pap

But not all scenarios actually happen, do they? While it might be mildly diverting to assess something that has actually happened to derive its sources of invention, it's hardly relevant to your argument. Let's recap. You made up a story to illustrate how the Queen's powers might be useful, if such events occurred. Using that kind of logic, pretty much everything becomes justifiable, which is precisely why it's no kind of logic at all. "Jimmy. Did you put the elephant-proof armour on the car? We're going to TESCO". "Do I have to, Dad? There are never any elephants at TESCO". "One day, there might be. This is why we spend so much money on elephant-proofing for the car" Where did I say that something can never happen? I said that the events you described "probably won't happen", based on the fact that it actually hasn't happened for over four hundred years.

A-ha, the whole "lost sale" argument. Yep, seen that one trotted out many times in relation to piracy. The record company are proceeding from the assumption that if people had not downloaded the song from Kazaa/whatever, they would have bought copies instead. The theft is the potential amount of money that the company could have made if all customers had bought, rather than nicked, the tracks in question. Of course, in reality, 99.9999% of those people would have just found it somewhere else on-line, and still not paid for it.

Sadly, I am inclined to agree with your last sentiment, saintbletch. This is a day and age in which we British citizens to be extradited for linking to copyrighted material. I hate to say victimless crime, but when you see the amount of money that record companies etc make in comparison to the artist, it's clear that the law is essentially protecting corporate interests. The problem is, public apathy with this sort of egregious penalty is ultimately to blame. Even the lower figure of $2,250 per song is still not justifiable on any level whatsoever. Anyone with any sense should know this. Remember that this follows years of big record companies charging over the odds for CDs, DVDs etc. But yep, you're right - priorities are totally out of whack, and few governments have the balls to put their citizens' rights over corporate interest.

Fairly clear the guy has an agenda, which is to scare you into taking notice. Leaving aside the obvious bs about US citizens being deported to China, the sort of money they are charging copyright infringers is crazy and ultimately, counter-productive. No person in their right mind could equate the level of larceny with the level of fee. I mean, how is the single mum with a $1.5 million fine ever going to pay that back? The only thing that they are likely to generate is public resentment, not cash - because the punishment simply doesn't fit the crime.

I have only seen the first 5 minutes of this, but some of the judgements passed look amazingly draconian. Woman who downloaded 24 songs on the Internet hit with $1.5million fine. Price on iTunes / similar = $24 or thereabouts. Wondering how the hell they justify that sort of money for that level of offence.

In his defence, he might not have taken it post-ban. Pretty sure "Snow" was illegal at any point during the '00's though.

I must admit, I am having trouble reconciling dune's anti-drug stance on here with his "Drugs of the Decades" thread on the UI. dune, on what foundation do you proclaim M-Cat as the drug of the 2010s? Personal use in 2010-12, or a simple repackaging of the opinions of others?

#cbb = Celebrity Big Brother Nicola on Celebrity Big Brother, then

An entirely frustrating affair. Leicester were very good - great discipline, and always looked hungry for the ball. Mostly, Saints were woeful, second best for almost the entire game, slapdash in the passing department and slipshod at shooting. I think I'm out of patience with Lee Holmes. Really wanted it to work out, but he lacks composure in front of goal and another player would have buried his chance tonight. Connolly is class when he's on form, but just wasn't at the races tonight. Guly's first touch put the ball out of reach on too many occasions, too many passes were overhit and the team didn't look like one on the same wavelength. Our first team is great, up there with anything else in this league. Past that, mileage varies.

The moment you have to invent scenarios to justify the position of the Queen, your argument is over. I am sure that if it happened, there would be an Oscar-winning film off the back of it. Probably won't happen though. The last time Royal Assent was refused was 1707.

Not a great showing from the lads. Jos has been immense. Connolly looks lost. Leicester doing a great job of doubling up on Saints players when we entered their final third. Saints, not so much. In short, we need a good sort out at half-time.

Game of Thrones is awesome. As Bearsey points out, it's chock-full of fantasy nooky, so definitely a post watershed show. Probably not a good idea to listen to it on speakers in a shared house. Your housemates will just think you are watching pr0n. They chuck the claret about with joyful abandon too. I think someone gets decapitated in the first episode. Lots of stab related injuries thereafter, including some truly vicious bits that'll make you gasp for breath or think "holy feck! did they just do that?". Second season is due to start on HBO soon. Definitely worth a look if you haven't seen it already.

OT: Might have asked you this before. Which Leigh? Oop Lancashire way?

It's poor education. The only thing our government was telling the youth back then was "don't do it - it's evil and illegal". Three causes of ecstasy related death are:- 1) Overheating. Body loses ability to regulate own temperature properly. 2) Drowning. Drink too much water because you are hot, and you risk drowning your brain. 3) Reaction to contaminants. The Dutch did something different. They passed legislation so that clubs had to be well ventilated, gave advice on water intake and made testing kits available. Result? We lost 40 people a year due to ecstasy related death. The Dutch have never attributed a death to MDMA itself. We can all adopt a holier than thou attitude, but even some of the older blokes on here could probably regale us with stories about the relative strength of LSD in the '70s. Everyone is young once, and you do stupid things when you're young. I prefer the pragmatic approach of the Dutch. They decided that it was more important to safeguard their kids than say "We don't approve". Pretty much every ecstasy related death in this country would not have happened if we'd have done the same.

A lack of evidence has never stopped Inspector Dune from trying to arrest sensible arguments.

Portugal basically decriminalised everything.

Yup. They're completely correct if you ignore all the evidence! Anyways, I've often wondered whether the contraband status of drugs makes them more attractive. Pap's somewhat less than mathematical formula:- Desire = people wanting what they don't/cannot have. My relationship with alcohol changed tremendously the moment I turned 18. Dunno if that is a common thing, but it certainly seemed cooler when I wasn't allowed to have it.

Blimey. Can we have dates of use please dune? I'd like to do some cross-referencing of your historical posts

Saintandy666 - don't want to quote your post, as it is rather long - but a great assessment of the current and historical situation.

Take a look at the anecdotal accounts of people on here. If there is a link between dope and other drugs, it's not straight to crack-cocaine/heroin. I would argue that alcohol is just as much as a gateway. The amount of people I see in pubs that are "on the beak" ( local slang for snorting coke in the bogs ) is amazing. Same thing with people who try to give up smoking, and end up recommencing the habit when they're on the beers.

Very good point, but are you perhaps guilty of presenting the exception as the norm? I could definitely tell some stories about people who've had some very bad reactions to drugs. I could tell countless more about people with very bad reactions with alcohol. As a former officer of the law, you will know that the amount of alcohol-related violence is far higher than say, cannabis. Your last point, about legalising drugs making as much sense as legalising rape is astonishingly ill-informed. Are you honestly saying that someone buying an illegal substance for their own use is on a par with raping someone?

You kind of are punishing the users, though. Why should someone who wants to smoke dope have to associate with criminals when someone who is going out and getting leathered can do so legally?

Good point. The assumption that someone partaking of a "jazz woodbine" is automatically going to start doing crack and heroin is one that people love to trot out. Think you nailed the potential reach of "gateway drugs". Definitely consistent with my experience. I know loads of people who'd happily go out and get spannered at a weekend, but wouldn't even consider involving themselves with hardcore stuff. It's fairly amazing that according to our classification system, MDMA is "as dangerous" as crack cocaine and heroin, yet the figures don't bear it out at all.

Sensible response. In terms of balancing the budget, decriminalisation would be a six-pointer.

I am not sure that there was anything oblique about my comments. I just find it ironic that you spend time accusing people of the same things that you do. Is this how you carry on in your own house? Does Mrs Alps get accused of being bigoted or making nasty comments every time she utters something you don't agree with? I am more than happy to fashion a proper response to your posts when they warrant one, sir. Problem is, you invariably attack the posters instead of the posts. Might pass for debate in primary school, but cuts little mustard with fully armed and operational adult brains.