Hester Stewart, 21, an "outstanding" student whose ambition was to become a surgeon, was found dead at a house in Brighton on Sunday morning, after a friend called police and said that she had taken a liquid drug called GBL.
Police are investigating whether she took the drug knowingly, but a long-term friend has told Miss Stewart's family that she "never ever took drugs" and would "never have knowingly taken this substance".
In an emotional interview with The Daily Telegraph, Maryon Stewart, her mother, a leading nutritionist, said that she felt "cheated, frustrated and angry" that the Home Office had hesitated on a promise last year to ban the substance, despite it being illegal in several other countries.
Leaving aside the emotion. Who honestly thinks banning GBL would have made any difference in this case?
Only idiots I assume...
We really need to start getting real in this country. Banning drugs has never stopped this sort of thing happening. And never will stop this sort of thing happening.
Banning drugs is simply a waste of time, money and effort.
8 comments:
All banning will do is:
a) put the price up
b) make it "cool" and "edgy"
c) a gets criminal gangs involved
d) c gets more kids involved in criminal gangs
e) c due to a will push GBL more to kids.
Can these bansturbators not see beyond the knee-jerk?
Oh, forgot, a knee-jerk does not require the involvement of brain cells...
You sound like the sort of person that *should* have died taking this substance.
Calling a woman who has just lost her daughter an "idiot" and saying:
"Can these bansturbators not see beyond the knee-jerk?
Oh, forgot, a knee-jerk does not require the involvement of brain cells..."
is such a heartless and totally idiotic thing to say.
How about someone you know and love die like this and see if you refrain from a "knee-jerk"?
In fact, how about you pay a visit to her University and see if her family and friends can see beyond giving you a knee-jerk of their own!!
The fact is if the drug was banned and the true dangers known it would have made it a lot harder to get hold of and a lot less desirable. True, where there is a will there is a way but there was no will here.
Prohibition of drugs has never worked in the past- why assume, on the basis of one incident, that it will this time?
"there was no will here."
@Adam where precisely have you gleaned this gem of info? The article just states a friend's opinion.
Also I'm not the sort of person who should die from using these substances. Because I keep well away from them.
And how would I feel if something terrible happened to one of my loved ones.
Well -- I'll give you an example -- my mother was nearly killed at the hands of an incompetent, inexperienced PRIVATE doctor. But this did not cause to run around shouting that PRIVATE healthcare is unsafe and should be banned. And neither does it change my opinion that we need to move to a more private based system in this country.
Martin - what's your definition of worked?? Eradicate the use of the drug completely to prevent things like this ever happening again?? Then, no, it won't work. It would, however, make the drug a lot harder to obtain and so therefore reduce cases like this. I'd call that a success and say that it worked.
RobW - Firstly, where I "gleaned this gem of info" from, as you so smugly put it, was from knowing the girl in question for over a year and knowing the sort of person she was and would have become.
Secondly, the comments weren't aimed at you.
Sorry to hear about your Mother. However, your example does not compare. Your Mother did not die and I am not saying ban ALL drugs. I wouldn't have called for a ban on all PRIVATE healthcare had I been you either. However, did you call for that Doctor's actions to be investigated? Had he been incompetent before? Had he been banned from practicing in other countries? If so, would you have called for him to be banned from practicing in the UK? I would have. Out of fear that the same would happen to someone else and they might not be so lucky. I can't believe that you would have just shrugged it off and said "Oh well. Shit happens" either.
The fact of the matter remains that if this drug had been banned it would have been less readily available and, therefore, the true dangers more apparent. It may not stop cases like this but it would definitely reduce the chances of this happening.
As Martin states, prohibition never works. EVER. Taking drugs is part of human nature, been doing it for thousands of years, even other animals like to get off of their face.
The only issue with this case is if she knowingly took it or not. If she did, then no crime has been committed. Knee-jerk to me, means an emotional, non-rational response to an event. Laws should be made within the boundaries of individual liberty, logic and facts, not the imposition of a minority.
I've done many things that could have killed me, but I wouldn't expect anyone else to be blamed for it. We, as individuals are supposed to be responsible for our own actions.
Whether things are illegal or not, if people want them, they will get them. The only differences is 1)how much it will cost, 2)what it has been cut with and 3)who they need to communicate with to get it.
You say this:
The fact of the matter remains that if this drug had been banned it would have been less readily available and, therefore, the true dangers more apparent. It may not stop cases like this but it would definitely reduce the chances of this happening.Less readily available doesn't mean anything. Apprently one in three people use cannabis.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=740
And its usage has been dropping in line with its decriminalisation.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/liberal-approach-pays-off-as-use-of-cannabis-drops-to-10year-low-420000.html
People don't assume because something is illegal, it must be bad for them. It's the opposite, people rally against authoritarianism, it draws attention to the drug and people wonder what all the fuss is about.
By the way, I looked up GBL, as I've never heard of it.
http://www.urban75.com/Drugs/gbl-drugs.html
It is sold in the grey market, often as 'alloy cleaner' or 'rust remover' and smells pretty much like you'd expect an industrial solvent to smell like. It is hard to store, requiring a glass bottle or bottle of a certain type of plastic. It will melt through most plastics. Yum!No thanks, sounds disgusting.
The whole 'story' the media have created is so full of flaws and inaccuracies, it's hard to know where to start! But lets look at why we would ever want to ban something like GBL in the first place? Alcohol consumption increased 400% in the U.S during prohibition! Result!!! I have used GBL, and GHB, on and off, for many, many years with no ill effects. I work hard, pay taxes, and don't act like a maniac! I've never got addicted, and always found it much safer than alcohol (and far easier to stop taking - alcohol withdrawal can prove fatal!). But, hey - I like to have fun - so shoot me!!! Incidentally, alcohol legally kills 50,000 people per year in the UK, along with the huge social cost: rape, violence, drunk driving, lost work hours, etc. Tobacco kills 150,000 people per year in the UK!! And that's legal, too!! GBL supposedly kills ONE person and we now have to BAN it thanks to our bed-wetting hysterical media! After all, what can actually be scientifically proven? Not much, from what I've read. Anyone dying is tragic, but we need to be rational here. Christ! -I am so sick of the pea-brained media and scaremongers manufacturing 'threats' so that we can be protected from ourselves! It's like MDMA all over again. 1 million kids dropping 1 million pills every weekend, and where are all the dead?! Visit your local cancer ward where all the smokers end up and get some fu**ing perspective! There are risks involved with many things! I ride a 190mph motorcycle, but I am not banned from doing so because other people crash them!
Post a Comment