for X amount of time. Surely the dog would be dead by then or the drugs discovered?

    I know everyone has a different opinion and for those who have had drug addictions or know people who have had them, i do feel for.

    But the advert makes the whole thing so dark. Everyone enjoys doing different things. Some of us like to drink others do a bit of coke. Yes it is illegal and yes there are risk but isn't that the same as a lot of things in life?!
    In my opinion it is using scare tactics.

    Anyway these are just my thoughts so please don't feel bad of me. :)

    Look forward to hearing some comments.

Comments

  1. Sven99
    FRANK (who produced this chain of adverts) are only unbiased in the minds of extreme prohibitionists. I've watched afew of these and they're pretty much devoid of worthwhile information. It may be more sophisticated than 'just say no' but its still unadulterated propaganda.

    The government would like to blame drug users for the consequences of the drug trade, but you don't see government funded ads telling you to drink fair-trade tea, or any attempt to scapegoat high street shoppers for the poor working conditions in sweatshops in the developing world. Once again drugs are subjected to a massive double standard.
  2. KomodoMK
    The higher end of the drugs trade tend to have weapons, possibly even require them. Not so common for street level dealers (at least not here though).

    Doing it off a toilet see? Sadly, little fishy and a friend have done this once many years ago, it is probably quite common for people who go into pubs/clubs they have never visited before where that is the only possibility due to the venues owners trying to prevent drug use.

    The nose bleed has happened to little fishy on a number of occasions when doing large amounts - actually once had to pretend his mate had accidently hit him in the nose when leaving the toilet as the pub owner came in after them, all very suspicious about what was going on.

    Yes, animals are used as drugs mules, you can find more information on it at the link below:

    http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/06/06/dogsasDrugMules6.06.htm

    That said, the FRANK adverts are very biased towards anti-drugs movement but what else do you expect from a Government service? Of course it's going to be filled with their own agenda.
  3. cannabis-sam
    And if the supply of drugs was controlled and regulated you wouldn't have any smuggling and subsequently no 'pablo the drug mule dog' people going to extreme measures as stated on talk to wank is a direct result of prohibition obviously frank can't see this.
  4. KomodoMK
    Legalizing and regulating drugs like Heroin and Crack may solve those problems but create a whole load more, and it's not a can of worms worth opening. The impact is far too great on society when it comes to dangerous drugs.

    Personally, I think drugs should be re-classified similar to the recommendation in the chart below. Those that put the highest strain on the police and health services, and are most damaging to users and society should be class A, and illegal. The rest, especially those less harmful than Alcohol etc should legal and regulated.

    [​IMG]

    Overall I think finding a balance between the two is required. I can't personally see how the FRANK advert actually has any impact on Cocaine users, it appears to me to only give further ammunition to the already anti-drug population.
  5. Sven99
    Legalising doesn't necessarily mean making them available over the counter. I would like to see heroin, crack and methamphetamine available in administration rooms for addicts, and that is what I mean by legalisation and regulation.

    But what is the benefit of making them illegal? It doesn't prevent their use - there isn't even evidence to show it reduces it. It makes the culture surrounding them needlessly dangerous (gangs, guns, cutting agents, prostitution, overdose, acquisitive crime) and when enforcement is successful it only causes more problems (high prison populations, inflated costs).
  6. cannabis-sam
    heres some more crap from FRANK:
    Well It couldn't have anything to do with the five pints of vodka could it rather than the illegal drugs but thats where the blame seems to fall.
  7. ComfortablyNumb
    Yeah seems to me he was having a nice relaxing night until he took alcohol, the most dangerous drug of all! Its annoying how alcohol is so acceptable..
  8. KomodoMK
    If it it was a controlled environment designed to eventually get them off the drugs all together then I can see some logic to it, however this should not be done at the tax payers expense.


    It does prevent their use to an extent, just as the stigma (with Heroin and Crack) does. If you make it legal and easy to acquire then more people would be curious and try it, possibly even my little fishy. I can see what you saying with the dangerous culture that surrounds it at current, but thankfully much of that is away from the eyes of the general public and affects only those involved. Having more people try Heroin will lead to more people developing an addiction, which will lead to them having to use it to function in day to day life, which ultimately leads to a bigger social problem. The overdose statistic if anything will probably rise due to the influx of inexperienced users and their will still be people who can't afford it so use crime to fund their habit.
  9. Sven99
    Even if it was at the taxpayers expense its alot cheaper than the alternative. But as a point of comparison, in Switzerland heroin user's habits costs them only a few pounds a day through the clinics (the joy of a lack of criminal mark-up) and 75% have jobs and so contribute to the economy. Even without users paying, it pays for itself many times over in savings on enforcement and jail costs - which are of course, at the tax-payer's expense.

    I don't buy it. The stigma doesn't help matters because (like most drug information) its mostly founded in myth - so when somebody sees it for themselves they stop believing the stigma. We'd be much better 'sending messages' through public health means than through law enforcement - as our experiences with tobacco have demonstrated.

    It affects alot of people that aren't involved - people living in poor areas that are practically controlled by gangs for instance. Even if you happen to be a lucky middle class person then its still affecting you if your house gets broken into. And everyone suffers from taxes used to fund the broken system. With a regulated system we can better protect non drug users from harm.

    First off, you haven't provided anything to demonstrate that legalising heroin will lead to more users. This mythical concept that there are thousands of people waiting in the wings for an unenforcable law to be repealed just isn't realistic.

    Heroin use has risen to massive proportions under prohibition, and has now stabilised at its historically highest level of use. In comparison, tobacco use has plummeted in response to effective regulation.

    And secondly, a rise in users can still accompany a reduction in overall harm. Studies of heroin use have shown that its not particularly dammaging to a user in and of itself, but that the damage comes from it being supplied by a criminal market. Risks of overdose can be dramatically reduced because the supply is of a known quality and being administered by medical professionals.

    And since I'm arguing for injecting clinics, heroin would not necessarily become more available to the average person on the street (and lets face it - its pretty damn available at the moment).

    On a personal level I think there would need to be some other regulated supply as otherwise there would remain an illegal market, but as I'm not an economist I'm going to leave that one to the experts.

    Sven99 added 1 Minutes and 56 Seconds later...

    I'm much less than convinced by Frank's user submitted experiences, simply because they publish so few positive ones. Either they filter out most of the positive ones or people don;t look at their site until they have a problem.
  10. Mammon
    FRANK. Fuck FRANK. This type of propaganda is typical of them. I think they’re aimed at younger teenagers and so have this obsession with the idea that the only reason people do drugs is because of peer pressure. FRANK’s position on every drug is that it’s nasty, horrible, dirty and dangerous – one toke on a spliff and your brain goes purple and blows up! No one enjoys drugs – they just do them because they want to be cool!

    This style and content of their nonsense reminds me of scare tactics stuff we used to get at school. They aim to spread fear, not information.

    As for the above quote, in my experience people are more likely to down vodka if they don’t have any Charlie, and that’s totally legal.
  11. cannabis-sam
    Yes intrestingly enough for SWIM and alot of his friends found drink to be a last resort drug the amount of time we had this conversation
    "can you get any weed"
    "nah SWIMS called everyone no ones got any"
    "any coke or MD about"
    "none man it's all dry"
    "guess we'll have to go down the off license and buy some cider then"
  12. Mammon
    Lol. Spot on, mate. Even the words are the same as SWIM uses. After a couple of pints of the cider, when SWIM wants a spliff more than ever, it'll be like:

    "What about Toby? Hasn't he got some hash or something?"
    "Give him a ring anyway..."
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!