Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

BuckyRover

Members
  • Posts

    6048
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by BuckyRover

  1. What are you talking about? Sven got bashed by the media for playing Hargreaves in midfield in 2006. He defined him as a player, the press thought he was useless. It was only after that tournament that he was considered a quality player. People laughed at me when I said he was good and deserved to start. People used Hargreaves as a reason to berate Sven (Why has he picked him? He's rubbish etc)

  2. Noticed an article on BBC news - saying that the price of coke has gone up due to the number of police busts. Also it stated that most cocaine is actually less than 9% pure nowadays.

    Also for anyone who takes it - it usually includes cockroach pesticide & animal worming tablets.

    Replace usually with infrequently and you may be onto something.

  3. What sort of message does it send out to other potential targets?

    Who would want to come and play for Blackburn if our "star" signing was a violent thug who hasn't performed on the pitch for two years?

    I like Sam and his attitude (mostly) and I didn't have a problem with signing Diouf, but this would be a step in completely the wrong direction.

  4. This is already the case. I would like the tax money to go on a different approach, viewing drugs as a social problem to be fixed rather than a legal problem to be chased down by police and largely ignored in the social context.

    Countries that have become softer law-wise on drugs, such as the Netherlands with cannabis, have found the numbers of users go down. Indeed the cannabis usage in the UK went down when it was re-classified. It's not inevitable that numbers of users will rise.

    Nail on head.

    A social problem rather than a legal one.

    It's a shame politicians are too scared to make big decisions. I am afraid it's the status quo for a while yet (forever?)

  5. Please explain why horse riding is not BANNED if it kills 100 people a year?

    What about motorbikes? Paragliding? Skydiving?

    Why are these fun yet risky activities not banned whilst ecstacy is? Why aren't they discussed in the same light? Why are drugs held on a totally different plain to everything else?

    Also: "Aimed at , no doubt , the simpletons who believe that because one substance (or activity in this case ) is dangerous then every other - and more- dangerous substance should be made available to the ever increasingly dumbed down populace ."

    Where is that claimed?

    This recent discussion is about Ectasy (the 17th most dangerous drug; behind Tobacco, Alcohol, Steroids and all the rest)

  6. I see Jackie "I'm banning weed because I didn't like it" Smith is up to her usual tricks. She has said the Professors comments are wholly unacceptable and that horse riding and Ecstacy are not comparable. I agree with her on that point, 100 deaths doesn't compare with 30, especially considering 500,000 (it could be 200,000) people take E every weekend (I guess that less people ride horses than take E). This also doesn't take into account serious injury or paralysis caused by horse riding.

    She actually told him to apologize to the parents of those affected by ecstacy. This government is a joke.

    If you try and deny man made climate change they talk about the scientific concensus. Yet whenever scientists talk about drugs, the government just ignore them and wheel out stupid, emotive arguments aimed at daily mail readers (they certainly have a lot of power).

    Where is our great leader? We need one

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.