Previous Next Index Thread
Previous Next Index Thread
In article <4Vc0xQi1ELMW088yn@IslandNet.com>, Matt Elrod <Creator@IslandNet.com> wrote: >twk@ecs.ox.ac.uk (Thong Wei Koh) wrote: >Interesting. Given that new designer drugs are cropping up all >the time, I'm not sure you'll be able to keep up. What if someone >develops a designer recreational drug that isn't addictive and does >not cause physical harm or irresponsible behavior. Would you have a >problem with that drug being sold in Singapore? If so, why? The solution is quite simple, at least to the authorities, simply classify these new substance as drugs (thus the 'lumping' of marijuana with hard drugs) until we are either sure they are reasonably safe and that we are comfortable with its usage in Singapore. I am not sure about this. Let's take some of the more pedestrian 'designer' drugs for example - ecstacy. If I am not wrong, users report a relaxation of inhibitions and a 'certain high' (whatever that means, nevermind). What I am concerned about is 1. psychological dependency on the drug as a means of escape, and 2. whether an irresponsible users, shedding whatever social or cultural restraints together with the relaxation of inhibitions, will cause problems in society. What are the effects of this drug taken with alcohol? >I posted a short article earlier in the thread on the use of cannabis >in ancient China. To save bandwidth, have a look at: I see some reference to Kublai Khan. He conquered China in the later half of Chinese history. [I note also in the article about opium usage in Singapore that the article [was written in 1917 during the British colonial rule. The following quotes [are quite illuminating: [ ["But why should he be ashamed?" I asked, "The British Government is not [ashamed to sell to him, [to encourage him to drug himself, to ruin himself. Why should he be ashamed?" [ ["Nevertheless, he is," replied the guide. "You see what he looks like-what [he has become. He is not quite so far gone as the others-he is a more recent [victim. He still feels that he has become degraded. Most of them do not feel [that way after a while." Note the presence of guilt and shame. [We learned that the opium trade was freely indulged in, at Singapore, [fostered by the Government. [It must be very perplexing to a Chinese sailor, [who arrives in Liverpool on a ship from Singapore, to find such a [variation in customs. To come from [a part of the British Empire where opium smoking is freely encouraged, [to Great Britain itself where [such practices are not tolerated. Ok, I think readers should stop trying to suggest that Opium is native to Singaporean culture. >Do you believe that there are any human rights violations that a country >could impose on its people that would warrant outside intervention? Human rights violations? You mean the death penalty or the banning of controlled substances? Yes, I believe that there is a case to answer if a country's law is unjust and unnecessarily cruel. I don't believe Singapore has even come close to that. Do you see any other governments complaining about Singapore's drug laws? >Do you think it is fair for a country to impose trade restrictions >on another based on human rights issues? If it is a valid human rights issue, yes. But I seriously advise against that. It is a clumsy tool that serves more to soothe the conscience of some than to help the situation. Trade restrictions invariably lowers