Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

Simon Heffer’s Disgusting Prohibitionist Rant

with 28 comments

Fat Cat And His Drug Of Choice

Journalists in the old media and politicans are panicking.  They are trying to crack down hard on us and our rights to opinions and self-expression.  In the age of WikiLeaks and the internet, their self-serving oligarchy is undermined by real freedom.

Cameron’s and Miliband’s arrogant and dismissive rejection of Bob Ainsworth’s proposals for an end to prohibition, shows they have no proper response to his arguments.  Today, another member of the ruling elite penned a truly ignorant and repressive opinion in The Daily Telegraph.  See here for the full article.

As well as trying it on with the discredited idea that cannabis causes psychosis,  Heffer says, with astounding spitefulness and stupidity:

“We have a serious problem with drugs in this country because we do not punish drugs crime severely enough. Legalisation is not the answer, but getting nasty might just be.”

It is an utterly disgraceful article. Heffer should be ashamed of himself for spreading lies and misinformation, I suspect deliberately.

The facts are that the harms caused by prohibition are well documented and proven.

The facts are that the allegation cannabis causes psychosis is just the latest scare story. In the 1930s the prohibitionists used to say that cannabis makes white women promiscuous with black men. This is just the latest smear of equivalent value.

Public opinion is hugely in favour of an end to prohibition. You only have to look at the polls and the huge volume of comment and opinion on the web.

The oligarchy of politicians and the media is on the point of collapse.  Those who value truth and freedom can console themselves that the darkest hour is just before dawn.  Journalists like Heffer and Andrew Marr, for example, are desperate to hang on to their corrupt position where they control the news agenda and contrive media coverage in cahoots with their friends in parliament.

A peaceful revolution is coming where fat cat journalists with no more talent than the lowliest blogger will be turfed out of their comfortable sinecures as the irrelevant dinosaurs that they are.

Heffer and his chums on both sides of the House have had their nasty little stitch-up going on for too long.  Dawn is approaching and his sort has no future

Advertisements

28 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. ”Legalisation is not the answer, but getting nasty might just be.”

    As if the consequences peacefull drug user face are not nasty enough already!

    Phil

    December 18, 2010 at 3:22 pm

  2. Heffer is an utter heifer…

    Leander C Clifton

    December 18, 2010 at 3:23 pm

  3. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Shaun Hankey. Shaun Hankey said: Simon Heffer's Disgusting Prohibitionist Rant: http://t.co/CNROijg […]

  4. This man should hold his head down in shame as he sits there drinking while condemning less evil drugs !!!
    I wonder if he would stop drinking if it was made illegal

    ryan griffiths

    December 18, 2010 at 3:38 pm

  5. were was this guy in the pass 20 years??
    in a cave somewere in a island with no tv or radio!!!
    just one idea :
    wy don’t some one with access to magazines that prove the eficience of medical cannabis, to send some copis to this tipe of polaticions that have bean living in “hiding” to see that what was 30 years ago is now proven to be rong from the beginning. It was rongly done in the 1 place you don’t suffocate a monky with pot cose just that kils brain sells
    mate since i spok to a lady in holand she was 85 years and she use medicinal cannabis 1 was for easing the efects of kimo but at the time it was for MS there i saw this was 2005 since then i think diferent. I’ve worked in varios contrys in europe this is the one mor severe on the subject

    alicio silva

    December 18, 2010 at 3:47 pm

  6. ha ha haaa what an expert on everything ha ha haaa simple simon , if ya cant win your own game simon cheat , lie and then turn to physical violence , beat it out of the people while avoiding the evidence at all cost , idiot is kicking his own chock

    jw

    December 18, 2010 at 4:06 pm

  7. I’ve personally dealt with people with psychosis and other mental health problems when I’ve been told by their mental health professionals that their psychosis is caused by excessive cannabis use.

    I know that’s only anecdotal, but I suspect that it affects people who already have a pre-disposition to mental illness and then is the ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’ so to speak. Obviously I have no idea what the psychological / biological / chemical mechanism for that is.

    I don’t think that necessarily supports the case for or against legalisation, but I do believe cannabis use can be harmful for some people.

    My personal view is that I have no great problem with people using cannabis in the privacy of their own home. Professionally however…..

    Maybe cannabis should be considered in a similar vein to steroids where it’s not considered an offence to possess them, but it is to supply?

    Cockney Copper

    December 18, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    • Anything done to excess can be harmful – like eating crisps for example.

      The debate in the US has moved well past the hysteria we get here. It’s common sense that harm is possible but comparatively speaking cannabis is harmless. Compared to alcohol or tobacco it is completely benign. Professor Les Iversen, the government’s chief scientific advisor on drugs, says cannabis is “one of the safer recreational drugs”.

      There is certainly no justification whatsoever for the prohibition of cannabis and it costs us billions every year in law enforcement costs.

      Peter Reynolds

      December 18, 2010 at 4:36 pm

      • Well, I’ll be working tonight on foot in a busy town centre, and the one thing I can say for certain is that I won’t be getting into any fights with people because they’ve had too much of the weed.

        The problem I have is that the downgrading of cannabis a few years ago has led to a massive increase in its use by teenage people (and younger), specifically in deprived areas. Many of those young people also then take other drugs, and commit acquisitive crime (typically burglary and theft from cars) to fund it.

        Would they be taking those other drugs anyway? I don’t know. Would they be committing those crimes anyway? I don’t know.

        I think the law has to protect the must vulnerable people in society, and whilst articulate, intelligent and affluent people may use cannabis without doing themselves any harm, they put themselves on the wrong side of the law by doing so, and I can’t see that changing.

        p.s. did you see that the Dutch are about to ban tourists from getting their holiday highs?

        Cockney Copper

        December 18, 2010 at 5:08 pm

      • Cannabis use in the UK declined after the downgrading to class C.

        Certain elements in Holland have been trying to close the coffee shops for at least 35 years. I doubt they’ll succeed this time.

        Stay safe.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 18, 2010 at 5:39 pm

      • “The problem I have is that the downgrading of cannabis a few years ago has led to a massive increase in its use by teenage people (and younger), specifically in deprived areas. Many of those young people also then take other drugs, and commit acquisitive crime (typically burglary and theft from cars) to fund it.”

        but but… you know you are lying, don’t you?
        Cannabis used in Britain went down after it was downgraded.
        It went up again when it was upgraded to class “C”

        Why do you lie? Don’t you have anything better to do, Cocky Cop? Like helping people, instead of hurting them?

        Beggars believe!

        and then you try to… “argue”.. that poor people shouldn’t have the same rights as rich people

        where do you come from? And why didn’t you just stay there, alone, incommunicado?

        rod

        December 18, 2010 at 9:59 pm

      • sorry, i spot a typo on my last post

        when i wrote “upgraded to class C”, should read “to class “B”, obviously 🙂

        rod

        December 18, 2010 at 10:00 pm

      • Rod – I come to Peter’s blog from my normal read at inspectorgadget so that I can better understand what people with a different opinion from me are thinking. I have posted a few comments to give a alternative but considered perspective, and have managed to do so without being abusive to anyone. Why don’t you try and extend me the same courtesy?

        I joined the Police to help people. Who is it you think I’ve hurt?

        What I’ve said is that in my (entirely anecdotal) experience the use of cannabis by young people has increased, and that in the deprived areas that I work, that, and other drug use, is funded by acquisitive crime.

        If you actually bothered to read my comments you’ll see that I’m fairly laissez-faire when it comes to personal cannabis use, and know it’s pretty harmless to me as a Police officer, compared to the excessive consumption of alcohol, for example.

        At no point have I said that poor people shouldn’t have the same rights as rich people. Again, read what I actually said and you see I said that the law has to protect the most vulnerable people in society. Do you seriously disagree with that?

        Cockney Copper

        December 20, 2010 at 7:59 pm

      • I’ve smoked pot for all of my adult life. I’ve never been sectioned, never been to gaol, never lost a job because of it and, to paraphrase Bill Hicks, I had a damned good time I am a postgraduate student too. People who claim that mental health issues have been “triggered” by cannabis use never bother to look at the rest of the patient’s history. Were they on anti-psychotics? Alcohol? Have they been taking cocaine, ketamine or amphetamines?

        Alcohol is psychologically harmful to some people yet no one calls for it to be banned.

        buddyhell

        December 19, 2010 at 12:55 pm

  8. Things are starting to hot back up in the press it would seem. yesterday, Ainsworth had a tiny paragraph in the Sun with criticism being the flavour. Today we ave half page spread of this:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3303058/Killed-by-one-puff-on-cannabis-joint.html

    Not that I read the Sun you understand.

    This country is really going to die as we know it, I have never been so sure of this. First step to totalitarianism, the death of free press, I’m just waiting for the birth of ours before it can even start to die…

    It is purely opinion based now isn’t it, search for facts in today’s UK media; needle and haystack.

    Jason Reed - HomeGrownOutlaw

    December 18, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    • I think they must be rattled when they stoop to printing nonsense like that Jason.

      Peter Reynolds

      December 18, 2010 at 5:40 pm

  9. what a fat slug.

    Architect

    December 18, 2010 at 4:44 pm

  10. that guy is just another deluded blind-prohib.. but its fun destroying peoples arguments/educating over there!

    p.s. thanks for the support Peter 🙂

    Jake

    December 18, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    • More power to you Jake.

      Peter Reynolds

      December 18, 2010 at 5:42 pm

  11. that same dude jumps into his Range Rover Sport after a bottle of the finest red wine and drives home to his mansion thinking that is ok? They are all the same these idiots. Usually socially warped, sexually deviant piss heads that will not admit that they themselves have a drug problem. Fat prick!!!

    Architect

    December 18, 2010 at 5:03 pm

  12. My rebuke. I also forwarded the last paragraph as a letter to the Telegraph Editor:

    So, the Telegraph shows it’s true colours. After Toby Young’s prohibitionist rant was utterly shot down by subsequent comments rebuking his sentiments in full, the Telegraph wheels out yet more unethical, immoral and unjust propaga…nda in support of a policy that has not only failed to curb drugs use but has been the direct contributor to the criminality that it seeks to eradicate.

    Simon Heffer is a product of 72 years of indoctrination by prohibition. He cares not for the emancipation of millions of law abiding, adult and responsible British citizens who are criminalised by the country that they contribute to by payment of taxes and the betterment of communities. He cares not for the fact that all empirical, scientific, research refutes his blinkered opinion. He cares not for the fact that while he sips his glass of wine within a legal, regulated and effective framework, others are languishing in prison under a system of legalised, state sponsored, kidnap of those gaoled for victimless crimes that harm nobody but potentially themselves (and even that is certainly not the case when speaking of cannabis, one of the least toxic entities on the planet which has never claimed the life of a single human being in all of it’s 10,000 + year history and is a verifiable medicine.) He abjectly refuses to share the freedoms which he so enjoys.

    Mr. Heffer is evidently uneducated about the topic he chooses so brazenly to champion. This is not because such research is difficult, bothersome or impossible. It is rather that as with many such prohibitionists, he fears that the research he uncovers will disprove his propagandist indoctrinated stance. Therefore, he simply drones on about his emotional and subjective opinion without so much as indicating any proof for his allegations.

    Worse still, he states as fact age old prejudicial discrimination regarding such matters as cannabis induced psychology and the blanket criminalisation of any drug user. He is too ill-informed to even realise that if he has ever taken a pharmaceutical, a sip of coffee or alcohol or a drag on a cigarette then he is guilty of criminal activities under his own self-confessed and certifiably insane ideology.

    How dare the Telegraph and Mr. Heffer state that millions of British citizens are wanton criminals? How dare they make any such claims when they indulge in legal drugs, incorrectly assuming that their drug is better than other drugs? Mr. Heffer lacks the knowledge of history and anthropology to understand that drug use has been endemic to human evolution and progress throughout the ages. Indeed, the reality he seeks to preserve is as much the product of human drug use as it is anything else. Art, science, literature, philosophy and politics all had origins partly incorporating drug use and do to this day. How dare the Telegraph and Mr. Heffer assume that a failed policy of 72 years of prohibition is preferable to an entire human history of responsible drug use? How dare they deny our very humanity?

    It is abhorrent to me and millions like me that instead of becoming enlightened citizens of progressive change, certain abjectly indoctrinated parts of our society prefer to stick their heads in the sand and disregard not only empirical evidence but also plain common sense.

    I was, until today, a Telegraph reader. Yet their blatantly prohibitionist and propagandist attitude over this last week in reply to the utterly sensible debate instigated by Bob Ainsworth has lead me to drop this paper like a lead brick. Twice in a week the Telegraph has seen fit to release such hogwash, gutter press and oppression articles. Well, no doubt just as in the case of Toby Young’s idiotic article, this piece too will be annihilated by public consensus.

    I champion the boycott of the Telegraph by all rational, reasonable and responsible readers in protest of their staunch support of prohibition and therefore, their culpable and complicit support of the misery of prohibition. They wholeheartedly support ruined lives, death, murder and social destruction. Not to mention crime, violence and the kidnap of perfectly peaceful, law abiding British citizens under trumped up charges based on a racist, unethical, immoral, unjust and highly discriminatory law.

    Dear Editor of the Telegraph, you fail to realise that this generation seeks empirical truth over sensationalism. Millions of British citizens impatiently await the day when the media will join us in that aspiration.

    Leander C Clifton

    December 18, 2010 at 6:14 pm

  13. here here Clifton!

    Have to say.. wow.. not many articles will get ~700 comments majoritively rubbishing the author!

    Jake

    December 18, 2010 at 7:35 pm

  14. Yup, that one pissed a lot of people off. Maybe something to do with calling us all f***ing criminals…

    Leander C Clifton

    December 18, 2010 at 8:02 pm

  15. “Fat Cat And His Drug Of Choice”

    I’d say looking at that picture, his favourite drug is sugar not alcohol.

    Adam

    December 18, 2010 at 9:09 pm

  16. the more idiots like that speak up the better our cause , tobacco and alcohol need to be on the drugs act list and all drugs should be control’ d through measures of regulation as so to cause the least damage to society , reasonability given back to the responsible and those who cannot be responsible and commit a real crime which involves a victim or victims,weather the accused is intoxicated or not at the time of committing the victim producing crime should be punished for that harm or damage caused to that or them victims , prohibition is a snowball effect policy in favor of itself through corrupt means , as it seems to get stronger on its own caused harm with little to no success for an over rated cost , no age limits in place and it uses child drug abuse as a reason to do more of the same , the by-product of no licensed sales of forbidden substance is an unregulated black market exploited by harden criminals making them billions and causing more harm than a regulated system that could and would be fine tuned to do everything prohibition claims it will do and more more to reduce all drug related harm for less in a fraction of the time without putting the medical users and hardened criminals in the same box ,a regulated system would also stem the flow of all future addicts of the hard end addictive drugs by separating the sales of substances and using an already successful working model to apply and wean off those of the harder drugs. been a prohibitionist is beside the point, , bob ainsworth is right , tell the truth and shame the devil

    jw

    December 18, 2010 at 9:34 pm

  17. Scouse Billy

    December 19, 2010 at 1:06 am

  18. What I can’t understand is why do they rant on about the >assumed< risk of psychosis in ordinary people when alcohol also creates a risk of psychosis. As a proud marijuana smoker I feel the paranoia (I don't get it often to be honest)(I think where they got the link of schizophrenia and cannabis) is 90% of the time because I'm committing an illegal act. I mean when I was younger and I was out drinking with friends I got really paranoid when I got home, worried my parents would find out how drunk I was.

    I've drunk myself to almost paralytic situations, had a small experience smoking, didn't really think much of it though and to this day I recreationally use cannabis. Out of the three, by a long way cannabis is the least harmful. The most ignorant help website in the world Talktofrank claim cannabis, like lovely legal tobacco causes lung damage. Then how come athletes are found with cannabis in their system? And I'm running marathons and train every day? Yet we should be criminals WHY?

    Ignorant hypocrites like this fat prat don't deserve to have a voice in the media.

    Stephen

    December 20, 2010 at 2:55 pm

  19. Have you ever thought about adding a little bit more than
    just your articles? I mean, what you say is fundamental and
    everything. But think of if you added some great graphics or video clips to give your posts more,
    “pop”! Your content is excellent but with images and videos, this
    blog could certainly be one of the very best in its field.
    Superb blog!

    kamagra.over-blog.fr

    January 29, 2014 at 2:20 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: