@`Matt 392531 wrote:
Might actully watch this, is it going to be slagging off drugs tho? If it is i cant be arsed with that shit, i get it daily at college.
I would think it will be quite balanced but I cant be sure. Channel 4 are normally quite good though.
“Documentary series examining the global story of drugs, from Afghanistan’s poppy fields to the streets of New York and the estates of Edinburgh”
Episode 1
“One in five British citizens have used class-A drugs. Focusing on Scotland – named by the UN as Europe’s drug capital – the first episode shows the stark contrast between Edinburgh’s rich city centre and its underprivileged estates, where up to 60 to 70 percent of the residents can be drug users.
Film-maker Angus Macqueen visits one such estate with two former users, who are now volunteers for anti-drug charity Crew. They show him how the drug trade operates on a day-to-day basis in front of – and often with the participation of – children, some as young as eight. While all social classes use drugs equally, 70% of addicts have left school by the age of 16 and 85% are unemployed.
The police fail to control supply – in Scotland seizing just one per cent of the heroin consumed – criminals make money, and demand only increases. With the advent of synthetic drugs like GBL, until recently quite legal and easily available online, banning and policing are becoming ever more random and ineffectual. Angus meets parents whose children have died as a result of drug abuse. Suzanne Dyer’s son Chris died from an addiction to GBL, a compound found in some industrial cleaners and widely used by clubbers. GBL became a popular ‘dance’ drug when GHB, another similar, and less potent, substance was banned.
John Arthur’s charity, Crew, which supported Suzanne Dyer and her son, sees the obsession with the banning and classification of drugs as increasingly irrelevant to what is happening on the streets. John’s not alone. Angus speaks to former government drugs advisor Professor David Nutt, who was famously sacked when he began to say in public that present policy is not based on scientific evidence.”
