I have just had what I think could be a good idea.

In order to prevent drug dealing in nightclubs and to do away with searches why not have a sniffer dog at the doorway. These dogs are very good at sniffing out drugs and a sucess rate of nearly 100% could be likely.

All that would be necessary would be for the dog to have a quick sniff of each person as they enter the club and if it doesn't react then you go stright in. What do people think.

Not a bad idea,but I have seen a few dogs sniffing around some of the clubs in the past anyway.

I think its a stupid idea, the police have more important things to do than waste time hassling clubbers. The clubs won't want it as word will get around and clubbers will go somewhere else. Heroin and crack are the drugs that the police should be concentrating on and these are not clubbing drugs.
I also think the Majority of people who take drugs at clubs take them with them, the evil drug dealer in the corner that the media portray does not exist. If you do need to score in a club you are looking for them, not the other way round. More generally law abiding citizens will end up with a criminal record, the costs to the police would be astronomical and for what!

Sounds like a great idea! Not sure if it would work though.

Firstly, I'm sure the sight of sniffer dogs at every nightclub door would look a tad intimidating.

Secondly, There will always be one smart arse that will either try to ply the dogs with alcohol or worse.

But most of all, I'm sure half the problem lies with the doorstaff themselves who let in known drug dealers for a cut of the profits??

Yes, I'm all for increased security in nightclubs, and it would be a much faster and more rigerous process than bouncers asking people to empty their pockets.

Where would the sniffer dogs come from though? And what would been done to ensure their welfare? Drunk people can be very mean, and I wouldn't be surprised if rowdy blokes didn't try to give the poor thing a sneaky kick.

Originally posted by neeeeeeeeeek
I think its a stupid idea, the police have more important things to do than waste time hassling clubbers. The clubs won't want it as word will get around and clubbers will go somewhere else. Heroin and crack are the drugs that the police should be concentrating on and these are not clubbing drugs.
I also think the Majority of people who take drugs at clubs take them with them, the evil drug dealer in the corner that the media portray does not exist. If you do need to score in a club you are looking for them, not the other way round. More generally law abiding citizens will end up with a criminal record, the costs to the police would be astronomical and for what!

I never said the police should be the dog handlers. Clubs are quite capable of using bouncers as dog handlers and financing the scheme themselves.

If, as you say, people are taking drugs into clubs then the dog idea would be a good way of stopping that. Just the sight of a dog on the door would be a reasurance to law abiding clubbers that a particular club was 'clean'.

Law abiding people do not get criminal records. People who take drugs are not law abiding people and should be caught and prosecuted.

Faster, yes, but not more secure. Aren't searches also carried out to find weapons and so on...?

Totally against this idea.

Bad for the clubber, bad for the club, just bad all round.

Dogs cant sniff out blades and bottles.
Some people get very drunk when clubbing and there are plenty of mean things that a drunk clubber can do to a dog, and whos to say that the Bouncers will keep full control of the dog and there wont be a biting incident? And what about people who are scared of dogs? They would be put of clubbing.

Originally posted by spyro2000
Totally against this idea.

Bad for the clubber, bad for the club, just bad all round.

Well said Spyro...

I don't think in practise this is a good idea. Though in theory sounds probable.

Where will they get the dogs trained?
The police have a dog training section but can't see a security/ bouncer company putting in the same effort/time and money into this. It's a long process and finding good dogs to complete training is not easy. Dangerous to take on 'sub-standard' doggies. They'd be a claim for a courtcase if the dogs were not fully trained and suitable. It is also very expensive and I can't see many companies affording to have a team of highly trained dogs and owners.

Is it fair on the dogs? Do they want to be there for hours on a door step to some club?

And some berk after too many stellas is bound to want to take on the dog and cause mayhem when they get bitten. Sue the security company etc...

The danger in clubs is weapons not drugs and as Sypro2000 has already said.

I would also recomend some sort of metal detectors to search for weapons.

Saying people are scared of dogs mor that dogs bite etc is also an argument against having dogs at airports or anywhere else. They work in those places so why not clubs.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I would also recomend some sort of metal detectors to search for weapons.

Saying people are scared of dogs mor that dogs bite etc is also an argument against having dogs at airports or anywhere else. They work in those places so why not clubs.


The reason is because Ill think youll find that security is slightly* more of a major issue when it comes to airports. I doubt that a clubber will be smuggling in 2000 pounds of crack into a club.


* and by slightly I mean absolutely way more MAJORLY

You really do live in a bubble don't you sid! Last statistics I think 2million ecstasy tablets taken every weekend.. That's a lot of bad people out there. Assuming your correct in your assumption that drug users should all be prosecuted, how is this going to happen? Where are these dogs going to come from other than the police?? What are the bouncers going to do with all these people they catch other than call the police? What are the police going to do with all these people?? What's going to happen to the real victims of crime when all the police are down the station charging these vast sums of people caught in possession of 2 or 3 ecstasy tablets?? I struggle to come to terms with the fact you are not actually a 55year old bloke who still lives at home and who's contact with the outside world is just what you read in the Daily Mail.

Expensive, unneccessary and impractical. Slimsid you are talking about somehting you know nothing about.

Crap idea, compleatly unpractical and totally useless- why don't go after the people who have 10,000 on them rather than the normal people who have 3 or 4!

Originally posted by neeeeeeeeeek
I think its a stupid idea, the police have more important things to do than waste time hassling clubbers. The clubs won't want it as word will get around and clubbers will go somewhere else. Heroin and crack are the drugs that the police should be concentrating on and these are not clubbing drugs.
I also think the Majority of people who take drugs at clubs take them with them, the evil drug dealer in the corner that the media portray does not exist. If you do need to score in a club you are looking for them, not the other way round. More generally law abiding citizens will end up with a criminal record, the costs to the police would be astronomical and for what!
Well said. :clap:
There is absolutly NO point in having sniffer dogs in night clubs. The police should be spending there time elsewhere i.e tackling the crack and smack dealers and users, most of the petty crime in this country is done by crack/smack heads.
What is the point targeting harmless clubbers? At the end of the day everyone has a 'place' that they can hide their drugs if they so wish.

Originally posted by DaisyBoo
At the end of the day everyone has a 'place' that they can hide their drugs if they so wish.

I had to think about that for a moment :hihi: :gag:

I guess the next suggestion will be for people trained to do full body searches employed in nightclubs :|

I guess the next suggestion will be for people trained to do full body searches employed in nightclubs

Have you found your ideal job???
:hihi: :hihi:

Great idea, law abiding citizens as stated in one of the replys would not be taking drugs into the nightclub anyway.

And isn't it 'nightclub' drugs that people get spiked with leading to them getting raped.

My friend nearly died as a result of taking your so called law abiding nightclub drugs, she was not a coke or heroine addict she just wanted a good time, another friend was ill for three days from having one dropped in her drink.

So if you would explain to me how they are harmless please do so. Anything that stops these going into nightclubs is a brill idea to me and anyone carrying them whether for personal use or not is fair game for the police as far as I am concerned.

The date rape drugs would NOT be picked up by a sniffer dog.

Good coz that didn't nearly kill her ecstasy did.

Not being funny, but what reason would someone have to drop that in her drink as it wouldn't even dissolve properly

And isn't it 'nightclub' drugs that people get spiked with leading to them getting raped.

Your words!

Anyway, getting back on topic.....

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
And isn't it 'nightclub' drugs that people get spiked with leading to them getting raped.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
Good coz that [date-rape drugs] didn't nearly kill her ecstasy did.

way to contradict yourself, you go girlfriend :roll:

read it again that was a different person one nearly died using esctasy and the other was spiked by something knocking her down for 3 days.

The debate was is it a good idea to stop them going into clubs, and my opinion is yeah too right. Everyone knows opiates kill you eventually but not everyone knows that these drugs can kill you too.

What do you need to take them for anyway, can't you have as good a time with out them, or are you that insecure you need the prop up off them.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
What do you need to take them for anyway, can't you have as good a time with out them, or are you that insecure you need the prop up off them.

what do you need to throw ann summers' parties for?? can't you have a good time without degrading the morals of society and playing with phalluses en masse??

alcohol does way more damage than designer drugs have..

Get the facts right and I'm sure you will find it wasn't MDMA that killed her - all the more reason to stop forcing it underground

do any of you people actually go clubbing or in touch with what goes on in the clubs…..really???? or are u just believing what u read in the papers? I guess not or you go to major commercial clubs as what you are talking has got be effing and jeffing and is so typical of people who don’t actually understand clubbing or even for that matter go….and due to the press etc. have such bad opinions of it and think every club has a big bloke in the corner forcing people to take things..

sniffer dogs ! what a load of crap, personally I would walk away as it’s a touch invasive, I think a search is bad enough plus the drugs u talk about, date rape ones wont get sniffed as they are odorous ! and like someone else mentioned the problems with drugs i.e. crime etc. are not clubbing drugs so by your theory sniffer dogs should be everywhere up and down the street…..how about one sniffing u when u out trying to relax after a hard week !!! or when u are waiting to see Cliff Richards that u have spent a month looking forward to ?

you are already searched going into nearly every club nowadays and the ‘drug clubs’ do very intrusive searches anyway and do have metal detectors etc. I personally think this is a little over the top, if a club has a problem with drugs its no good catching the people with small amounts they need the large dealers who are generally the bouncers or the bouncers are paid off by them ! also you forget one thing, clubbing and drug taking go hand in hand…one wouldn’t survive without the other ! I mean it wasn’t long ago Sheffield was handing out licenses to clubs running from Sunday morning 6am till 1pm Sunday lunch ! what the hell did the council, police and all the dogs in the world think people where doing there ????? clubs would laugh at the idea !!!! as it goes against the ethos of clubbing

getting back on topic..

i think metal detectors should be mandatory for all clubs, or at least ones over a certain capacity.. where i'm from (west midlands) this tends to be the case.. i was so surprised when i first moved up here and found that i never get searched going into clubs, let alone scanned with a metal detector!

what some of you are not realising is that most club owners don't want to actively stop drugs coming in to their establishment.. they know that if their club got a rep for being "drug free" it would soon also become "client free" as clubbers steered well clear..

Originally posted by neeeeeeeeeek
Have you found your ideal job???
:hihi: :hihi:

Ha! There are so many replies to that! You 'orrible orifice (I'll see you in PM!) :hihi:

I don't see how having sniffer dogs in nightclubs is going to improve your choice in friends when it comes to somehow spiking drinks (if indeed that's possible with ecstasy after what mjlacey's suggested). Neither will they protect you from yourself if you're experimenting & after fun.

What do you need to take them for anyway, can't you have as good a time with out them, or are you that insecure you need the prop up off them.

Has Alcohol ever passed your lips?? And could your friend who nearly died not have a good time without them??


Anyway, Dogs on doors will just make people take drugs before they go out, they may even double drop instead of taking a couple with them to last then the night, thus increasing the risk. Even the cheif of police knows are drug laws dont work and you want some poor dog to be sat outside a club all bloody night?

:loopy:

Cant you have a good time without them….christ what age are we living in or do people live with their head in the sand

Get your coat ! the fact that something like 99% of english notes have traces of coke and nearly every toilet in town has traces of it shows u a lot of people do this, I think I even read all toilet cisterns in the house of commons have traces of it !!!

And like someone said MDMA (ecstasy ) wont of killed the person or hurt them, it will have been what its mixed with, and if that isn’t a strong enough argument to bring it open and ‘above’ ground I don’t know what is and catch the idiots who mix poisons etc. in with this crap.

I know this is all opinions etc. but I think the problem needs to have a realistic view point, alcohol is the worst the drug going its causes more illness, NHS bills, aggressiveness etc. but no one thinks twice about having a glass of wine etc….

**steps off soap box**

I just ask don’t walk around with your eyes shut and realize what really happens around you everyday ! I would safely say someone in your office is a heavy user of this stuff and maybe even done it today whilst at work !…

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
Great idea, law abiding citizens as stated in one of the replys would not be taking drugs into the nightclub anyway.

And isn't it 'nightclub' drugs that people get spiked with leading to them getting raped.

My friend nearly died as a result of taking your so called law abiding nightclub drugs, she was not a coke or heroine addict she just wanted a good time, another friend was ill for three days from having one dropped in her drink.

So if you would explain to me how they are harmless please do so. Anything that stops these going into nightclubs is a brill idea to me and anyone carrying them whether for personal use or not is fair game for the police as far as I am concerned.
I have never heard of anyone taking the 'date rape' drug in a nightclub.
As for your friend having one dropped in her drink, i find highly unlikely as ecstacy pills DO NOT DISSOLVE.
Have you any idea how many people take ecstacy? Thousands and thousands! and the percentage of people who become ill or die as a result is so tiny.
Alcahol kills and injures so many many more people that ecstacy, do you think alcahol should be banned also? or should we go round aresting people who drink to much aswell?
People who die taking ecstacy die as a result or either a. being to hot, or b. not drink enough water. It's not actualy the pill that kills them.

We go clubbin here in Doncaster and can last the pace without any drugs to help us, and if the sniffer dog came to me and I would probably stroke it as I have nothing to hide, have you??

Where do you get your drugs from, if you don't make your own then you are feeding the very drug dealers that you are slagging off.

How two faced is that slag them off but buy off them anyway.

The bottom line is its your choice whether you take them, but if you get caught out by the sniffer dogs if they were there thats your responsibility, and crying that the police should be chasing smack heads is a cop out, if you need them you need them, but if you get caught with them its your fault.
How many of you can honestly say you have them just for personal use and have never offered them to anyone else.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty

How many of you can honestly say you have them just for personal use and have never offered them to anyone else.

I can.

Plus theres nothing wrong with offering. Its up to the individual to say NO.

who said i did them ?

also i do think the police etc. should chase smack dealers not social dug users due to the crime and addiction they lead too.

forgive me but clubbing in doncaster can barely enter the scale of true clubbing ! a jive on yates dance floor does not equal clubbing

that is true spyro but as daisy said my friend probably got so ill from being too hot or not drinking enough water, she obviously didn't know that.

What if you offered them to someome and they said yes as she did and she had died, what would you have said to the police when they had come for you as her supplier.

'Well I'm sorry shes dead but she should have said no?'

Then someone else said there is no risk but if people took them before they went out they would probably double up increasing the risk.

What risk you are all pushing it that there isn't a risk, its perfectly alright to do it.

And with regards to drink, yeah that is a problem too if they can't control it but its legal and drugs are not, and they get nicked for being drunk and disorderly if they get caught.

Like I said before the choice is yours use it or not use it but you know its illegal and if you get caught you pay the piper at the police station, same as the drunks pay for drunk and disorderly, and no amount of crying about smack heads alters that, they will get what is due to them at some point too.

Originally posted by DaisyBoo
I have never heard of anyone taking the 'date rape' drug in a nightclub.

there isn't a single "date rape" drug, there are loads.. the one that got all the media coverage was rohypnol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohypnol), which is a benzo (like valium or temazepan) so will pretty much knock you out with little or no memory of the night before.. obviously, this isn't much fun, so ppl rarely take these recreationally..

however, plenty of drugs used recreationally can also be abused and used to coerce people into non-consensual sex (ketamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketamine), ghb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-hydroxybutyrate), etc.)..

Originally posted by DaisyBoo
People who die taking ecstacy die as a result or either a. being to hot, or b. not drink enough water. It's not actualy the pill that kills them.

you are mostly correct.. people very very rarely die from mdma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mdma) toxicity (i can't recall a single case).. it has a massive LD50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LD50); people inevitably die from either heatstroke (too much activity and not enough water) or water intoxication (drinking too much water which reduces the level of essential salts in the body and causes the brain to swell)..

other than that, there are the occasional documented cases of people dying from "snide" pills (usually PMA or something as a result of a poor manufacturing process), but this is as a direct result of the whole culture being driven so far underground and not being properly regulated..

who labelled them social drugs anyway, in the 60's sniffing lines of coke was a social activity to many people, don't we know how wrong they were.

and thankyou bob for enlightening me on the fake drugs etc and the mixed stuff.

this is the point I am trying to make, you are all going out to have a great time, pills and all, but what if you got hold of a bad batch. when would you know, would you know looking at it or when you were in a ball on the floor, and if you had offered it to someone else and they were in a ball on the floor what would you feel like then??

If you want to take that risk and have taken them before you set off, you have nothing to fear from the sniffer dog,only the dealers who you call so much would be at risk from them.

So what would the problem be with the dogs then, and if the bouncers are the dealers like so many of you say then they will be busted too so the problem will be solved.

Im still don't understand why you are not getting the facts here.
What is the point spending money chasing clubbers who have 2 or 3 pills on them when there are smack/crack heads who would gladly rob your granny of her pension for their next fix. Surely the money should be spent dealing with this side of drug use that clubbers minding their own business at the weekend.
Yes pills can be dangerous if you don't know what you are doing but alcahol is far more dangerous, but that is ok because it is legal and why is it legal?? so the government can make so much from the tax on it.

With you daisy but you are banging your head against a wall with some people... Sad but true.

I hate peaple who rant on abowt Drugs everybody has there prefrence and mine is not alcohol..

I have been on the club circuit for over 20yrs now and seen it from both sides of the bar and beer heads are total W*****s give me a pilled up grurner eveytime they are so polite non aggresive,your guy who has been drikin all night is rude and aggresive i hate workin when its a normal night its not nice..

As for kicking out time there is always somebody who has had there face smashed in by sum t**t over 100 police waiting outside(think of your council tax)to escort you home,While on the Drug side the staff are having such a easy night:clap: and its a pleasure to work for them come kicking out time 300 clubbers no police no violence that is the perfect night for us bar staff..

Dogs in clubs NO they cant smell weapons my main worry. more metal detectors NEEDED..

Originally posted by benclements2


Firstly, I'm sure the sight of sniffer dogs at every nightclub door would look a tad intimidating.



lol yeah its bad enough with 2 great gorillas stood on the door

it would stop all the drugs and everything getting in

Originally posted by benclements2
I'm sure the sight of sniffer dogs at every nightclub door would look a tad intimidating.
Intimidating dog 1 (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TRAVEL/NEWS/07/27/olympics.airport.ap/story.airport.dog.ap.jpg)
intimidating dog 2 (http://www.taipeitimes.com/images/2005/02/13/20050212173841.jpeg)
Intimidating dogs 3&4 (http://www.bluefudge.com/images/sniff.jpg) :hihi:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
[B]We go clubbin here in Doncaster and can last the pace without any drugs to help us, and if the sniffer dog came to me and I would probably stroke it as I have nothing to hide, have you??

:clap: this made me laugh so much, and sorry, but it was at you, not with you. You NEED drugs to go clubbing in Donny! Before you start, I am Donny born, bred and escaped to the light side. I used to be a barmaid in one of the busiest bars in Doncaster town centre and I can assure you that the majority of the doormen there not only know and ignore the drugs, but a hell of a lot of them are actually the dealers you claim to so despise. And I say ARE not maybe.

I can see why you so prefer the crowds of people having sex on the market stalls out of their heads on alcohol and vomiting in the street to the happy chilled out 'druggies' wandering home peacefully.

Well that goes right back to what this topic was about in the first place, let the dogs into the nightclubs and when they sniff the bouncers out they too will be off down the cop shop won't they.
As for the market stalls read back, I said the people carrying the drugs can't winge about other drug users if they get sniffed out they pay the piper down the police station same as the drunken bums who get nicked for being drunk and disorderly.

The original topic was should sniffer dogs be in the nightclubs and yeah they should, and if you get caught you get caught as you know before you arrive with them that they are illegal, same as if you get drunk you risk getting nicked for being drunk and disorderly.

You cannot slag off the smack heads coz they get off in a different way to you. they buy from thir dealers and so do you.
The smack heads know they will get nicked at some point so what makes any drug user any different from someone else, they are illegal and if you run that gauntlet thats your choice, but if you get caught and nicked you have no right to point the finger and say well what about them.

You cannot slag off the smack heads coz they get off in a different way to you. they buy from thir dealers and so do you.
The smack heads know they will get nicked at some point so what makes any drug user any different from someone else, they are illegal and if you run that gauntlet thats your choice, but if you get caught and nicked you have no right to point the finger and say well what about them.

Generally, what makes a bone fide smack head different from your occasional (or even every weekend, imagine!) recreational (ecstasy et al) drug user is, ooh... lets think.. addiction?!

I have yet to meet a single person (and I've known a few..) addicted to ecstacy. Thankfully, I've never met anyone addicted to the harder stuff either. In fact, I've never met anyone who's even tried heroin. I appreciate you may find this hard to believe, but not all drug takers are the same.. and they should not be treated the same. You are hardly likely to find your common garden clubber stealing from their family, commiting burglary or selling their body for ecstasy are you?? Please note as this point, I am simply repeating the popular stereotype of the average heroin user, as frequently quoted by the media :)

Going back to the topic in question, sniffer dogs in clubs. No, I don't think it's a good idea. :thumbsup: :hihi:

You are probably right the esctasy users don't rob their grannies. But if you read back I said yes I agreed with the dogs because of experiences I had encountered at clubs. Then everyone compared their situation with what about smack heads, what about drunks, they do worse. I never actually said anywhere that clubbers rob their grannies but the do buy off dealers the same as the smack heads do.

So knowing that its illegal, should the sniffer dogs sniff them out they cannot start pointing the finger elsewhere, they are responsible for their own actions. I also cannot abide drunks so I feel the same way as you there and also have never defended the drunks either.

I also have 2 daughters and a son growing up. When I was growing up I went clubbing and didn't need drugs and to hear grown people say clubbing and drugs go hand in hand is wrong.
I want my kids to have a great time and experience life but if I found out that they had be told this garbage when they got to clubbing age I would be furious. Surely people can go out and have a great time without the need for pills, I still do and I too am donny born and bred, and I would like to think that my kids can go too without having to pop a few pills beforehand.

I have known some heavy drug users, most are now dead, some drunks who have pickled their livers, and died covered in big black blisters, my friend who tried some escasty and nearly paid the price for it and my other friend who was spiked by something taken into the club obviously for that purpose.

so drugs of any description are not my favourite thing, I personally think there is no need for them and people are getting swept away in this fever that there is a need for them and its wrong.

I am also a believer that it is down to choice what each individual does, but like I initially said before everyone jumped on the defensive band wagon, if you get caught for it you pay the piper at the police station.

This is a bit of an off the cuff comment because it's very late (or early!) and I can't remember everything that you said in your last post.

All i wanted to say is that your last post reminded me strongly of my mum. My nana (my mum's mum) is a bit of an alcoholic and my mum cannot stand people drinking. My mum thinks I (and all my friends) are alcoholic because I like a bottle of wine on a weekend (and any other occasion that may demand it :) ) I understand and appreciate why my mum feels this way. However, my dad... well, his dad was a major, abusive, horrible alcoholic but my dad understands the difference.

I know that sounds really patronising, and I sincerely don't mean it to be so. I say it purely because I think you (understandably) have been negatively affected by drugs and therefore react so.

The last thing I'm going to say on this is; if you've ever been drunk but can say you're not an alcoholic, then you've had a recreational drug. Just like any other.

Do you pro-sniffer-dog people really think that because a substance is against the law then any person taking it is a bad person? you think millions of people should be sent to prison just for peacefully having a few hours of enjoyment at the weekend on a couple of pills??? you will all know people that take ecstasy maybe without realising, i'm sure you wouldn't want to send them all down for it.

Sniffer dogs at clubs are a stupid idea because 1) it will put clubbers off going to clubs and drive drugs more (dangerously) underground, 2) leaving only ******-up people to go clubbing and therefore kill all the best clubnights 3) not help whatsoever with the more serious problems of violence and vandalism fuelled by alcohol.

As usual, these measures (such as intrusive searching and sniffer dogs) will only serve hurt the people that are least involved - your everyday regular young people up for a good time; rather than wheedling out more serious menacing persons such as those who are out to date-rape.

I agree, policing time is better spent dealing with crack and smack dealers (the drugs that really mess people up and drive people to violent and petty crime) rather than pills or weed which don't.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
You cannot slag off the smack heads coz they get off in a different way to you.

i think this is the basis of a lot of arguments such as this.. very often, people who are against pills/mdma/designer drugs tend to think that all drugs are the same.. ergo, popping a pill is just as bad as chasing the dragon..

those people who are informed about drugs (whether they agree or disagree with their usage) will generally agree that drugs fall into certain "categories" of danger/social harm..

it is definitely fair to "slag off" smack 'eads and defend mdma in the same breathe; they are fundamentally different drugs, with different routes of administration and significantly different social side effects..

not all drugs are the same.. that is why you can defend alcohol yet attack pills in the same breathe..

Originally posted by slinky
The last thing I'm going to say on this is; if you've ever been drunk but can say you're not an alcoholic, then you've had a recreational drug. Just like any other.

touché :)

i think we have all got sidetracked.... sniffer dogs can sniff my ass if they where on a club door.

slinky think u got it spot on !

Lets end the debate. They rock.

I am of course referring to Ann Summers parties. ;-)

But I would imagine some substance abuse would be a requirement. A G&T at the least ;)

When i started this thread I assumed that people would automatically agree that drugs in clubs are bad and that they should be stopped. The debate was about wheter sniffer dogs would be a useful weapon in the fight against drugs. Obviously if you actually approve of drugs in nightclubs then you will be against the dog idea because it might actually work.

I find it rather amusing that so many pro-drugs people chose to slagg of alcohol and say it is worse than drugs. Leaving aside whether this is true or not (and it is a rather doubtful claim) can we assume that all these people are t-total but take drugs. Come on, I bet 99% of druggies also drink quite a lot too and most smoke also. If you are the type of reckless person who likes drugs then you will also like booze and fags.

I just wonder what would happen if one club adoped sniffer dogs on a trial basis. I suspect that the drug problem in that club would drop dramatically. Many druggies would probably be detered from even trying to enter the club and those that risked it would likely get 'sniffed out' and handed over to the police.

Be quiet, you are boring me. Out of touch and blinkered.

Originally posted by Guderian
Be quiet, you are boring me. Out of touch and blinkered.

Do i take it from this that you are in favour of drugs in nightclubs?

I just can't think what they get out of it anyway. What is the appeal of drugs?

Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex - drugs should not even come into it.

Originally posted by Guderian
Lets end the debate. They rock.

It is a great idea to end the debate as you will never convince me otherwise and I have given you reasons why I feel like that too.

I have never said esctasy users are in the same league as smackheads, the comparison I made was that you both buy off dealers somewhere, and as most of you were quick to shout out that the bouncers are the dealers then let the dogs have them, but then where do you get your stuff from.

You cannot slag off the dealers yet buy off them, or slag off other drug users who buy a different drug from the same place, as Daisy said she has never heard of anyone selling date rape stuff, why on earth would they sell it to you, they might as well just ask for a bonk.

You have also said that it is not dangerous if you know what you are doing, again, did you know what you were doing when you had your first one as obviously my friend didn't.

You have contridicted yourselves so many times, why would sniffer dogs push everything underground if everything was OK with it.

Anyway, you have your opinion and I have mine, and I challenge anyone to read through my comments and find anywhere where I said you are nasty people, or anywhere where I defend drunks too. Judging from the bits you have pulled out of my comments you do a lot of selective reading, and miss the point over the dogs.

I have had friends who were hard drug users, drunks, 'social drug' users, and that was their choice it did not make me think any less of them and we did not row over it because I chose not to do it, but it did make me very sad when I watched a lot of them die horrible deaths and to think my children are growing up into a culture where people are told that drugs and clubbing walk hand in hand is very sad too.

My comments on the dogs were, if you take drugs of any description and the dogs sniff you out, then you pay the piper at the police station just the same as the other harder drug users and the drunk and disorderly people. there were no actual comments from me regarding any of you as individuals, the debate was over the dogs.

Why would any innocent person have anything against the sniffer dogs. if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear.

Yes, such security measures for clubs would no doubt drive drugs more underground but that is a good thing. It takes them further away from decent people who go to clubs for normal social reasons and help confine druggies more to their own type. That way we are all happy.

Slimsid2000 - I wouldn't say that alcohol is worse than 'drugs' as a blanket statement.

But alcohol definitely makes people more prone to violence than other certain drugs would (for instance MDMA, weed, LSD/hallucinogens). And it IS more addictive than certain drugs.

ALL drugs have health risks, including fags, alcohol and caffeine. You can be killed by taking a pill (VERY rarely) you can also die from a wasp sting or from eating a peanut and are much more likely to die in a road accident (lets ban all cars!!). It is up to the individual whether they choose to take a health risk with any drug. Unfortunately there are unjustly harsh laws against drugs passed by people who have little or no understanding of these drugs and their effects.

You are obviously one of these people that thinks all drug takers are BAD people and should be locked up. If I applied your narrow minded thinking back onto yourself then I wonder what you could be accused of - speeding maybe? (putting others lives at risk) ? piracy? or are you such a upstanding member of the community you have never in your life broken or bent a law??

It is not drugs themselves that cause problems in clubs. Problems in clubs are caused by a very small minority of individuals with social/behavioral problems (or temporary behavioural problems fuelled by alcohol) they may or may not be drug dealers. but in most cases they are not, as large-scale drug dealers are not generally found in clubs. Like i said before the majority of club-goers are in all other ways normal people just out having a good time and are not out to harm anyone at all. Leave them alone!

Originally posted by Guderian
Be quiet, you are boring me. Out of touch and blinkered.
:clap:
I bet they read the daily mail too.

Fantastically well put Maxien. Hear,hear!
Each to their own.

is this fair on the dogs?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I have just had what I think could be a good idea.

In order to prevent drug dealing in nightclubs and to do away with searches why not have a sniffer dog at the doorway. These dogs are very good at sniffing out drugs and a sucess rate of nearly 100% could be likely.

All that would be necessary would be for the dog to have a quick sniff of each person as they enter the club and if it doesn't react then you go stright in. What do people think.

Ann Summers -

Do you think that the type of dealers that sell smack/crack are the same dealers who sell ecstacy to people in nightclubs?

I would have no idea, as I don't buy off them, but the majority of drug dealers I have run into, deal for money, they do not have a particular ID on which drug they deal,nor do they particularly care what you do with it once it has been sold, it is purely a money making venture for them. I would bet that somewhere further up the chain there is a link between your suppliers and theirs, and should someone sadly have a bad reaction to something your dealer had sold, they would crap themselves in exactly the same way as the smack heads dealer would.

If you take pills, where do you buy your pills from and what do you call the person you buy from, your mate or your dealer, coz if they are selling the pills they are one in the same, and what does this have to do with sniffer dogs in clubs anyway.

takes them further away from decent people who go to clubs for normal social reasons and help confine druggies more to their own type. That way we are all happy.

Good god slim, You are quite amazing!! They should do a fly on the wall thing, following you about and listening to your views! You really must have absolutely no friends! If you somehow bracket yourself in with decent people and to be a decent person requires being as blinkered as you then I might just develop a healthy smack habit! You really really need to get a bloody life. NOT EVERYONE on this thread who thinks your idea is stupid takes drugs, some people are just slightly more aware of what goes on around them and are capable of human interaction.

I just can't think what they get out of it anyway. What is the appeal of drugs?

Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex -

Brilliant! You openly admit that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about yet you drone on about it.

Have you seen Southpark? You really are the teacher, the one with Mr Hat.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
I would have no idea, as I don't buy off them, but the majority of drug dealers I have run into, deal for money, they do not have a particular ID on which drug they deal,nor do they particularly care what you do with it once it has been sold, it is purely a money making venture for them. I would bet that somewhere further up the chain there is a link between your suppliers and theirs, and should someone sadly have a bad reaction to something your dealer had sold, they would crap themselves in exactly the same way as the smack heads dealer would.

If you take pills, where do you buy your pills from and what do you call the person you buy from, your mate or your dealer, coz if they are selling the pills they are one in the same, and what does this have to do with sniffer dogs in clubs anyway.
I just wondered becasue of something you said in a previous thred, but i hope you wouldn't be so naive.
Obviously there is a huge difference between someone who sells smack/crack, and your mate that you buy a few pills off in a club.
I have been serious clubbing for about 6 years and never once have i been offered smack/crack in a club.

If they were indeed the same sellers, surely they would just sell the drug which offered them the most profit margin?
The fact that they dont suggests they are two different types of seller.

Originally posted by Guderian
If they were indeed the same sellers, surely they would just sell the drug which offered them the most profit margin?
The fact that they dont suggests they are two different types of seller.
Of course there are different types of sellar, why would a smack/crack dealers go to a nightclub? There is no demand for stuff like that in there.

I know that Daisy, and you know that. But do THEY?
It doesnt say so in the Daily Mail, so how could they know?

Don't waste your breath on slim.

People talk about drug users (i use that term loosley) being on the fringe of society! I dont think this guy has ever left his PC.

Thats exactly the point (and problem) guderian - THEY DON'T actually KNOW what they are talking about/judging from their moral high horses!!!! (THEY as in those who slag off all people who take drugs - thinking 'druggies' are all evil nuisances, which they absolutely are not !!! except for a tiny percentage of course)

I like to call it ignorance.

I don't read the daily mail either do you?? and you do do selective reading don't you??

Does it or does it not say I would bet that somewhere further up the chain there is a link between their dealer and yours, and why would they want to sell smack in a club when the money is in esctasy that would be a stupid business deal wouldn't it.

That would be like trying to sell sugar to a diabetic ( no offence meant to diabetics before another debate starts lol).

And why is there a huge difference, the only difference is between those dealing to feed their own habits and those dealing for money. The ones dealing for money are exactly the same as yours, selling and making money off stuff that you think you need.

Can this selective reading and going around and around in circles end now, and can I drag it back to the original thread about the dogs. I believe if the sniffer dog gets you thats your responsibility and all this dragging it off onto dealers and drunks and social drug users and smack heads doesn't alter that fact. Before you start calling me for calling you lot, have a read back and show me where I have called any of you for what you do. If I can still be friends with people doing a lot harder drugs than yours then what reason would I have to slag you all off as you seem to think I am doing.

Read all of the things I have written and then get down off your defensive horses and answer the things I did ask you rather than the bits that you can twist into something else, which incidently had nothing to do with the original thread in the first place.

Considering the harshness of punishment for dealing a class a drug, and knowing the difference in effects of the drugs, do you still honestly think that somone selling pills in a nightclub to their mates and a few others just out having a good time should be dealt the same punishment as someone who knowingly and heartlessly sells crack or smack to some poor f*cked up addict who has f*cked up their lives with the stuff?

Originally posted by slimsid2000

Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex - drugs should not even come into it.

So if their were no drugs in nightclubs you'd feel more comfertable going and finally you'd get laid by a girl with an Emma Bunton esque bottom.

If you had your sniffer dogs put into lace what would stop 'druggies' from consuming the pill of their choice before entering the club.

A drug-free boozy 'pulling' parlour filled with people like mr slim is certainly not somewhere i would like to take my vulnerable young bottom on a night out - ugh!!! Take me to a friendly, peaceful happy e-heads club anyday!

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex - drugs should not even come into it.
:lol:
Are you single by any chance???

Personally i go to nightclubs to listen to the music/dj's and spend times with friends and generally enjoy myself.

The smack heads take the smack knowing the consequences of their actions, they might get addicted they might have a reaction and die, they might thing they are capable of handling their drug and kill themselves through over doing it which I know from experience has happened.

Your friendly person selling in a club probably had no intention of harming you in any way, but what if his dealer had sold him some bad pills, or you took one thought it was OK and took a few more and unintentionally did yourself some harm as was said earlier on in the thread.

To me a dealer is a dealer the smack heads dealers don't want to kill them whats the point of that. Your friend is still your friend but he has bought from a bigger dealer than himself who doesn't look at him as a friend , he looks at him as money.

So the answer to your question is yes one dealer is the same as another although granted some peddle more misery than others, and somewhere a lot further up the chain from your friend there is probably a connection between the two.

You don't need to take the drugs in whatever form , same as drunks don't need to drink, smokers don't need to smoke, if you want to do it that is your choice, but once again if the sniffer dog catches you then that is your fault too.

If you buy your pills from the same person every time you are out, when does he start to become your dealer as well as your friend?? When to you start looking for him as your supplier when you want to go out. A dealer is a dealer

I don't personally buy them but a mate of mine sells them. He is not stupid he would just go to a sniffer-dog-free club, whereas you can send your offspring to a sniffer-dog club safe in the knowledge that they won't come across any.Fair point(s)

Originally posted by DaisyBoo
:lol:
Are you single by any chance???

Personally i go to nightclubs to listen to the music/dj's and spend times with friends and generally enjoy myself.

You know that is the best statement I have seen on here all day.
Why can't everyone go to nightclubs to listen to music/DJs, spend quality time with their mates and generally enjoy themselves, without having any substances, drink, weapons or any other creation.

I can have a great time with my mates anytime, and need nothing other than their company to do it,

Then there would be no need for this debate to be going on at all.

Originally posted by maxien
Problems in clubs are caused by a very small minority of individuals with social/behavioral problems

it is ironic that you posted this for sid's attention, given the subject & tone of his other posts lol..

Very fair point maxien, before it got blown out of all proportion and the drunks and smackheads got dragged into it, not by me I might add, and also regardless what your friend does he is still your friend as I have been trying to tell people are mine.

If he did get sniffed out though, he would know why and would pay the consequences as would some of my mates otherwise he would not be going to a sniffer dog free club to get out of the way. On the same note though, should my kids buy anything from your friend, although I understand completely that he has just purely supplied and has intended them no harm what so ever, it would not alter the fact that the next time he entered a club he would continually be looking over his shoulder for me. which I would say you would do with your children.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
You know that is the best statement I have seen on here all day.
Why can't everyone go to nightclubs to listen to music/DJs, spend quality time with their mates and generally enjoy themselves, without having any substances, drink, weapons or any other creation.

I can have a great time with my mates anytime, and need nothing other than their company to do it,

Then there would be no need for this debate to be going on at all.
I CAN go to nightclubs without taking drugs and i do it most weekends, although in the past i have been to nightclubs and taken drugs to enhance the enjoyment/music.company etc

Same as going to the pub really, i can quite happily go to the pub and drink coke all night, or i might want to enhance the enjoyment/music/company by having a few alcaholic drinks.

Whats the difference?

Originally posted by DaisyBoo
I have never heard of anyone taking the 'date rape' drug in a nightclub.
As for your friend having one dropped in her drink, i find highly unlikely as ecstacy pills DO NOT DISSOLVE.
Have you any idea how many people take ecstacy? Thousands and thousands! and the percentage of people who become ill or die as a result is so tiny.
Alcahol kills and injures so many many more people that ecstacy, do you think alcahol should be banned also? or should we go round aresting people who drink to much aswell?
People who die taking ecstacy die as a result or either a. being to hot, or b. not drink enough water. It's not actualy the pill that kills them.

A bit of selective reading from me, did you write this statement earlier, spot the difference

The chances of dying from overheating, not drinking enough water, or from having some dodgy pills is hardly on the same scale as a glass of pop down the local is it??

But you are still out having a good time with your mates, thats the difference.

what???? :loopy:

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
The chances of dying from overheating, not drinking enough water, or from having some dodgy pills is hardly on the same scale as a glass of pop down the local is it??

But you are still out having a good time with your mates, thats the difference.
I have been far more ill through alcahol than i ever have been with drugs.

There is more chance of me getting run over by a bus than there is me dying from taking pills.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
I can have a great time with my mates anytime, and need nothing other than their company to do it,


i can get to work in plenty of time by walking anytime, and need nothing other than my legs to do it..

however, i enjoy driving in my car, listening to music, relaxing.. so i do..

everyone in this thread (with the possible exception of sid) enjoys being with their friends, and need nothing other than their company to do so.. however, in the same way you enjoy a casual drink with your friends, many people choose to enjoy drugs with their friends.. you have obviously never tried mdma, or any kind of social drug (and i'm not for a minute suggesting you should), so you don't know how it affects your social experience..

mdma, as an example, will strengthen the bond you feel between you and your friends (in a similar way to how alcohol does).. no-one "needs" it to have a good time, but then you don't "need" butter on your sandwiches, it just makes them taste better!

Has anything you have had to say about this been to do with whether sniffer dogs should be allowed in nightclubs, or is your main concern smackheads and drink as I think that is a different topic and it is getting a bit boring now.

I think its a good idea as I have nothing to fear from the sniffer dogs, you on the other hand are a brilliant advocate for smack sniffers and alcohol sniffers, lol. You have experienced some bad effects from drink and presume smack heads are the scum of the earth rather than the victims,I on the other hand have seen some bad experiences with drugs, so I support the dogs.
Maybe you should open another topic an drugs versus alcohol as this seems to bother you so much, and if it makes you so ill why do you do it. Maybe one day you will have a bad experience trying to enhance you evening out and when you have to attend your friends funerals you will probably start to think the same as me. I do not think any less of my friends for what they did and I still love them the same I just wish they hadn't done what they did, and when your E's nearly took another one it is difficult to not think along the same lines.

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
Has anything you have had to say about this been to do with whether sniffer dogs should be allowed in nightclubs, or is your main concern smackheads and drink as I think that is a different topic and it is getting a bit boring now.

I think its a good idea as I have nothing to fear from the sniffer dogs, you on the other hand are a brilliant advocate for smack sniffers and alcohol sniffers, lol. You have experienced some bad effects from drink and presume smack heads are the scum of the earth rather than the victims,I on the other hand have seen some bad experiences with drugs, so I support the dogs.
Maybe you should open another topic an drugs versus alcohol as this seems to bother you so much, and if it makes you so ill why do you do it. Maybe one day you will have a bad experience trying to enhance you evening out and when you have to attend your friends funerals you will probably start to think the same as me. I do not think any less of my friends for what they did and I still love them the same I just wish they hadn't done what they did, and when your E's nearly took another one it is difficult to not think along the same lines.
Ill try and say this as nicely as possible without using abusive language but why on earth am i an advocate for smack heads?

Im leaving this thread now as you are continuing to wind me up with your narrow minded views.

Dirty bob this is one of the few responses that have actually made me smile today. That is very true, I too drive my car with musoic on full blast, base blasting the other cars, and the other drivers probably think I am as high as a kite myself, but I am not, just happy being deafened by the music.

I have tried 'recreational drugs' before actually, until my friends started dying, but once again that was their choice, as it is everyones choice on here. what really got me going over the day was the comments that it went hand in hand and regardless how nice they are people who sell pills are dealers in some form, and the presumption from some people that I am a newspaper reader with no experience of any drugs what so ever.
And it will never alter the fact that should a nice friendly pill seller sell any to my children he will probably have been force fed the rest by the end of the night lol.

At least you seem not to think I am the enemy here thats one good thing lol.

DOES IT SAY SMACK SNIFFERS OR SMACK HEADS,
You are winding yourself up by not reading the stuff right in the first place, it says advocate for Smack sniffers not smack heads, which has been the problem most of the time, read it right before you get on your high horse again, and maybe you won't get so wound up.

Had it not got onto this stupid thing about smack heads and brunks in the first place there would be nothing to be stressed about.

Originally posted by slimsid2000


Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex - drugs should not even come into it.

Absolute rubbish! Nightclubs are a place to dance and ENJOY YOURSELF. I for one would personally prefer to be surrounded by people doing just that, than pervy old men trying to hit on me. Not everyone's life revolves around trying to meet members of the opposite sex - especially those that already have a partner!

And on a completely different tac...

Years ago I went to a club in Kent where they had sniffer dogs on the door. 10 out of 14 of our party had ecstacy on them & not one was stopped! They just wagged their tails!

So I'm not sure how well that would work...

Katie you might just be my saving grace her lol

when you went to the club years ago and got 'sniffed', did your party think well if I get stopped by the dogs I will get my ass kicked as I have got pills on me or did they start ranting and raving about smack heads and drunks.

BLAH BLAH BLAH EACH TO THERE OWN.

Leave the pill poppers alone they do no harm only a few die a year compared to 30,000 alcohol deaths a year and riseing faster each year,Only about a 1000 crackheads and smackheads die a year still 28,000 or so short of alcohol related..

Before you critasize other peaple why dont you sample things first,
some of you say"i dont know where to get drugs from"just ask your teenage son or daughter im sure they will help..:hihi:

Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
Katie you might just be my saving grace her lol

when you went to the club years ago and got 'sniffed', did your party think well if I get stopped by the dogs I will get my ass kicked as I have got pills on me or did they start ranting and raving about smack heads and drunks.

More than likely they just got on with having a good night & Katie's post has answered Slimsid's query about whether it'd be a good idea.

Good discusion all some good points raised.
But i don't think dogs should be in clubs (music to loud)but for festivals and open air concerts yes a sniffer should be there but not for night clubs..


10 out of 14 of our party had ecstacy on them & not one was stopped! They just wagged their tails!
Dogs don't want to spoil your fun all they see is alot of freindly happy clubbers.Thats just what our dog did we have a collie who likes to sniff about so we got him a secruity shirt and all he does at festivals and partys is wagg his tale he goes down a treat with all peaple.sorry bit of babble there abot our pup any chance given i will talk about him.

Anyway personly I think there should be more metal detectors at clubs One as you walk in the door and hand held MDs before you get in the club that is peace of mind for me..

PARTY ON DUDES whatever your poison is:thumbsup:

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I would also recomend some sort of metal detectors to search for weapons.
Doorman: "Ah, madam, you appear to be triggering my metal detector. Kindly remove your coins, keys, zips and any metal fasteners. Hmm, it's still going off? Then there's nothing else for it - you should remove your underwire bra immediately - it could be a security risk"

It's going to take a loooooong time to get into clubs. Are you going to introduce a 2 hour club check-in time?

Originally posted by feargal
Doorman: "Ah, madam, you appear to be triggering my metal detector. Kindly remove your coins, keys, zips and any metal fasteners. Hmm, it's still going off? Then there's nothing else for it - you should remove your underwire bra immediately - it could be a security risk"

It's going to take a loooooong time to get into clubs. Are you going to introduce a 2 hour club check-in time?

Ohhhhh the mental pic :hihi:

I think there might be issues with "intimate" piercings too Sian, but I'm not sure I want to think about that so early in the morning!!

Originally posted by feargal
I think there might be issues with "intimate" piercings too Sian, but I'm not sure I want to think about that so early in the morning!!

Speak for yourself, Sounds alright to me :D

Wasn't this discussed in the pub on Wednesday, or is it me :suspect:

The sniffer dog thread I mean...

So presume we have sniffer dogs outside/in a nightclub

They sniff an ecstasy tab/poppers/speed ( selected that as the more typical clubbers drug/) on a person and the amount is for their own personal use. They are obviously not there to deal.

What action does the security take then?

They confiscate the drugs? What do they do with their nightly haul?

Do they just kick person out of the club? Not much of deterent.

Will those wishing to do drugs just take their drugs before they enter the presmises?

Will those taking recreational drugs go where the security turn a 'blind eye' to such activities?

Will clubs suffer if they take a a tough no drugs approach? Will people elsewhere?

Do security call the cops after they find drugs on a person? Do they have to call the cops everytime?

Will the cops care?
Will the cops run around every nightclub in South Yorks to caution a person?

Does it stop the big dealers?

Basically supply the bouncers with drugs that they can then sell back to the person they took them off once they are inside! TOP PLAN!
:banana:

Originally posted by neeeeeeeeeek
Basically supply the bouncers with drugs that they can then sell back to the person they took them off once they are inside! TOP PLAN!
:banana:

Will they be selling the underwired bras & 'intimate' piercings back too or has the metal detector idea been scrapped ?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
People who take drugs are not law abiding people and should be caught and prosecuted.

Unless they are legal drugs of course.

I can tell you there is no problem with intimate piercings and metal detectors...

Sorry to be opening a new can of worms, but do people feel that there are huge drug problems in Sheffield?

Personally I feel under large amounts of pressure to drink loads if I go out but I've never felt under pressure to take drugs. I've also never been in a club and thought 'Whoa, something should be done about the number of people out of control due to drugs'

Originally posted by Strix
Intimidating dog 1 (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TRAVEL/NEWS/07/27/olympics.airport.ap/story.airport.dog.ap.jpg)
intimidating dog 2 (http://www.taipeitimes.com/images/2005/02/13/20050212173841.jpeg)
Intimidating dogs 3&4 (http://www.bluefudge.com/images/sniff.jpg) :hihi:

Although not a dog lover, I think all of the dogs in the above links look sweet and friendly not intimidating or frightening. Whether it would resolve the problem is another matter, because I rather suspect these cesspits of humanity aka dealers would just find somewhere else to flog their stuff.

Metal detectors etc are used by the Courts. Without exception everyone going in to any court absolutely must walk through. In Sheffield's Court the security guards personally inspect every bag, briefcase or box of papers to ensure nothing untoward. At most the inspection takes 2 minutes per person and by the way Sian there is no need to remove any garments. :D

Originally posted by mjlacey21
I can tell you there is no problem with intimate piercings and metal detectors...

yeah, the jewellry is made out of surgical steel so it won't set off metal detectors..

Originally posted by Mooly
Sorry to be opening a new can of worms, but do people feel that there are huge drug problems in Sheffield?

Personally I feel under large amounts of pressure to drink loads if I go out but I've never felt under pressure to take drugs. I've also never been in a club and thought 'Whoa, something should be done about the number of people out of control due to drugs'

this is a very good point.. many's a time i've been in a place and left because i thought it was too full of drunken louts who looked like they could cause trouble.. i've never thought the same way when in an environment when drugs are involved.. and, no, i don't mean clubs/parties where everyone is completely mashed up :roll:

i mean i've been in plenty of bars (not mentioning any names, but you've all likely been in them) where some people are plainly on drugs, but i've never been in a surrounding where i've though "god i've got to get out of here, all these mashed up people look like trouble"..

Sorry to be opening a new can of worms, but do people feel that there are huge drug problems in Sheffield?

I don't think sheffield has a drugs problem, not a clubbing drugs problem. Sure there are a few too many heroin addicts about but not out of proportion with any other city. The starter of this thread does not even go clubbing or have any idea what he is talking about!

All I am suggesting is that something be done to try and solve the drug problem in as far as it relates to nightclubs. I don't doubt that there would be a certain amount of dispersment (although at least some drug takers may not take them elsewhere). Just the sight of tight security on a nightclub door may well be a sufficient deterant in quite a few cases.

Anyone found with drugs upon them should be detained by the bouncers (using minimal force necessary) until the police arrive. Then they and the drugs should be handed over to the police to take the matter from there.

I find it rather disturbing that some people say bouncers themselves are heavily involved in drug pushing. I would certainly hope this is not true even if there have been a few issolated examples. I thought all bouncers had to be registered and have criminal record checks before getting a job. Perhaps any bouncers on this forum could give their views as personally I am in no possition to know how widespread this is. I always thought bouncers were there to protect people from the troublemakers.

People say I don't know what i am talking about and have no experiene. Well, I am proud to say i have no experience of drugs but I do have experience of going to clubs and bars. I can only speak for myself but I would much prefer to to to one where I can be reasonably sure any druggies have been filtered out.

Good clubs draw in a lot of visitors to a city who spend money while they are there, hotels, taxi's, bars, etc all gain from this.
If you impose to many restrictions and clubers decide to go to other towns and cities we may end up with more bars like Weatherspoons etc to fill the void.
I see the club scene and city 'drug problem' as two seperate issues.

SlimSid, may I ask what behaviours these druggies you see at the nightclubs elicit that makes you think they're on drugs?

Do you think they come from a particular section of society or have anything in common other than they're on drugs?

Seeing as most dogs can only work for 20 mins without an hours break and they cost £10,000 to train that's a lot of money and a lot of dogs - some people on here are bonkers...

Sniffer dogs at clubs is a bad idea - it would achieve nothing, cost absolutely ridiculous amounts and would no doubt put more than a few clubs out of business. Humans have taken drugs just as long as we have been breathing and will continue to do so - the main risk with drugs is not knowing for sure what you are getting so the intelligent thing to do would be to swap the sniffer dog on the door for a guy with a pill testing kit. That way the people that choose to enhance their night with mind altering substances can at least be assured they know what they are taking.

There's no point even trying to explain to people like Slim - just let him get on with life in his bubble where nightclubs are just for pulling.....

Slim, you are one of a kind.
I hope!

Ecstasy's the great bogeyman of the nineties, you're more likely to die of allergic shock from penicillin than doing E but that won't stop the moral majority clamouring for its abolition whilst dragging on a Marlboro and drinking beer. In twenty years people will realise that sensible people who enjoy using drugs can do so sensibly and lots of chemicals will be decriminalised, allowing the government to tax the sale of drugs from newsagents, which at the moment is money that goes to criminals.

On another note, how readily available are the different kinds of drugs anyway? It's not as if anyone's being offered a hundred tabs of LSD in the street, is it?

Ecstasy is something sid will never experience.
Ok i know, 'stop being nasty'!

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Do i take it from this that you are in favour of drugs in nightclubs?

I just can't think what they get out of it anyway. What is the appeal of drugs?

Nightclubs should be places to meet members of the opposite sex - drugs should not even come into it.

fun?
some people like a drink on a night out, some people like a few drugs, some people dont need either ...............whichever you choose its about enjoying your time out

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I find it rather disturbing that some people say bouncers themselves are heavily involved in drug pushing. I would certainly hope this is not true even if there have been a few issolated examples.

how many times?? the image of a drugs "pusher" is nothing more than propaganda; a myth.. yes, in my experience most clubs have bouncers you can score off.. however, you certainly will not find them going round "pushing" their wares on people..

they don't have to.. people come to them, people want their product.. are bar staff "alcohol pushers"?? no.. you go to them to get served, at your request..

I thought all bouncers had to be registered and have criminal record checks before getting a job.

they do.. they will only have a criminal record if they were stupid enough to get caught..

god slim, you redefine the word "naïve".. amongst others :roll:

Is it really an unreasonable vision to have a situation where drugs are something that decent law abiding young people do not come accross in the course of a night out.

Whether people go to nightclubs to meet girls/boys, listen to the music, have a night out with mates or whatever they should not have to mix with criminals. Drugs should clearly be seen as part of criminal culture not youth culture.

Of course I am not naive enough to believe that drugs can ever be eradicated from society but I do think it possible (with sufficient will) to drive them much further to the margins. At least that way people who are not interested in them can avoid them, while those who want them will still get them. Is this so bad? Surley it is better than to have them so prevelant.

Originally posted by slimsid2000


Whether people go to nightclubs to meet girls/boys, listen to the music, have a night out with mates or whatever they should not have to mix with criminals. Drugs should clearly be seen as part of criminal culture not youth culture.



Balls

if thats your point of view then there should be sniffer dogs at the supermarket, in the pubs, in the bars, in the job centre, in the bookies, in church etc.

Just leave it be.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Is it really an unreasonable vision to have a situation where drugs are something that decent law abiding young people do not come accross in the course of a night out.

Whether people go to nightclubs to meet girls/boys, listen to the music, have a night out with mates or whatever they should not have to mix with criminals. Drugs should clearly be seen as part of criminal culture not youth culture.

Of course I am not naive enough to believe that drugs can ever be eradicated from society but I do think it possible (with sufficient will) to drive them much further to the margins. At least that way people who are not interested in them can avoid them, while those who want them will still get them. Is this so bad? Surley it is better than to have them so prevelant.

i rarely resort to direct, blunt name calling but in this instance: sid, you idiot..

the situation you have described that you crave so much is exactly how it is.. no-one "pushes" drugs on those who do not want them* the dealers are there purely to provide drugs to those who want them..

i am dumbfounded that a "man" of your age can have so little life experience.. your naïvete and apparent social ineptitude seem to know no bounds.. and, no, i'm not just talking about this thread :roll:


*=apart from date rapists, but that's a whole different kettle of fish and one which i like to think most people would have the same opinion on..

Originally posted by slimsid2000

Drugs should clearly be seen as part of criminal culture not youth culture.

Of course I am not naive enough to believe that drugs can ever be eradicated from society but I do think it possible (with sufficient will) to drive them much further to the margins.

And sort of drugs might you be talking about? Alcohol? Heroin? Tobacco?

So sid, when in your active social life do you get drugs offered to you??? Is it not already the case that people who want drugs can find them and people who don't want drugs have little involvement? Do you often find it a problem that on your daily quest to find a girlfriend you are offered all manner of illicit substances??

The margins of society that you refer too, Millions of people, 500 billion dollars a year, that's a very big margin.

I mean I would like to go to a club and be sure that i wouldn't be in the same place a s those who sell or take drugs and that any girls I may talk to are not there for that reason.#

All right, if some people are so stupid and determined to take drugs they will find somewhere to do it but why not at least try to create SOME night spots that are drug free. Is not everyone happy that way? How can those who argue (presumably from a libertarian viewpoint) for 'live and let live' disagree with this?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
How can those who argue (presumably from a libertarian viewpoint) for 'live and let live' disagree with this?

if you don't know the answer to that question then clearly you don't understand the meaning of the phrase "live and let live" :roll:

sid, obviously you think "drug takers" are all wide eyed, unpredictable maniacs who are sure to spoil your night with their hedonistic fury.. i can guarantee, if you have ever ventured into any of the popular bars in town you have mixed with people on drugs (and i mean illicit substances, not alcohol) and probably not noticed..

in fact, if you went along to one of the larger forum meets i'd wager that there you would be mixing with these "druggies" that you so detest..

quick, run sid, before one of them tries to push drugs on you!! oh no, you'll be giving head for crack before you know it!! :roll:

Why would you want to be so sure that no one in a club has taken drugs? What effect does it have on your clubbing experience?? How does other people taking drugs in a club effect you?? Has it not crossed your mind that some people you may have talked to whilst out clubbing are on something other than beer?? Good god, there really is no hope for you is there!
Stick to the internet mate, you might find that real people don't live up to your expectations.

Originally posted by dirtybobby
if you don't know the answer to that question then clearly you don't understand the meaning of the phrase "live and let live" :roll:

sid, obviously you think "drug takers" are all wide eyed, unpredictable maniacs who are sure to spoil your night with their hedonistic fury.. i can guarantee, if you have ever ventured into any of the popular bars in town you have mixed with people on drugs (and i mean illicit substances, not alcohol) and probably not noticed..

in fact, if you went along to one of the larger forum meets i'd wager that there you would be mixing with these "druggies" that you so detest..



Maybe you should explain. If you (not I) argue that people should be allowed to take drugs in the name of 'freedom' then how can you be against allowing those of us that don't wish to mix with drug takers their freedom to socialise in a non-drug environment?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Maybe you should explain. If you (not I) argue that people should be allowed to take drugs in the name of 'freedom' then how can you be against allowing those of us that don't wish to mix with drug takers their freedom to socialise in a non-drug environment?

Maybe you should answer neeeeeeeeeek's question

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Maybe you should explain. If you (not I) argue that people should be allowed to take drugs in the name of 'freedom' then how can you be against allowing those of us that don't wish to mix with drug takers their freedom to socialise in a non-drug environment?

i'm not, sid.. i am not a "libertarian" (although i think you misuse the word).. indeed, a lot of my views probably fall right of centre..

i am simply pointing out the way society and the club/bar scene is at the moment.. the only way you can guarantee avoiding these dangerous, raging drug addicts is to continue to stay in your house, rubbing one off over the thought of touching a girl you meet once a year and hugs everyone but you..

some people seem to have completely vilified all "drugs" simply because parliament once declared them illegal.
Yet potentially far more dangerous drugs that just happen to be legal through coincidence and tax are looked upon completely differently.

Personally I do only use legal drugs, but I don't really understand why some people get so upset about non legal ones. There's really no difference apart a man made definition, which is no difference at all.

Slim - if you don't want to socialise with drug takers then don't go to where they are. What they are doing doesn't hurt you, it's not the same as smoking.
I might not wish to mix with (for example) those who masterbate. Does that mean that if I demand it a test should be developed and deployed to check whether you're a w*nker before you're allowed into the bars I like?

Anyway, the idea is unworkable, only the police could supply and handle the dogs and they do actually have better things to do with their time.

Originally posted by Cyclone
Slim - if you don't want to socialise with drug takers then don't go to where they are. What they are doing doesn't hurt you, it's not the same as smoking.

touché! that is a very good point.. smoking is perfectly legal, but nicotine addicts directly affect the health of those socialising around them.. if sid were to actually leave the confines of his house, i think he'd find recreational drug users in mainstream bars & clubs are a lot less detrimental to his health than smokers..

I might not wish to mix with (for example) those who masterbate. Does that mean that if I demand it a test should be developed and deployed to check whether you're a w*nker before you're allowed into the bars I like?

lol :lol:

If slimsid wants to go somewhere where he can be guaranteed not to come across anyone who takes an illegal drug i suggest he sticks to the old mans pubs because WHERE YOUTH CULTURE IS, THERE ARE DRUGS ALSO! if slimsid disagrees with that then he really is not living in reality and should better educate himself before throwing around ridiculous ignorant statements about a lot of young people.

It's funny how slimsid is not even answering any of the reasonable questions asked of him so far - i wonder why ;-)

lets repeat some...

slimsid:

1. how have 'druggies' (drug sellers or takers) actually directly negatively affected your personal clubbing experience? (if you do indeed go to clubs that is)

2. What positive difference would it actually really make to you to socialise in a drug-free place? (of which there are actually very few of these places and you dont even realise!)

3. have you ever been offered a drug in a club or bar by a complete stranger?

4. can you not get your head around the concept of decent, young drug-taking people?

I've no idea what your idea of decent is slimsid but mine is that decent = considerate, caring, otherwise law abiding, involved members of their working, middle or upper class communities. millions of decent young people take drugs every weekend and are not undertaking any form of criminal (or otherwise) activity that harms anyone else.

PS there is NOT a drug 'problem' in Sheffield clubs. There is not noticably any more drug takers/sellers here than in any other city in the UK. Its the same everywhere. Like I said, like it or not, it is a part of youth culture.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AnnSumsparty
[B]Great idea, law abiding citizens as stated in one of the replys would not be taking drugs into the nightclub anyway.

There are plenty of law abiding citizens who would be pulled by sniffer dogs for taking law abiding, prescription medications and who would be unable to prove that they didn't have drugs of the illegal kind on them without lengthy and humiliating body searches and/or blood tests.

I went on honeymoon to Canada and my first interaction on Canadian soil was to be pulled by a sniffer dog upon arrival. My palliative care consultant had thankfully thought to cover me for this eventuality and given me a letter detailing all of my pain medication. Without this letter I dread ot think what would have happened (chances are I wouldn't have got to enjoy my honeymoon much).

The possibility of error is just too great to be of use without someone who really knows what they're doing as a dog handler. On top of that, sniffer dogs can only work short shifts so the cost would be astronomical, and who would be there to guard the dogs from the pushers who make their money from getting the drugs into the clubs?

From the perspective of 'personal safety' I would have thought that the average person trolleyed on alcohol is more frightening and likely to do damage to people and property than anybody on dope/e/acid/whatever, and alcohol's legal!

BTW, since I use neither alcohol nor non-prescription drugs I am on nobody's case and don't intend to offend anybody. Providing you don't force me to join you, enjoy whatever you want to do!

Originally posted by Cyclone





I might not wish to mix with (for example) those who masterbate. Does that mean that if I demand it a test should be developed and deployed to check whether you're a w*nker before you're allowed into the bars I like?



Surley they won't be doing it in the club alongside you - that is an important distinction. Also, to the best of my knowledge masterbation is neither illegal nor unhealthy.

The same argument about "otherwise law-abiding people" doing just one illegal thing is made by everyone from drunk drivers to fox hunters. Either you are law abiding or you are not. Like it or not people who take illegal drugs are not. If you want to change a law you should lobby your MP or start your own political party. In fact, wasn't there a legalise cannabis party standing at the last general election? The voters decided not to put them into parliament - that is democracy.

On a slightly different note, are there plain clothed police men and women in clubs keeping an eye out for any wrong doing? I'd like to think so but have no idea.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Also, to the best of my knowledge masterbation is neither illegal nor unhealthy.


is a good job, otherwise you'd be either banged up or dead a long time ago lol :hihi:

And how do you know so much about my private life?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
And how do you know so much about my private life?

hmm, let me see, maybe because you insist on filling the forum with banal and pointless threads about your inability to integrate socially..

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Surley they won't be doing it in the club alongside you - that is an important distinction. Also, to the best of my knowledge masterbation is neither illegal nor unhealthy.

The same argument about "otherwise law-abiding people" doing just one illegal thing is made by everyone from drunk drivers to fox hunters. Either you are law abiding or you are not. Like it or not people who take illegal drugs are not. If you want to change a law you should lobby your MP or start your own political party. In fact, wasn't there a legalise cannabis party standing at the last general election? The voters decided not to put them into parliament - that is democracy.

On a slightly different note, are there plain clothed police men and women in clubs keeping an eye out for any wrong doing? I'd like to think so but have no idea.

given that you admit in the other thread that you have never to your knowledge seen someone taking drugs they clearly don't do it stood next to you either.
Illegality is just something we made up, i'm sure that somewhere in the world it's illegal and someone similar to you is wanting to know which bars to avoid as they will be full of illicit w*nkers.
Whilst some drug taking is certainly unhealthy, I don't think it's really fair to single it out, as it may well be less unhealthy than smoking and drinking. So it's this 'legality' issue that must be getting you all up tight. Whilst it's nice to see that you have a respect for our laws and politicians, you should probably work on developing a healthy cynicism to go along with that.

God I hope not, what a complete and utter waste of police time that would be, I pay my taxes and would like to think that they could be doing something useful, catching muggers and burglars, and uninsured drivers for example.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Maybe you should explain. If you (not I) argue that people should be allowed to take drugs in the name of 'freedom' then how can you be against allowing those of us that don't wish to mix with drug takers their freedom to socialise in a non-drug environment?


Sid, don't know what kind of music you like but you'd better put it all in the bin, those musician's that made it, yip, all on drugs...

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Surley they won't be doing it in the club alongside you - that is an important distinction. Also, to the best of my knowledge masterbation is neither illegal nor unhealthy.

The same argument about "otherwise law-abiding people" doing just one illegal thing is made by everyone from drunk drivers to fox hunters. Either you are law abiding or you are not. Like it or not people who take illegal drugs are not. If you want to change a law you should lobby your MP or start your own political party. In fact, wasn't there a legalise cannabis party standing at the last general election? The voters decided not to put them into parliament - that is democracy.

On a slightly different note, are there plain clothed police men and women in clubs keeping an eye out for any wrong doing? I'd like to think so but have no idea.

so if we made alcohol (or chocalate if your teetotal) illegal you would immediately cease consumption of said substances?

Originally posted by nightrider
so if we made alcohol (or chocalate if your teetotal) illegal you would immediately cease consumption of said substances?

Yes, I'd have to. Presumably it would no longer be on sale (except from very dubious individuals) and would manage to live without it.

I very rarley drink alcohol (except the odd liquour chocolate at Christmas and a 'Highland Fling Cocktail' at an annual Burns night dinner) and could manage without it if necessary. As for chocolate I can take it or leave it.

These are all the redest of red herrings anyway. Most people in this country do not take illegal drugs and I suspect that quite a few of those that do only started because of peer presure (then became adicted). It is very unfair to equate drug culture with youth culture - many young people don't take drugs and it is wrong to tar us all with the same brush. As for the people who sell them they couldn't care less if you die or not as long as they make some money from you.

stop now, sid.. you're giving naïve people a bad name..

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I very rarley drink alcohol (except the odd liquour chocolate at Christmas..

lmao :hihi:

These are all the redest of red herrings anyway. Most people in this country do not take illegal drugs and I suspect that quite a few of those that do only started because of peer presure (then became adicted [sic]).

you're joking, i assume? surely?

It is very unfair to equate drug culture with youth culture - many young people don't take drugs and it is wrong to tar us all with the same brush. As for the people who sell them they couldn't care less if you die or not as long as they make some money from you.

are you a young person? no..

am i? yes (along with the other advocates posting in this thread, i would imagine)..

who, then, would you say is the more accurate authority on what "youth culture" get up to?

what i, and others, are stating here is not opinion, but fact.. i am not talking about the legality/safety/etc. of drugs, am i talking about the situations, practices and behaviour being discussed.. i will summarise for you, sidney:

1) a large percentage of young people do take illicit drugs
2) the majority of these are what are described as "recreational" drugs, such as cannabis, ecstasy/mdma, etc.
3) the majority of these drug takers get their drugs from friends, who most certainly do care about their wellbeing (if only for their own peace of mind)
4) "recreational" drugs are exactly that - they are used recreationally in the same way alcohol/video games/theme park rides are.. as such, users seek out their supplier (usually a friend, as mentioned above) and request drugs.. they are in no way "pushed" onto them (they should be so lucky!)

sid, really, stop.. you are making yourself look daft, even to those who do not advocate drug usage.. just when i think you can't possibly be any more naïve you go and surprise me with a post like that lol..

give me strength..

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Yes, I'd have to. Presumably it would no longer be on sale (except from very dubious individuals) and would manage to live without it.

I very rarley drink alcohol (except the odd liquour chocolate at Christmas and a 'Highland Fling Cocktail' at an annual Burns night dinner) and could manage without it if necessary. As for chocolate I can take it or leave it.

These are all the redest of red herrings anyway. Most people in this country do not take illegal drugs and I suspect that quite a few of those that do only started because of peer presure (then became adicted). It is very unfair to equate drug culture with youth culture - many young people don't take drugs and it is wrong to tar us all with the same brush. As for the people who sell them they couldn't care less if you die or not as long as they make some money from you.

the point that was being made was that you are a very rare person (special even), if you automatically obey whatever crackpot laws the government pass.
Most people excercise a little bit of free thought and decide for themselves.
And it is a fact that something ridiculous like 80% of 15 year olds have tried at least one recreational drug. Even if only 50% of them carry on using it on an ocassional basis it's still going to be at the very least a few people in most pubs/clubs.
Sheesh - MP's have admitted to having tried canabis in their youth, they obviously survived the experience with their minds mostly intact.

Originally posted by Cyclone
you are a very rare person (special even)

lol :hihi:

Most people excercise a little bit of free thought and decide for themselves.

innit.. you do come across as the world's most naïve automaton, sidney..

And it is a fact that something ridiculous like 80% of 15 year olds have tried at least one recreational drug. Even if only 50% of them carry on using it on an ocassional basis it's still going to be at the very least a few people in most pubs/clubs.

i wouldn't bother quoting facts and statistics, sid will only choose to ignore them and continue posting his increasingly naïve and skewed perspective on life :roll:

Originally posted by Cyclone
the point that was being made was that you are a very rare person (special even), if you automatically obey whatever crackpot laws the government pass.

This is exactly the same point being made by pro-fox hunters who intend to ignore the new law and continue hunting. Personally, I don't care about fox hunting one way or the other but if you (or anyone else) is pro drugs but anti hunting then it is a little food for thought.


Most people excercise a little bit of free thought and decide for themselves.


I am so glad you made this point so explicitaly as it goes right to the heart of the matter.

I would suggest that it is much easier to be rebelious against remote 'authority' figures (police, courts, teachers etc) than it is to go against your own peer group. How many people who start taking drugs really do exercise genuinely free thought rather than go along with the group so as not to be labeled boring, squre, Daily Mail reader or whatever insults you may care to think up.

Such things said to me on an internet forum are like water of a duck's back but to a teenager who desperately wants to fit in it is a different matter.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Such things said to me on an internet forum are like water of a duck's back but to a teenager who desperately wants to fit in it is a different matter.

You're 35, what does it matter? Are you vindictive because you had a hard time as a teenager and trying to figure out where you went wrong?

I really don't understand you.

I've smoked pot because I like it and want to, none of my friends really did. Where do I fit in to your half-brained theories?

Are you seriously claiming that there is no peer pressure to try drugs?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Are you seriously claiming that there is no peer pressure to try drugs?

Are you seriously claiming they are the root of all evil?

Try widening your horizons a little bit, you dont need to go out and try any drugs, just be a little more open to the possibility that in some circumstances they could even enhance your life. You may even get that desparately needed girlfriend!

Originally posted by floyd77
Are you seriously claiming they are the root of all evil?

Try widening your horizons a little bit, you dont need to go out and try any drugs, just be a little more open to the possibility that in some circumstances they could even enhance your life. You may even get that desparately needed girlfriend!

No thank you. I prefer to think for myself on these matters. I also don't want girls who are drug takers.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I am so glad you made this point so explicitaly as it goes right to the heart of the matter.

I would suggest that it is much easier to be rebelious against remote 'authority' figures (police, courts, teachers etc) than it is to go against your own peer group. How many people who start taking drugs really do exercise genuinely free thought rather than go along with the group so as not to be labeled boring, squre, Daily Mail reader or whatever insults you may care to think up.

Such things said to me on an internet forum are like water of a duck's back but to a teenager who desperately wants to fit in it is a different matter.

so if the government turned around tomorrow and banned whatever it is you like doing. You'd just happily go along with it, rather than rebelling against that remote authority?
Or would you be then claiming that you'd only done it in the first place because of peer pressure?
You don't seem to understand the point I was trying to make about legality and law being just something that we as a society invent.
If a large proportion of that society are ignoring a given law, then it's probably a sign that the law needs updating to reflect the desires of society as a whole.

no girlfriend for Sidney then.... :suspect:

Originally posted by slimsid2000
No thank you. I prefer to think for myself on these matters. I also don't want girls who are drug takers.

TBH I don't see the point of dogs pn the door or in the club, we always used to take the stuff before we got to the club, so it a) had time to kick-in, b) couldn't be found if you got searched.

Originally posted by Cyclone
so if the government turned around tomorrow and banned whatever it is you like doing. You'd just happily go along with it, rather than rebelling against that remote authority?
Or would you be then claiming that you'd only done it in the first place because of peer pressure?
You don't seem to understand the point I was trying to make about legality and law being just something that we as a society invent.
If a large proportion of that society are ignoring a given law, then it's probably a sign that the law needs updating to reflect the desires of society as a whole.

The point I was making is that your calim about people taking drugs because they think for themselves is in reality very far from the case. I think a lot of people from good homes who don't come from a drug taking background get into it because either some monosylabic pop star (take your pick) says they are 'cool' or more likely because their 'friends' persuade them to start to fit in. I doubt they know that much about the harm drugs can do or even really want to try them deep down.

If it came down to it i would rather trust the police etc who are there to look after us rather than some scumbag drug dealer who is only concerned with making money and couldn't give a toss about the effects his drugs have.

Given that you lack any experience in the area, why do you not give a little bit more weight to the opinions of others who have more relevant experience?

I didn't actually say that people take drugs because they think for themselves. I said that people think for themselves before agreeing or not with laws passed by the government.

What are these 'friends' in apostraphe's, are they different to friends? And how did they start, and why would they want to 'persuade' someone, and for that matter why would the said someone not refuse to be persuaded if they really didn't want too.

Lol - do you think that most police officers have never tried any drugs, or that they don't break the law? They are no different to everyone else, they just have a different job.

Originally posted by Cyclone
What are these 'friends' in apostraphe's, are they different to friends? And how did they start, and why would they want to 'persuade' someone, and for that matter why would the said someone not refuse to be persuaded if they really didn't want too.


I don't remember anyone pressuring me into trying anything, I was curious and wanted to see if I was missing anything (very similar to when I decided to try drinking Absinthe, which was not a pleasant experiment), drugs were ok every now and a gain but the novelty wore off and I haven't done anyhting for about 15 years now.

Slim, you do realise that you're not actually thinking for yourself, you're doing what youre told by the nanny state.

I was asking you to think for yourself.

What if a georgous lady goes to Amsterdam on holiday, has a few perfectly legal spliffs then returns home to Sheffield meets you and instantly falls in love with you?

"Sorry luv, I dont go with dirty drug takers"

I keep waiting for the hallucinations from absynthe, even bought some of the 'real' stuff from Poland.
It just gives me a headache and makes me forget stuff.

Originally posted by floyd77
Slim, you do realise that you're not actually thinking for yourself, you're doing what youre told by the nanny state.

I was asking you to think for yourself.

What if a georgous lady goes to Amsterdam on holiday, has a few perfectly legal spliffs then returns home to Sheffield meets you and instantly falls in love with you?

"Sorry luv, I dont go with dirty drug takers"

i doubt if that would happen as sid is very anti smoking

Originally posted by Cyclone
I keep waiting for the hallucinations from absynthe, even bought some of the 'real' stuff from Poland.
It just gives me a headache and makes me forget stuff.

i bought some of that stuff from spain man it is strong it didnt really affect me except getting drunk quicker

btw whats the difference with the absinthe here and the real stuff from poland ?

Originally posted by Cyclone
I keep waiting for the hallucinations from absynthe, even bought some of the 'real' stuff from Poland.
It just gives me a headache and makes me forget stuff.

It just made me violently (and I mean VIOLENTLY) ill and completely erased 2 weeks from my memory.

Oh well, It was worth a try.

Originally posted by panda79
i bought some of that stuff from spain man it is strong it didnt really affect me except getting drunk quicker

btw whats the difference with the absinthe here and the real stuff from poland ?

the law here limits the amount of the halucinogen that can be in it (to zero I think).
If you get the real stuff it has a chunk of wormwood in it, which is where the hallucinogens come from I think.

disappointingly google seems to think that it's all a load of rubbish.

fact sheet (http://www.foodreference.com/html/fabsinthe.html)

Originally posted by slimsid2000
The point I was making is that your calim about people taking drugs because they think for themselves is in reality very far from the case. I think a lot of people from good homes who don't come from a drug taking background get into it because either some monosylabic pop star (take your pick) says they are 'cool' or more likely because their 'friends' persuade them to start to fit in.

i'll reiterate what i said above, as you clearly ignored it in a desperate attempt to keep some part of your argument valid:

are you a young person? no
do you take drugs? no

why, then, do you feel you are better informed on these subjects than the many people replying to this thread who fulfill both criteria?

I doubt they know that much about the harm drugs can do or even really want to try them deep down.

everyone knows the danger of smoking, it's printed on the boxes in big black letters.. this doesn't stop billions of people doing it everyday worldwide..

Originally posted by Cyclone
If you get the real stuff it has a chunk of wormwood in it, which is where the hallucinogens come from I think.


Same as Mescal, if you get the last glass out of the bottle you get this pickled catterpillar too and you have to swallow it (I can't imaging anyone chewing it), it's supposed to have LSD-like qualities.

I did nothing to me.

Originally posted by nick2
Same as Mescal, if you get the last glass out of the bottle you get this pickled catterpillar too and you have to swallow it (I can't imaging anyone chewing it), it's supposed to have LSD-like qualities.

I did nothing to me.

this is a myth.. people associate the name "mescal" with the drug mescaline, hence the mythical claim that the worm has hallucinagenic properties.. you swallowed a worm for nothing lol :D

Originally posted by dirtybobby
you swallowed a worm for nothing lol :D

:(

I had a fantastic hang-over the next day, so it wasn't a complete waste.

I've just noticed this post. My mate's recently left the Royal Military Police dog unit to start up his own business carrying this sort of stuff out as well as selling trained dogs for this very thing.

If anyone wants a drug dog, arms explosive dog, gaurd dog or similar then PM me and I will pass on his details to you.

He has a website, but it's not uploaded yet. ( http://www.searchandsecure.co.uk)

Originally posted by slimsid2000
The point I was making is that your calim about people taking drugs because they think for themselves is in reality very far from the case. I think a lot of people from good homes who don't come from a drug taking background get into it because either some monosylabic pop star (take your pick) says they are 'cool' or more likely because their 'friends' persuade them to start to fit in. I doubt they know that much about the harm drugs can do or even really want to try them deep down.


Sid, at first your outdated, ignorant & poorly informed opinions were amusing. But after over 200 collective replies from fellow forummers you continue to spout this rubbish. I think it has really got to the point where you are insulting the intelligence of probably about 90% of the young British population with sweeping statements based on absolutely **** all experience or knowledge on the matter.

I think we are all beating our heads against a brick wall here guys!

Originally posted by KATIEB_23

I think we are all beating our heads against a brick wall here guys!

Agreed.

I think maybe we should let this one lie, and go away saddened that people can make their minds up about stuff purely on the scare stories in the tabloids and not personal experience. :(

A collective boycott of sid's posts is required. It's not like he takes any bloody notice of anything anyone ever says!!

I was just thinking, does anyone think it's a good idea to set up an anonymous poll on who has ever tried drugs or takes them on a regular basis? Then we can finally prove to Sid that we are not just making this all up; that the world really isn't black-and-white/good-and-evil/druggies-and-decent-people?

Or would we still be wasting our time?

Soz I was busy writing that suggestion while the last 2 posts popped up. Much prefer your idea!

Originally posted by neeeeeeeeeek
A collective boycott of sid's posts is required. It's not like he takes any bloody notice of anything anyone ever says!!

That does sound like a good plan, all we're doing is encouraging him everytime one of this topics appears. On the other hand, we do get some discussions going!

Originally posted by nick2
It just made me violently (and I mean VIOLENTLY) ill and completely erased 2 weeks from my memory.

Oh well, It was worth a try.


It just made me violent. I am not violent and have never punched anyone in my life, except when I drank absynthe I punched one my closest friends. It made me utterly paranoid. Then I vomited spectacularly. I decided not to drink it again. Took me a while to recover from that (physically and mentally)and the friend didn't like me for some time - we are ok now 5 years on!

Originally posted by floyd77
Slim, you do realise that you're not actually thinking for yourself, you're doing what youre told by the nanny state.

I was asking you to think for yourself.

What if a georgous lady goes to Amsterdam on holiday, has a few perfectly legal spliffs then returns home to Sheffield meets you and instantly falls in love with you?

"Sorry luv, I dont go with dirty drug takers"

Perhaps we have a different interpretation about what thinking for oneself actually means.

Simply doing somwthing because the police, courts, parliament, parents, teachers, doctors etc (what you like to call the nanny state) says it is not a good idea to do it is hardly thinking for yourself. Neither is doing it because some 'celebrity' who probably has no medical training or any true knowledge of the subject. Or for that matter, simply following the example of the most rebelious (possibly least well educated) of your peer group.

To me none of these things constitute thinking for oneself or in anyway examining the issue in any detail at all.

By the way, to the person who says I am not a young person at 35 I disagree. I don't consider 25 over the hill by any means. Anyway, I have never taken drugs at any age so that argument doesn't stand up what ever way you look at it.

What a fantastic thread this is!

I have never read such a collection of misinformed views of drugs and drug culture, not only from the great sid.

I have great confidence in saying that one of the worst drugs available is alcohol.

Sid your last post: People don't do these things because the state says not too! They do these things because they want to, and it just so happens that the state says not too.

In my opinion all drugs should be legalised, then they could be controlled, doses managed, sold without additives and all those profits would be going to the government as tax and not to the "scum" that you believe push drugs on society.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Perhaps we have a different interpretation about what thinking for oneself actually means.

for once, you are right.. everyone here understands "thinking for yourself" in the literal english sense; making decisions based on your one's own curiosity and desire to experience new things..

you, on the other hand, seem to think that "thinking for yourself" means mindlessly believing propaganda and doing what you're told..

Simply doing somwthing because the police, courts, parliament, parents, teachers, doctors etc (what you like to call the nanny state) says it is not a good idea to do it is hardly thinking for yourself.

show me in this thread where anyone said anything to suggest this was the case? no-one here does things simply because they are illegal/frowned upon you buffoon.. the point everyone is making, but you fail to understand, is that in order to make a truly individual decision rules and laws have to be disregarded.. i'm not saying they should be disregarded, i'm just pointing out that freedom by its very definition requires there to be no restrictions surrounding that choice..

you personally cannot exercise this freedom of choice, because you choose to be bound be the laws and propaganda you have been subject to..

have you ever murdered anyone? i'd like to think not.. have you not committed any murder purely because it is illegal? i personally know that i have never indulged in murder because i consider it morally wrong (at the very least).. it just so happens that, in this instance, my morals fall in line with that of the law.. this holds true for the majority of laws in place in this country..

with regards to drugs, however, my morals and decisions are not 100% in line with the laws and legislation currently in place in the uk.. by your definition, this makes me a mindless "druggie", and a bad person..

By the way, to the person who says I am not a young person at 35 I disagree. I don't consider 25 over the hill by any means. Anyway, I have never taken drugs at any age so that argument doesn't stand up what ever way you look at it.

i don't consider 25 over the hill either, i'm 26! if you, a 35 year old man, consider yourself part of "youth culture" then you are woefully misguided..

actually, i don't know why i'm surprised, you think i'd have learned by now that there are no limits to your naïvete..

anyway, you have just proved every point i have raised in this thread:

I have never taken drugs at any age so that argument doesn't stand up what ever way you look at it.

exactly.. you have never taken drugs or had any experience by proxy, which is why your arguments do not stand up against those of others in this thread, whatever way you look at it..

Originally posted by TimmyR
Sid your last post: People don't do these things because the state says not too! They do these things because they want to, and it just so happens that the state says not too.


exactly.. but don't expect him to listen..

sid, i notice you are monitoring this thread quite closely.. why is it, then, that you only reply to the points you think you have some form of rebuttal for? i emphasise "think" because in each of these instances your "arguments" have been panned into the ground..

no-one enjoys shouting you down, sidney.. it's just that you refuse to listen to anyone's side of the debate.. what is the point of opening a debate if you are not willing to take on the opinions of others? what is even worse is that a lot of what's expressed in this thread is fact, not opinion, and yet still you ignore it..

Originally posted by TimmyR
In my opinion all drugs should be legalised, then they could be controlled, doses managed, sold without additives and all those profits would be going to the government as tax and not to the "scum" that you believe push drugs on society. I don't agree with the legalisation of currently illegal drugs.

While I can see the benefits that you mention, such as managed doses and taxes going to the right places etc. I don't think they are good enough reasons to legalise drugs.

There are many down sides to a legalisation, one of which would be that more people would try the drugs as they would then be legal. These people may not normally bother with them thinking them to be illegal or in some ways, making them legal could make people take a lighter view of the drugs, thinking they are less dangerous etc.

This is just one reason I am against the legalisation of drugs, but to me it's enough as I think it would increase the number of people taking them and that's a bad thing, regardless of them being sold legally or illegally.

Originally posted by lalaland
I don't agree with the legalisation of currently illegal drugs.

While I can see the benefits that you mention, such as managed doses and taxes going to the right places etc. I don't think they are good enough reasons to legalise drugs.

There are many down sides to a legalisation, one of which would be that more people would try the drugs as they would then be legal. These people may not normally bother with them thinking them to be illegal or in some ways, making them legal could make people take a lighter view of the drugs, thinking they are less dangerous etc.

This is just one reason I am against the legalisation of drugs, but to me it's enough as I think it would increase the number of people taking them and that's a bad thing, regardless of them being sold legally or illegally.

Perhaps not the nasty ones - the class A's, but cannabis should be. Look at holland, they all seem to be getting on with their lives quite nicely. The economy hasn't suffered because they're all too stoned to do anything. It costs humongous amounts of money to police these things and in reality only a small amount of drugs are stopped. And so much more importantly there are all these scrota of society getting fantastically rich on the back of it all - and then selling guns, making the streets less safe etc etc.. Legalise and you get rid of all that.

Originally posted by lalaland
I don't agree with the legalisation of currently illegal drugs.

While I can see the benefits that you mention, such as managed doses and taxes going to the right places etc. I don't think they are good enough reasons to legalise drugs.

There are many down sides to a legalisation, one of which would be that more people would try the drugs as they would then be legal. These people may not normally bother with them thinking them to be illegal or in some ways, making them legal could make people take a lighter view of the drugs, thinking they are less dangerous etc.

This is just one reason I am against the legalisation of drugs, but to me it's enough as I think it would increase the number of people taking them and that's a bad thing, regardless of them being sold legally or illegally.

i wholly agree with this.. i have absolutely no desire to encourage drug usage.. unfortunately, as sidney has demonstrated, there are plenty of people who will mindlessly follow the law, so changing the law to allow all drugs will no doubt encourage their usage.. even demonising them, as the government has tried to do with cigarettes, will not discourage people..

however, it would be nice to have nice, clean, measured dosages of illicit drugs available..

i think there are strong arguments for both cases..

woah, talk about going off topic!! lol..

Originally posted by TimmyR
Perhaps not the nasty ones - the class A's, but cannabis should be. Look at holland, they all seem to be getting on with their lives quite nicely. The economy hasn't suffered because they're all too stoned to do anything. It costs humongous amounts of money to police these things and in reality only a small amount of drugs are stopped. And so much more importantly there are all these scrota of society getting fantastically rich on the back of it all - and then selling guns, making the streets less safe etc etc.. Legalise and you get rid of all that.

Better still all you people who currently buy drugs stop doing so and send them out of business.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Better still all you people who currently buy drugs stop doing so and send them out of business.

For Christ's sake!!!!!!!


Can we please just start ignoring slimsid's posts? We just don't get anywhere, it's like smashing your head into a brick wall.

Originally posted by KATIEB_23
I was just thinking, does anyone think it's a good idea to set up an anonymous poll on who has ever tried drugs or takes them on a regular basis? ?

See here - http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56574

Originally posted by TimmyR
Perhaps not the nasty ones - the class A's, but cannabis should be. Look at holland, they all seem to be getting on with their lives quite nicely. The economy hasn't suffered because they're all too stoned to do anything. It costs humongous amounts of money to police these things and in reality only a small amount of drugs are stopped. And so much more importantly there are all these scrota of society getting fantastically rich on the back of it all - and then selling guns, making the streets less safe etc etc.. Legalise and you get rid of all that.

unfortunately, it doesn't work like this..

clearly, in your eyes, cannabis is of no threat and should be legalised.. you demonise class a drugs as "the nasty ones".. however, in my eyes cannabis is much worse than ecstasy/mdma, cocaine, etc.. i would definitely not encourage the legalisation of cannabis, because i don't smoke it and consider it dangerous..

i am not saying any of this is correct, i'm just making the point that your arguments for legalisation are based on your moral standing.. this will undoubtedly differ from other peoples'..

it really would have to be an "all or nothing" scenario, like in the aforementioned ben elton novel "high society".. i abhor heroin usage, but that is simply because of my moral opinion of the substance and its users.. that's not to say i am correct, however, so i would have to accept it as just another drug and allow it on the market with the ones i do approve of..

them's the breaks..

Originally posted by Hook
For Christ's sake!!!!!!!


Can we please just start ignoring slimsid's posts? We just don't get anywhere, it's like smashing your head into a brick wall. Actually, to be fair, he is making a good point here.

If someone is concerned about their money being used for uses that they wouldn't condone when they purchase something from someone, then the best way to stop that would be to stop purchasing that item from that supplier. This has been done where people disagree with certain companies using their profits to fund things around the world that some customers may not agree with.

So if someone's buying drugs from someone and they know they are using the money for activities that they don't agree with and complain about it then they should perhaps consider buying from someone else.

Originally posted by TimmyR
Perhaps not the nasty ones - the class A's, but cannabis should be. There are many issues about legalising canabis, but I still think my statement would apply to this too. If you legalised canabis then you would still get people using it who maybe in the past wouldn't have done because they see it as safer now or because it's legal.

Canabis still has some nasty effects it would seem according to recent reports regarding mental illnesses etc. and in that sense is still not good for you.

I know that smoking and drinking could be seen in a similar way, but think about it like this, if smoking and drinking were recently discovered, do you think they'd be legal now or outlawed?

(This isn't an anti-legalise canabis or a pro-legalise canabis post, just my thoughts on the matter)

Hmmm yeah sorry for going off topic a bit. :) I don't think how healthy drugs are is really the point - they're all bad for you. The point is to weigh up the benefits to society of them being legal compared to not being legal. I think both ways would have problems but believe that if legal, drug usage could be monitored and managed more effectively.

Now then, maybe we should get back to shouting down slimsid...

Also, I woudn't for one second, consider using the current classification of drugs as A, B C or D.

This is meant to be a 'harm index' but it is actually backwards, with some of the least harmful drugs in Class A, and the most Lethal in Class C.

Originally posted by TimmyR
Hmmm yeah sorry for going off topic a bit. :) I don't think how healthy drugs are is really the point - they're all bad for you. The point is to weigh up the benefits to society of them being legal compared to not being legal. I think both ways would have problems but believe that if legal, drug usage could be monitored and managed more effectively.

Now then, maybe we should get back to shouting down slimsid... My point is that they will affect society if legalised because more of society would use them and that would have an impact on the health of society as the down sides of the drugs took hold of the new users.

I've not read the whole post yet, but how come everyone likes having a go at Sid?

Originally posted by lalaland
I've not read the whole post yet, but how come everyone likes having a go at Sid?

i always try to avoid coming across as "having a go" in internet debates.. unfortunately, sid's stubborn and naïve disposition makes this nigh on impossible..

it's like the old chinese proverb says:

Originally posted by confucious
arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics.. even if you win you're still a retard..

:D

Originally posted by lalaland
My point is that they will affect society if legalised because more of society would use them and that would have an impact on the health of society as the down sides of the drugs took hold of the new users.

I've not read the whole post yet, but how come everyone likes having a go at Sid?

Trouble is, a lot of deaths due to taking illegal drugs occur because of the crap that they cut them with. This element could be removed. However, I guess there'd still be an element of "underground" sales.

Read the thread, I don't find sids comments make me want to have a go at him, just wonder where on earth he gets his ideas from! I don't comment on the practices of bee keepers for example because I have never met one, seen one at work, been anywhere near a beehive.

Tim (the master of stupid examples)

Originally posted by lalaland
My point is that they will affect society if legalised because more of society would use them and that would have an impact on the health of society as the down sides of the drugs took hold of the new users.

I've not read the whole post yet, but how come everyone likes having a go at Sid?

I don't think that there are actually many people who are put off by the legality or otherwise of cannabis (particularly since it was downgraded).
On the other hand, regulated supply would allow for the enforcement (or attempt too anyway) of things like minimum age, etc...
Just for the record (and i've said it before), i've never tried anything except alcohol, simply because i'm not interested, but i'd still support the legalisation of most non physically addictive drugs.

After seeing Send in the Dogs the other night on ITV I was reminded yet again how good my origional idea was. Those spanials were very effective at the train stations so why not in clubs. Now the smoking ban is in force it will be even easier for them to detect drugs.

I think if it was trialled like you suggest .. most clubs would be empty. The police need to concentrate on knife crime and guns , and violent crime . Not people having a good time in clubs.. getting drinks spiked is another issue entirely.

Ive read your comments and respect your views I just feel that in light of the state of our country people having a good time in a club through their own choice harms no one ...

and if it does harm you then as a responsible adult you have only your self to blame.

I have no problem with people having a good time in clubs but this should not include either drugs or violence. I entirely agree that much more should be done about drug and knife crime but this can do done as well as doing something about drugs rather than instead of.

maybe you should join the police ?

:hihi:maybe you should join the police ?


What as -a spanial?:hihi:

I still think that it would be a very good idea to have sniffer dogs at the doors of clubs. This doesn't have to be operated by the police, it could be done by private security as a condition of your entry in to the club and therefore it could be funded by the club and not drain police resources.

Slimsid2000, I'm sure if you were to provide this service in Sheffield or South Yorkshire that you'd have a pretty good chance of starting up a decent trade. Perhaps you should consider speaking to some licence holders, putting together a business plan, getting an SIA licence and getting some dog handlers hired?

if it were run by a private company and as a money making enterprise then surely it would not be a prevention to crime ... that is a government issue.

Maybe slim sid should spend his time rehabilitating offenders and people at the root of the problem, rather than jo public popping the odd pill on a sat night and not harming anyone.

Licensees wouldnt want their customers turned away surely .. and have to shell out extra cash ?

The question was whether it would work or not as a crime (and drugs are illegal) reduction measure. Obviously if you favour drugs in clubs then you would hardly agree with it any way.

sorry missed where i actually put that in any of my posts. But then with john major as your pic its easy to see how you can get things wrong !!!

if it were run by a private company and as a money making enterprise then surely it would not be a prevention to crime ... that is a government issue. I'm not sure how you reach that conclusion?

Private security is a very big business in this country and does have an impact on crime. Just because someone is charging for that service doesn't mean it's suddenly not preventing a crime.

To be honest I'd rather that a nightclub, which is a business making money, pays for a service like this rather then it be supplied at the cost to the tax payer.

As a similar example, do you realise that football clubs have to pay an amount to their local police force for the policing services provided to their match? This prevents crime and is also being paid for directly by that club.

Maybe slim sid should spend his time rehabilitating offenders and people at the root of the problem, rather than jo public popping the odd pill on a sat night and not harming anyone.That could be one angle to looking at the problem, but there's certainly nothing wrong at all with preventing the sale and use of illegal drugs in a club. This would also be helping people.

As for not harming anyone, people selling drugs in clubs can often hurt people and can those using drugs. While I don't want to jump in to the debate on the effects of each drug or the crimes associated with those that supply them or use them, I think it would be unrealistic to suggest that there is no harm caused by the use or sale of illegal drugs in a club.

Licensees wouldnt want their customers turned away surely .. and have to shell out extra cash ?Any reputable club wouldn't want drug users or sellers in their property and if they were knowingly turning a blind eye to it they'd quickly find their licence under question.

As for clubs not wanting to have to 'shell out extra cash', a quick google search shows that it isn't unthinkable - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7352751.stm and http://archive.lancashireeveningtelegraph.co.uk/2000/1/18/744753.html so it's certainly been done before and there's no reason why it can't be done again in other places.

Could be a good money maker here, get a few dog handlers on the books and hire them to cover several clubs in different areas etc.

You have read between the lines on this one, maybe you should read back on previous posts in this thread to other views also.

My point is that violent crime is an issue , not drug use in a nightclub. Where alcohol goes violence goes and this needs to be sorted. I have never ever in my life seen violence at a rave /club etc. I havent seen anything in the media recently about drug use in clubs .. but we are plagued with stabbings, shootings, etc etc . I just think there are better things to do than put sniffer dogs on club doors .

As someone that lives used to live in Manchester , it is easy to find out and read up on how clubs / doors are run, and all that goes with it.. once you have done that its easy to see how a private company running such a thing wouldnt really work.

I do however think metal detectors etc are a superb idea as violence at the moment is appalling.

You have read between the lines on this one, maybe you should read back on previous posts in this thread to other views also. I've posted my views on the subject and quoted some of your posts, replying to the points you made.

My point is that violent crime is an issue , not drug use in a nightclub.I don't think that just because one issue exists doesn't mean we should ignore the other, both are problems, and this thread was started because the OP had an idea to tackle drug issues in nightclubs and similar establishments.

You are of course welcome to your own opinion and to make any point you wish, but with the original topic of the thread being about sniffer dogs at nightclubs I'd say that the point relating to drug issues in nightspots is quite valid here.

Where alcohol goes violence goes and this needs to be sorted.Another issue and one that I will not dismiss, however again I suggest that just because the alcohol fueled violence issue exists doesn't mean we should ignore the drug issue that clearly exists.

I have never ever in my life seen violence at a rave /club etc. I havent seen anything in the media recently about drug use in clubs .. but we are plagued with stabbings, shootings, etc etc .If you rely on the media to get an understanding of what issues are present then you may find you only get a fraction of the picture. The media tend to report on what's 'in fashion' at the time. After all you won't get as much interest in media if they continue to report on the same type of stories forever. Just because drug issues don't reach the press doesn't mean they aren't existent. I have been involved in plenty of incidents in the past that I thought would feature in the press only to find nothing at all. The reason for this? Because it wasn't pick of the day when it came to selling that particular newspaper or getting viewers for the news channel.

Today's press seem to currently favour stabbings and knife crime. It's the hot topic, it sells, it creates concern and fear, so there's plenty of that being reported in the press. It's not just started all of a sudden, I've been to plenty of stabbings that never made the press, it's just that now there's a buzz for it in the press so it's appearing more and more. Give it a while and stabbings will be old hat and something else will come along that grabs the headlines.

I just think there are better things to do than put sniffer dogs on club doors .Again you are of course welcome to your own opinion, but the OP appears to be under the impression that this would be a good idea. I am also of that opinion. Some may argue that there are better things to do than put door staff on doors at clubs, I guess it comes down to personal views and priorities.

As someone that lives used to live in Manchester , it is easy to find out and read up on how clubs / doors are run, and all that goes with it.. once you have done that its easy to see how a private company running such a thing wouldnt really work. I don't agree. I think this would work and I also live in Manchester, so perhaps I am equally qualified to have such a view :D

I am interested though as to why you think it wouldn't work? Currently there are plenty of companies selling private security services, especially to nightclubs and other establishments and they appear to be doing very well for it. If they offered this as an extra service I think they'd do well.

I do however think metal detectors etc are a superb idea as violence at the moment is appalling.Remember that violence can occur without items detected by metal detectors. I think in some situations they are a good idea, but I don't think they are any better an idea than a sniffer dog.

Im an educated person and know just how the media manipulate stories and what goes unreported.

The original post is asking what we think to the idea, and i dont think it is a good one as , i think there are better ideas.

My point is if a private company is running something like this , not the police under what terms are they operating , and what agreements do they have with club owners. The police arent stupid , they knows what goes on , but its not really worth their while to arrest someone with 1 ecstasy tablet when they can arrest someone trafficking a kilo of smack !

Im sure some club door men ,security firms etc know exactly who the dealers are and in some cases control who deals within night clubs.

Im sure you will have heard about the alledged involvement of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in cocaine trafficking in Central America during the Reagan Administration . My point is if not run by the police how do you know the companies are not in it for their own gain ???


I think it a bad idea , that wont work , it will force the problem to another area .. instead it would be a much better idea to enforce something along the lines of in Holland decriminalize some drugs , make the trade safe and regulated and people wont abuse it.

Im an educated person and know just how the media manipulate stories and what goes unreported.

The original post is asking what we think to the idea, and i dont think it is a good one as , i think there are better ideas.That's fair enough. I however think it's a very good idea, but we can of course disagree.

My point is if a private company is running something like this , not the police under what terms are they operating , and what agreements do they have with club owners.Probably the same that the door staff have with the clubs, if it's not provided as an additional service by the security firms that is.

Door staff aren't employed by the police, they are hired through other companies by the clubs or in some cases employed directly with the clubs. I don't see why dog handlers would be any different and suspect that in cases where this sort of thing has been operated in the past it may have been under the same way.

The police arent stupid , they knows what goes on , but its not really worth their while to arrest someone with 1 ecstasy tablet when they can arrest someone trafficking a kilo of smack !Both commit an offence, so both should be dealt with. However we have to bear in mind that it's more common for people to carry around small amounts of drugs rather than larger quantities, so by arresting these people it's not directly taking people away from catching dealers.

I've arrested people in the past for having cannabis on them. I'd normally prefer to go down a street caution route, but if it's not an option due to the circumstances then the offender has to come in. It may be the case that had I have not been off the street dealing with that person that someone with a boot full of cannabis may have come along, but you have to deal with the offences as they come along and it's a lot less likely.

I suppose in comparrison you could claim it's not worth arresting a shop lifter who's taken 1 CD when someone could run in to a store and sweep an entire rail of clothing in to their arms and leg it. Again both are offences, both happen and both need dealing with.

Im sure some club door men ,security firms etc know exactly who the dealers are and in some cases control who deals within night clubs.I've heard of such things happening in the past and there was a rumour about a place in Sheffield a while back that had this problem (although I don't know if it was anything more than just a rumour). However it's possible to get corruption in many jobs and trades, there has to be an element of trust I suppose.

Im sure you will have heard about the alledged involvement of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in cocaine trafficking in Central America during the Reagan Administration . My point is if not run by the police how do you know the companies are not in it for their own gain ???There are thousands of clubs and bars in the UK, most of these hire security staff. I'm sure that in that large number there are the odd few bad apples, but that's just part of life and hopefully one day they'll get caught. However we shouldn't dismiss a good idea because of a fear of corruption when in reality adding someone to do this job wouldn't be any different to current door staff working there, they'd still have to be SIA regulated and work in the same way.

I think it a bad idea , that wont work ,Drug dogs are very effective, I think it would work very well. It would be very hard to get drugs passed a trained dog, so I'm not sure how you think that wouldn't work.

it will force the problem to another area ..There are many crimes in the UK that are displaced rather than completely wiped out, it's not always possible to wipe out crime so often it's sought to reduce or displace it. Expecting to wipe out drug problems would be unrealistic. However the suggestion was to solve or reduce drug problems in clubs and bars, it sounds like you are agreeing that this would possibly achieve that if you are suggesting it would be displaced and in that case surely this would be a good idea in protecting staff and users of those places from drugs and the problems they bring.

As for forcing it to another area, people will always take and deal in illegal drugs sadly. But removing club and bars from them will tackle a large area of the problem. I'm sure if the problem moved in a big way to another area a similar solution or other methods could be used to tackle it.

instead it would be a much better idea to enforce something along the lines of in Holland decriminalize some drugs , make the trade safe and regulated and people wont abuse it.Some people abuse alcohol and that's legal, I am sure that people would still continue to abuse drugs regardless of their legal status. I have to admit, I wouldn't want to see illegal drugs legalised personally.

Your comments suggest you work for the police ? so i would hope that you would be of this opinion. However my feeling is that there are far more serious crimes being committed which aren't tackled properly and effectively . I'm not suggesting that people shouldnt receive punishment if they commit a crime of a less serious nature but I think time is better spent tackling more prevalent issues violence, knife crime or hard drugs ... rather than 'recreational drug users '. And personally I think that abuse of alcohol legal or not is a far great problem than that of recreational drug use. Unfortunately I don't make the laws or uphold them I deal with the consequences of them being broken, hence why i feel some things probably need to be changed , and some things are more worth spending time on than others.