What are your unpopular opinions? (Vol. 2)

[hidetheelephants]

andym1603 said:

Legalising drugs in prisons would only make things harder for the staff than what they have to put up with at the moment. Yes the occupants would be chilled out most of the time but if the stupid buggers overdose that means a fatal accident inquiry for each death. These are long drawn out and the finger almost always points at the staff for allowing the deaths to happen.
Also, you would get bullying of the ones that had the drugs from those who cannot afford them. Causing more trouble for the staff to deal with.

ODing on cannabis. Another unpopular opinion; I'd have the stuff dispensed to prisoners for free.

[Blown2CV]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

dukeboy749r said:

DodgyGeezer said:

Giving 16 year olds the vote is insane.

Actually, this, too - barking mad.

I don't know where I stand on this issue, but I do find it odd that the people who are most against 16 y/olds voting because they're not capable of making this kind of decision are often the exact same people who think Shamima Begum, at the age of 15, was perfectly able to make and understand the decisions she made.

I'm kind of leaning towards 16 y/old should be allowed to vote, and Begum should be left where she is. I find it hard to reconcile not allowing 16 y/olds to vote whilst thinking Begum should be left to rot.

Because everyone at that age is left wing. Then you grow up and realise the world is not as simple as you thought and politics is just like choosing which hand to punch yourself in the face with.

[Randy Winkman]

Blown2CV said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

dukeboy749r said:

DodgyGeezer said:

Giving 16 year olds the vote is insane.

Actually, this, too - barking mad.

I don't know where I stand on this issue, but I do find it odd that the people who are most against 16 y/olds voting because they're not capable of making this kind of decision are often the exact same people who think Shamima Begum, at the age of 15, was perfectly able to make and understand the decisions she made.

I'm kind of leaning towards 16 y/old should be allowed to vote, and Begum should be left where she is. I find it hard to reconcile not allowing 16 y/olds to vote whilst thinking Begum should be left to rot.

Because everyone at that age is left wing. Then you grow up and realise the world is not as simple as you thought and politics is just like choosing which hand to punch yourself in the face with.

And then you get really old and all this new fangled stuff is really confusing and life's not as good as it was in the old days etc etc

[Strangely Brown]

Randy Winkman said:

Blown2CV said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

dukeboy749r said:

DodgyGeezer said:

Giving 16 year olds the vote is insane.

Actually, this, too - barking mad.

I don't know where I stand on this issue, but I do find it odd that the people who are most against 16 y/olds voting because they're not capable of making this kind of decision are often the exact same people who think Shamima Begum, at the age of 15, was perfectly able to make and understand the decisions she made.

I'm kind of leaning towards 16 y/old should be allowed to vote, and Begum should be left where she is. I find it hard to reconcile not allowing 16 y/olds to vote whilst thinking Begum should be left to rot.

Because everyone at that age is left wing. Then you grow up and realise the world is not as simple as you thought and politics is just like choosing which hand to punch yourself in the face with.

And then you get really old and all this new fangled stuff is really confusing and life's not as good as it was in the old days etc etc

As the song says:

Accept certain inalienable truths: prices will rise, politicians will philander, you too will get old-- and when you do, you'll fantasize that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were noble and children respected their elders

Respect your elders

[captain_cynic]

Strangely Brown said:

Gordon Hill said:

Strangely Brown said:

Gordon Hill said:

I think that Katie Price is the victim of discrimination, she's done nothing to warrant how she is being treated, just leave this fine lady alone.

Do not feed the troll.

Nobody, except perhaps the bint herself, thinks that so you are quite clearly either sectionable or just having a laugh.

I see that you've had a sense of humour bypass, chill out FFS, try laughing a bit more instead of being a miserable c#nt.

... and the horse you rode in on, sunshine. There is nothing remotely amusing, in any sense about that oxygen thief. But thanks for your concern. Love you too.

Cheers.

Edited by Strangely Brown on Thursday 30th May 20:38

This in spades.

At first I thought the guy might have a genuinely unpopular opinion and gave him the benefit of the doubt, then he fell back on the "it was just a joke (but not remotely funny)" trope and proved he was just a troll, and not a good troll at that.

Possibly unpopular opinion... People who try to claim other people don't get their jokes are the ones with no sense of humour. It isn't the comedian who decides what's funny, it's the audience. Right up there with "If I told a joke on this forum I'd be banned", I've a fairly offbeat and dark sense of humour myself but if you're one bad joke away from getting banned you really should look at how you communicate with other people.

[andym1603]

hidetheelephants said:

ODing on cannabis. Another unpopular opinion; I'd have the stuff dispensed to prisoners for free.

Have a look at your last reply. You said legalising drugs which encompasses all and not just cannabis. Do you work in this environment a to be able to understand the effects and value of drugs in a custodial situation?

[hidetheelephants]

andym1603 said:

Have a look at your last reply. You said legalising drugs which encompasses all and not just cannabis.

Except I didn't write that and for good reason.

[andym1603]

hidetheelephants said:

There's ~£8bn a year wasted enforcing insane and counterproductive drug laws; decriminalise all usage and for the likes of cannabis etc legalise it and tax it. Legalised drugs should be available in prison.

Last sentence says it all.

[hidetheelephants]

andym1603 said:

hidetheelephants said:

There's ~£8bn a year wasted enforcing insane and counterproductive drug laws; decriminalise all usage and for the likes of cannabis etc legalise it and tax it. Legalised drugs should be available in prison.

Last sentence says it all.

This is the unpopular opinion thread. I have not argued for all drugs to be legalised. To expound on "and for the likes of cannabis etc legalise it and tax it", legalisation should be lead entirely by safety and harm reduction, there does seem evidence in favour of legalising cannabis and mushrooms, more equivocal for ecstasy, lsd and other synthetics like mcat. Cocaine, heroin, synthetics like fentanyl should not be legalised. For the last sentence; the drugs are there, prohibition is pointless, harmful and costs money. Piss tests and punishment for positive tests have encouraged users to use drugs that either are not tested for or have a short metabolic half life, these are very often more dangerous than the drugs they were consuming before.

[andym1603]

hidetheelephants said:

This is the unpopular opinion thread. I have not argued for all drugs to be legalised. To expound on "and for the likes of cannabis etc legalise it and tax it", legalisation should be lead entirely by safety and harm reduction, there does seem evidence in favour of legalising cannabis and mushrooms, more equivocal for ecstasy, lsd and other synthetics like mcat. Cocaine, heroin, synthetics like fentanyl should not be legalised. For the last sentence; the drugs are there, prohibition is pointless, harmful and costs money. Piss tests and punishment for positive tests have encouraged users to use drugs that either are not tested for or have a short metabolic half life, these are very often more dangerous than the drugs they were consuming before.

Okay but if you see the effect that Spice or Monkey Dust has on people you may change your mind. Both of these drugs are legal and are not deemed dangerous.

[nuyorican]

andym1603 said:

Okay but if you see the effect that Spice or Monkey Dust has on people you may change your mind. Both of these drugs are legal and are not deemed dangerous.

Agreed. But those two hideous drugs were only brought to market because of cannabis prohibition.

[NAAHD]

That school, mainly secondary education, is a complete waste of time for a lot of people. It caters to the few and provides little preparation for real life.

But I dropped out so maybe I’m just bias myself

[DavieW]

NAAHD said:

But I dropped out so maybe I’m just bias myself

So it seems

[e-honda]

Vice crimes gives criminals a vocation which mostly keeps them out of the way of ordinary law abiding people.
People in the drug trade are criminals, their money making skill usually isn't chemistry, logistics or retail it is a willingness to break the law and ability to get away with it.
If you decriminalize the drug trade these people don't go legit, and those that do won't stick with it for all that long.
They will go find new ways to make money breaking the law which could include theft, robbery, fraud, arms dealing, kidnapping, extortion etc.
It's currently fairly easy to avoid crossing paths with a drug dealers by not buying drugs. You can't avoid the harm caused by arms dealing just by not buying weapons and it's very difficult to completely avoid the risk of being robbed, defrauded, extorted or kid napped, so the less people out there doing that the better.
It's a shame we have to throw those people most likely to suffer addictions to the wolves to keep ourselves safe but it's pretty affective.

[nismocat]

You wot mate?

[hidetheelephants]

andym1603 said:

Okay but if you see the effect that Spice or Monkey Dust has on people you may change your mind. Both of these drugs are legal and are not deemed dangerous.

Neither are legal for sensible reasons.

e-honda said:

If you decriminalize the drug trade these people don't go legit, and those that do won't stick with it for all that long.
They will go find new ways to make money breaking the law which could include theft, robbery, fraud, arms dealing, kidnapping, extortion etc.

You're taking a reasonable point, that drug dealers aren't going to magically stop being criminals, and extrapolating it well beyond reality; the drug trade is worth an estimated £10bn a year, they are going to struggle to find even a small fraction of that in those other areas. Even the crime du jour, blackmailing gullible people who take dick pics, is worth perhaps a tenth of one percent of that. A proportion of them will continue their life of crime, but with much less money with which to buy influence and accomplices and most of those other criminal endevours being easier to detect they will end up in jail. Others will go straight because the money's better, entry level drug mules are not living on Park Lane.

Edited by hidetheelephants on Friday 31st May 02:12

[slopes]

e-honda said:

You can't avoid the harm caused by arms dealing just by not buying weapons

I'm pretty sure Tony Blair said that Labour had eradicated gun crime in the UK by making the possession of hand guns illegal so anyone buying, selling, or possessing a hand gun is jolly naughty and should apologise pretty swiftly.

[cwis]

Housing benefit. It should be scrapped.

Why? Market forces. Rents would fall due to lack of affordability. That would make some landlords have to sell up. House prices would drop do to increased availability.. Housing as an asset class would be less attractive - money would flow into startups, maybe - increase productivity, innovation etc... Wages may have to raise making employers again look at increased productivity and investing in their businesses....

I'd hesitate to call myself left wing (or any kind of wing to be honest) but taxing everyone to give money to the rentier class to allow the lower payed to be able to live in their buildings at inflated rents whilst working for companies also owned by similar people who then don't have to pay an actual living wage (including living costs) seems a little inequitable... And it probaby stifles innovation and productivity.

[Nethybridge]

captain_cynic said:

This in spades.

At first I thought the guy might have a genuinely unpopular opinion and gave him the benefit of the doubt, then he fell back on the "it was just a joke (but not remotely funny)" trope and proved he was just a troll, and not a good troll at that.

Possibly unpopular opinion... People who try to claim other people don't get their jokes are the ones with no sense of humour. It isn't the comedian who decides what's funny, it's the audience. Right up there with "If I told a joke on this forum I'd be banned", I've a fairly offbeat and dark sense of humour myself but if you're one bad joke away from getting banned you really should look at how you communicate with other people.

Oh God, the overthinkers are here, lighten up dude.

The thread doesn't come with provisos or stipulations on content, trollery is welcome, nay encouraged.
it's about unpopular opinions, whether serious or lighthearted.

[mickythefish]

Too much consumerism, too much escaping from reality of our existence not being all about money.

Too much being told what to think and do all the time, even those ones that say they are free thinkers when they are covered in brands.