Should drugs be legalised?

Well, Gary, we're back. And as you know, we like to discuss everything and anything. And that includes the controversial topics because I am strongly opinionated as you are well aware and sorry, our listeners. And today we are going to dive into something that has come up about with the release of prisoners from Indonesia for drug smuggling. So we're going to discuss whether or not we think drugs should be legal. Have you been my good man?

Well, Dave, it's an interesting topic and thanks. I've been very good, actually. well, drugs. It's always a very controversial topic. Some people believe in terms of drugs that it should be legal. Others believe, well, drugs should never be consumed. And others go even further that it should be as part of death penalty. And, well, in the first instance, what constitutes drugs?

That's a really good question because I guess what we're we could really delve into a big farmer issue and some of the things like the opioid crisis that's going on in the US and I think that we'll definitely touch on that as we go forward but to try and sort of frame it so people understand where we're at and what we're talking about it would be non-prescription illicit drugs so you know ice, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, things like that.

Not necessarily something you could get over the counter, even if you're obtaining more of it than you should have, or you're getting it without a prescription or, you know, that would be a, we'll go into that in another episode. Cause I think the whole opioid crisis is, something worth discussing because it's not even just opioids. It's for me personally, I think there are a lot of people are too quick to the prescription drug cabinet anyway, but yeah, we're discussing illicit drugs. Now.

Something like pseudoephedrine, because it is effectively a precursor for certain types of or making certain types of drugs, but pseudoephedrine in and of itself is good for, I don't know, headaches, pains, whatever else it's given for. I think if people have colds and whatnot. But in, well, in a number of countries, if you have more than a certain amount, it constitutes possibly...

Garfield Samuels (: 02:29

a drug offense because it's a precursor or one of the substances used to create, for example, ice. Well, that's why here, Sudafed, think it was, there's a certain type of Sudafed that they turn around and they stopped selling it without prescription and limiting the numbers because people were going along. So drug, drug manufacturers, for example, had sort of drug mulesk that would go from pharmacy to pharmacy and pick up, you know, 10 boxes of Sudafed here and there.

Yeah, and that was the pseudoephedrine that they were getting out of it. It's always something difficult to tackle because on one side, people do need drugs to survive or to get to their daily routine or even just to even have a reasonable normal life. Do you need it? Well, we're not talking about now the next are the illegal drugs. We're talking about the drugs. We'll come to that in a second in terms of the

what is perceived as illegal drugs and which some people do depend on. the drug, what we refer to as pharma producing, the drug companies produce, which are for pain, for whatever else, a lot of people do depend on them to survive. one of the, which you touched on, is very key and that is the whole, the...

the whole business off and which has affected the US and a number of countries across the world where you've had a number of people die because and this is a it was a painkiller and one particular company has been well dragged over the coal of the calls for their push and and knowingly selling You know this drug over time which has has been it's very highly very highly effective addictive rubber and it's a lot people oxycontin oxycontin

the hillbilly heroin as it's known. I have a nephew that had an issue and I don't mean he didn't have any addiction. It was prescribed to him legally for after knee surgery. But he happened to have a few drinks when he had a few beers. When he'd taken this to, I think he was a week or two off a knee reconstruction or I don't think it a full knee reconstruction, but point being anyway, it is a problem.

Garfield Samuels (: 04:53

But that one we're to save because I've asked him to do a podcast and have a discussion. So we won't, we won't delve into it and give away too many secrets. And we'll also be careful at the moment not to go down the rabbit hole or we'll change the whole episode into the prescription issue. But onto the, the illicit stuff. The topic was raised by you and I think it was brought up by your, your lovely wife, Hi, Juga. because of we've just had

ine was released in, I think,: 2000

and 18. So it raises the question for me because I'm seeing you you've you've up and all of the people involved in terms of the nine were all Australians. All Australians. In terms of our international audiences so they put perspective on that and they were recently in early December released by the remaining five were released by the Indonesian government as more of a goodwill gesture. Yeah.

And I do have an issue with that. So I think this is a really good topic that's actually been suggested to us because it's being celebrated in the Australian media and the Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is sort of, you know, doing a little bit of a victory lap of sorts. Not a big one. It's not, it's not like he's just signed some big security pact or whatever. But the point is, you know, there's that kudos of look at me getting these Australians home.

What a great prime minister. But look at any prime minister would do the same. course, of course. In this regard, you know, I've got no time for Albo, but Airbus Albo. But in this instance, I'm not actually having got him any, whoever it was would be doing it. And I have an issue with that because I think the diplomacy, the time, the money, the energy that's been used, I don't believe it should be. I think these people should have, I think they're lucky.

Garfield Samuels (: 07:07

to not have been executed with the ringleaders to be honest. Yep. They're lucky. Very lucky. but it raises the question, you know, should drugs be legal because it does start to lend itself to this type of situation where, you know, obviously people say if drugs, there's an argument that says if drugs are legal, you stop the smuggling and therefore you don't have this situation. And that sounds like a very nice and sweet argument.

Cigarettes are legal, but there are still black market cigarettes anyway, because they still undercut the price. So it's not as it's not that simple. Why I have an issue with it and why I think they're very lucky is when so let's let's start with the two that were executed. So for those who are unaware, most of Asia, well, many parts of the world are far tougher on on drug smuggling than what we are in the West. Yeah, the West.

Now, now Australia, we're tougher on drugs and what some US states are and the like, and I think we're not tough enough. But the point is that the execution is on the basis of the damage that you're doing through the importation of those drugs. So for those that say, I don't believe in capital punishment, I don't believe in the death penalty, I acknowledge your right to do that. But in this situation, what I would give you is this thought.

Let's say you've got an 18 year old daughter that's just finished school and she turns around and travels over to Bali for a, for an end of, end of school, what we call schoolies, which is, you know, celebration end of, in the school and some local Balinese guy or some other Australian, cause I don't even want to cast aspersions on the Balinese people. Cause to be honest, of them are lovely. So let's say it's an Australian guy that gives you a daughter drugs and says, come and party.

And your daughter ends up either overdosing at that time or creates an addiction and her life spirals into whatever it may be, whether it be prostitution, crime, you know, and all the other, all the things that go with it. So, so why is it that we start pretending the people are smuggling are the victims? Cause the very reason that they were smuggling was because they wanted money. Correct. Yeah. Correct. So to them, you know, and generally speaking, you don't smuggle drugs because you think to yourself,

Garfield Samuels (: 09:29

I want to make a thousand dollars a week and to throw out the order you're doing a good thing for a good deed to someone else you tried to get rich right that's what you're trying to do you're trying to make enough money for Ferraris and a lot yeah because because Dave look these guys the Bali what was a Bali 9 originally it was 8.3 kilograms of heroin that were importing into Indonesia back in 2005 April 2005 now what was the street value at that time? million

dollars, Australian dollars that is. Right. So we're roughly talking about give or take $20 million today and there's nine of them. Right. Now let's, let's assume there's a few other people down the line that, weren't in, in that, let's, let's call it 20. Right. Actually let's even call it 40 people are going to get half a million dollars on leaving distribution. So your daughter's life or your son's life is worth nothing to these people on the basis they make half a million dollars.

That's where my issue is with the drugs because I've said in other episodes, I'm a libertarian, you know, free speech, absolutist, your body, your life. And people would say, well, hang on, how can you say that? But now you have an issue and here's the delineation. If you know how to grow your own poppies or whatever, and you, you extract everything to create European or you grow your own marijuana or you, you do everything.

On your own with no damage along the line. So no one's house is broken into because someone was addicted to your drugs. You've, you've created it. You've consumed it. I don't have an issue, but that's not the case. What it is is when I say I'm a free speech absolutist, I'm a, I'm a liberal, you do you libertarian guy. The limitations to that. Otherwise you get energy is where you start to harm other people. So in this situation, it's.

How much was that eight kilos, eight plus kilos of heroin, how much damage was that going to do? Cause everyone knows without even going into research and data that let's turn around and I've never used drugs. I don't know, but I'll ballpark it and say, you know, eight million, eight kilos at $20 million a street value is going to be somewhere around, I don't know, five million, let's even call it one million uses. Right? Yep.

Garfield Samuels (: 11:48

Let's even round down to a hundred thousand users. We all know how that hundred thousand users that there'd be a percentage that creates addiction. There'd be a percentage that's continuing the addiction and there'd be a percentage that would create death and misery along the way. And that's why you can't argue that having a free for all on drugs answer your body, your choice situation. That's why the distribution of drugs is a problem. Well, the, especially some

countries in europe which are very liberal when it comes to these things they would argue well you know if you have a controlled amount that people can have whether it is in the form of heroin heroin or other drugs that that that that that that should be something which you know in small amounts that people can consume. sounds great in theory but then you're saying for example that no one gets addicted to cigarettes and no one

gone from the old days, like: 1920

Yeah, we've gone from that type of recommendation and doctors. I've heard that in a long time. Yes. Yeah, I should be doing the old 19, 19 twenties. So we've gone from that thing where your doctor's recommending you suck on a camel. And for those of you don't know, they don't not getting the joke. Camel was a very famous brand of cigarette. So, you you weren't literally sucking on a camel. But we've gone from.

Doctors were prescribing There's no joke like that isn't it about the guy that there's two guys that says he's He's got a really sore throat and he says he's taking all his medication and nothing's working And his friend says to him what he says, what do you do when you have a sore throat? He says well, I suck on a lifesaver, right? He says okay for you you live at Bondi. So

Garfield Samuels (: 14:11

And those that don't get that joke, it's Bondo Beach lifesavers and lifesavers are a loli. For broad audience, Bondo Beach is a famous beach. Sydney and lifesavers, they are on the beach. Yeah, lifesavers are the lifeguards on the beach. anyway, people get the Aside from my terrible jokes, you know, we've spent 50, 60, 70 years moving away from doctors prescribing cigarettes as a go-to, to saying, here's the problem. I don't know if they're quite...

prescribing, but they were very openly suggesting that, let's say it wasn't a, was good for you. That's correct. So, and, and this has happened and will happen throughout human history is when there's money in something. because I, not sure if we've, released our, our episode Nazis on drugs. I can't remember because it was, it have been one of our test episodes, but the point is in our

Discussion on Nazis on drugs. We discussed what was known as pervertin and pervertin was a drug that was given to everyday people in Nazi Germany in the thirties. I think it have even started in the twenties and the Weimar Republic and pervertin was sort of prescribed and sold on the concept of, we'll give you energy to get through your day. So as a German worker, you'd really produce an amazing amount of work at a high level if you're taking a pervertin and if you're a

a stay at home mom, which is effectively what you're supposed to be in, in Nazi Germany, have a thousand children for the right. It would give you energy to get through the day, you know, taking care of your thousand blonde head, blue eyed Aryan, supreme race people. Now, pervert in, for those that thinking, so what was a pick me up? it's effectively, ice it is, meth, methamphetamine. So, you know, we, you get a situation where.

People create things that they sell to you on a beneficial basis. And there are lots of people either don't ask questions that should or are willfully blind to the issues that are being caused and will be caused because there's money. So the, so we've had as humans, a long history with drugs, heroin.

Garfield Samuels (: 16:32

derivatives from different things. And these days, a lot of synthetics. there are let me not say no, there are some people who still consume the real thing from poppy plants, which heroin comes from, or whatever other drug. But a lot of- to call it milk of the poppy, which was effectively liquid heroin way back when for pain. That's right, that's right. So, you know, and because over time, you know, human knowledge has improved where it's known now.

or people to have back in the: 1930

certain parts of the so-called Western world today, in terms of well-to-do families, they made their money from the days of having the drug trade from China being... opium wars. The opium wars, and benefited tremendously. Yeah, and I'm super critical, but here's my caveat, Let's say today, for example,

And I'll be very generous to farmer and I'll say it's still dominated by people that have the interest of your health and the community at large. So I'm being extremely generous. Yeah. You, you, you, you sure you didn't smoke anything for a couple of Let's, let's talk drugs. What can I take? but I'm being very generous and I can understand why people would say I must be on drugs to be generous to be a farmer. But for this hypothesis, let's, let's imagine that they really are.

Trying to cure things and acting in your interest your health interest interest of its consumer So money is not the thing anymore. No, they still want to want to make money But we will make money because what I'm going to do is is create come up with a new type of Apple that they give you an extra boost of Energy and it's seedless, right? So I'm gonna be generous that they're coming up with this drug. Yeah, it has no side effects. Yes They can make a mass produce it. Yeah, let's entertain it for the time being so they come up with that

Garfield Samuels (: 18:55

Yeah. And at the time they run through 10 year clinical trials. And one of the reasons why you have 10 years is because you don't know what the side effects will be for a year or five years, eight years, 10 years. And for those of you that were foolish enough to believe the bullshit that they could do 10 year clinical trials in three months for the COVID vaccine, I have a bridge to sell you on Sydney Harbor. But anyway, we won't go down the COVID rabbit hole for now. The point is,

that they come up with this thing, they run the 10 year clinical trials, the side effects are negligible to nil, the benefits are astronomical, the use is basically universal across all age groups, genders, and we all take it for 30 years before we start finding out there's a problem in year 31.

In that situation, I wouldn't be critical of people who go, well, this is now what's happening. Cause at the end of the day, end of the day in life, none of us have a crystal ball. We all have to make decisions based on best information available. And that's fine. What I'm talking about here is where people have the information, they know the damage that's being done and they just don't give a shit because the money is just too good or the prestige or whatever it may be. So for me, that damage that

you know, would have been done with that eight kilos that the, the Bali nine in this Australian context, I think they're very lucky. The five that have come home. think they're extremely lucky to have got home. The other thing I have an issue with in this too is even if my position was that I thought drugs should be legal. And I took the view that, you know, in Australia, let's say in Australia, the drugs that they were importing into Indonesia were legal.

and that what they would have just got was a fine because what they were doing was on the black market and getting around the taxes they would have paid. I still have an issue that we're involved in another nation states affairs on how they run their family. So in Indonesia, their view is that drugs do incredible damage and the importation and distribution of drugs should be punishable by death. So I still have a real issue when we start seeing diplomatic efforts.

Garfield Samuels (: 21:20

to get people out of a bind that they've created of their own volition in another nation state. But in some instances, well, in a lot, not a lot, but in some instances where because the governments and because of the laws in, especially the Western style countries, those laws are such that the governments are effectively deep, well.

not just when responsible for their citizens, even especially when they get into trouble overseas, but they need they have to make that effort and especially in diplomatic ways to try to resolve or to get them off the case. So are the government's not supposed to do that, even though when their laws say or essentially indicate that they need to or must do the strongest representation that they can to on behalf of their citizens? I think it depends on

on what it is. So to me, for example, let's say you're in Indonesia, you're in Bali, Indonesia, and the volcano erupts and the Australian government's now trying to get, you know, 37 flights available as quick as possible to repatriate people. Or the American government or whichever. Yeah. Yeah. Whatever, government is from, from the Australian context, but it could be the U S UK, wherever that's different. But when we're talking about a transgression that is criminal,

And mind you, this is now we get subjective because as everyone knows what's legal in one jurisdiction may be illegal in another and vice versa. It's different if for example, there's a situation at the moment of an 18 year old British national that was in Dubai. And as you do when you're 18, young man, you're thinking with the little head and a 17 year old British national, they've had a holiday fling, right? Consensual.

So there's nothing, she's made no complaint. There's no rape. There's no sexual assault. This is in Dubai. When the girl returns home, because she's from a South Asian family, think Indian, and her mom finds out what's going on, she's upset. So she contacts the Dubai authorities and this kid's currently in prison. Right? So you've got an 18 and seven year old. It's not illegal in Britain. Teenagers. It's consent. There's no issue. But because she's under 18 in Dubai,

Garfield Samuels (: 23:39

They've put him in prison. Now, in that situation, to me, the British government should be stepping in and using your diplomatic efforts and saying, in our country, there's zero issue here. They tick all the boxes for age of consent. There has been consent. There's no claim even from the girl. This is mother has stepped in and got to know how to join. Right? And I can understand as a parent,

why you can have your nose out a joint, but I don't think much of you, you've got an 18 year old boy in prison for this, but that's a whole nother episode. Now the point is, the diplomatic effort in that situation is because what has transpired is not illegal in Britain. There's no victim per se, cause the girl herself hasn't even complained, but what we're talking about here is illegal in Australia or in most States in the US or I think in all States, if it's importation of heroin.

So that's to me where we've got diplomatic efforts to try and mitigate the risk of someone that's voluntarily chosen to engage in behavior that you know is on the high end of the criminal scale. But at the same time, the commitment, so whether it be drugs or in the example you gave about the kid from the UK in somewhere like the Middle East, the government, governments are still responsible and and have to.

be, have to make representation to the authorities when they're, because they get in trouble. be to the absolute minimum. Well, it is what it is. see, some people say maybe you can't have it both ways. So this is why, whether it is for drugs or in this case, a kid who had sex with another teenager from overseas, doesn't, you know, at end of the day, doesn't matter.

Well, I don't, I'd need to, I'd need to delve deep into it. And I can understand why you would say a citizen, a citizen in trouble in another nation state. Is in trouble. Is in trouble. but as a taxpayer that's contributing to that, I'm not, I'm not very happy that that's the.

Garfield Samuels (: 25:51

That's the way in which my tax dollars are being used when you've got yourself into that sort of trouble. I certainly understand and agree with you on that because the thing is when you have money being poured into some of these cases which can run into hundreds of thousands of times because you're talking about getting lawyers in the countries to do the representation of these people in trouble. it does cost a lot.

Well, this has been 19 years before they've been released. So I can't imagine that it sat there after a year or two when they were in prison and there's been no communication. I'd imagine sort of, yeah, regular, there's regular, you know, consular visits. now? How about now? So I have an issue with that, but we're getting onto, let's even move away from the, let's move away from the trafficking side of it for the moment. Let's get onto the individual consumption, but

Before we do, a word from our sponsors.

Garfield Samuels (: 26:52

welcome back. Gary, let's, let's now delve into the individual and people choose to consume drugs. Right. So let's, take the point of view. say, okay, let's hypothetically speaking back to what I said. The individual now, has the capacity to start manufacturing and growing at their own home. whatever it is they're consuming. Yeah. Now this one gets even more complex because

My libertarian self says, well, you just laid out that if someone's not distributing, they're not harming others. There's no importation of the precursors. There's nothing there. They have this incredible bit. There are physics and chemistry genius or chemistry genius, and they do all this on their own without damaging anyone. I would suggest in the U S if I was a U S citizen, I would probably say, okay,

You've now, you you've counted everything in terms of harm to others. You're not causing any drug gang related crimes on the streets. You're not, you're not selling to someone else. Everything's personal use. In Australia, I think we still have another problem. And the problem we have is that we have universal healthcare. And the reason why I say that's a problem is the, the, the

the implementation and the application of a Medicare system that's universal for all that we, so what I mean by that, for those that understand everyone in Australia pays a percentage of their income that goes towards our universal healthcare that everyone has access no matter what you can have private healthcare. If you want to have your gold plated bed with the doctor to take you out for a round of golf after your hip replacement and all that sort of stuff.

but everyone has access to it. Now you think, okay, what the hell does this have to do with someone consuming drugs? Well, within that, you have a social contract. So if I'm prepared to say as a citizen, as a taxpayer, that I think for me, it's 2 % of my income. So as a taxpayer, I'm prepared for 2 % of my income to be contributed towards our universal healthcare system each year.

Garfield Samuels (: 29:11

Well, what I expect is a reasonable standard of care from each individual is putting into that pot. So again, to try and give you an analogy or think about this, imagine you all turn around and you say, everyone I went to college with or everyone I did my apprenticeship with, we still catch up once a month. And what we do is we all throw in money each month that contributes towards whatever we do. So whether we play golf, whether we have a barbecue, whether we go out for a fancy dinner.

And within that, you turn around and say, well, Dave makes $5 million a year as a podcaster. So we're a long way into the future where inflation makes, yeah, that's like five million, five million is $5. But Dave, Dave pays a thousand dollars a month because he's well off. Gary pays a hundred dollars a month and your other friends are not doing so well. They just pay two dollars a month, right? So that's, that's your Medicare system. So that's you get together. Now what we find is when we get together,

You find that what happens is we rotate through these months that we know everyone has different tastes. Everyone makes an effort. So we have a burger meal one month. We have a Thai meal. Another month. We have a gourmet five star French laundry, like Gavin Eason type, you know, in a month. And then we go play golf because some people just want to get out and do it. And then what you find is all the effort you're putting in, when you turn up, no one can play golf.

because you've got a couple of people that keep realizing they're turning up in flip-flops. I was going to say thongs, but again, thongs for our US listeners means something else. So they turn up in their flip-flops and the singlet to the country club and everyone keeps getting kicked out. And you're like, I'm getting pissed off because I keep contributing. And what happens is you're not taking responsibility. Or when we turn up for the dinner, we're booking places that have a two hour window for our seating.

and two of you keep turning up an hour late and ruining the get together. So if you're going to turn around and have a universal healthcare.

Garfield Samuels (: 00:00

you put in, what the expectation is in that social contract is that you're trying to take care of yourself to a reasonable level. If you're shooting heroin, you're taking ice, you you're doing these things. I couldn't, I couldn't accept your argument that you're taking care of yourself to a reasonable level. What I would say is you're exponentially growing the risks to your health that you're going to be a larger train on the system that I'm contributing to knowingly.

Because again, I don't have an issue if I'm putting into that healthcare and using our analogy on the way to the country club, you're in a terrible accident and it's a million dollars to save your life. I don't have an issue. That wasn't your fault. But if you're going to turn around and drive at 300 Ks an hour everywhere, I'm going to say, hang on. you know, so, so I'd say that's one of the problems we would have here that on this hypothesis that you're going to get this magic situation that the individual can cater to their own needs.

that it still wouldn't work somewhere like Australia. Now, as part of, we'll get back to and we'll continue the conversation about the, not just the Bali 9, but drugs in general and why drugs are bad for you. But in particular, or if we want to look at it broadly, when someone gets released from serving time for drugs, et cetera, should they or can they benefit in the terms of

a book deal because a lot of people know about the Bali folks. and in some instances, other cases, there was a Chappelle Corby case before that. Well in Australia we can't because I think it's proceeds of crime. what happens is here we, I'm not too sure about the U S. The question is, should they, explain the proceeds of crime act first, but then explain, say, you know, look, we look at whether, should they benefit or not?

Yeah, well, the concept is I couldn't turn around. This is to the extreme. I couldn't turn around and 18 ago. You know what the maximum I'm gonna serve from her is 25 years on good behavior and blah, blah, blah. I'll be out in 15. If I kill someone high profile enough, so I'm a Mark Chapman, I kill a John Lennon, you know, someone of fame. And what I'll work out is by the time I've done my, my

Garfield Samuels (: 02:22

My time I'm gonna be 40 and I reckon I can sell that the book in the story and a movie deal off the back but I can make 50 million dollars Now I know that's an extreme calculation, but there are people that would work that way So in Australia you you couldn't do that because it would be considered your proceeds were derived from the crime you committed All right. Now, I don't think that's the case in the US. I think it's I think it's very different

I think it may also vary state by state as well. Well, I'd suggest that if you were genuinely rehabilitated, so if you were someone that, and this can happen, you can be very young, get in the wrong crowd and people check, learn, change, et cetera. And this is, this would be one of the reasons why two of the nine were executed, right? Cause you have the ring leaders that get everyone else into it. You've got younger people that were led down the garden path and deserve to be punished for it, but their punishment's not, not finite. same as,

well, your life being finite, capital punishment. So, you know, in that situation, I'd like to think that if you got out, you're not looking for book deals and things anyway, what you'd want to do is one of two things. The first is obviously establish a life for yourself that you've robbed yourself of at such a young age. And the second is if you feel like you want to do something outside of just for yourself, that you would want to work in a social work type setting that is telling your story.

to stop others from going down that path. You wouldn't really want to be profiting from it. Interesting. Well, it's something which I know a lot of people have very strong opinions on as to whether people should or shouldn't benefit in that regard. Now, is it prudent? So yes, the proceeds of crime in Australia as an act of law that

states that people cannot benefit from it and as such any proceeds they make from book deals etc is actually taken by the tax office I think or whoever gets involved. Now should people actually benefit? I don't think they should but I don't think the tax office should either. But essentially at the of the day goes to the actually then takes charge of it by whatever mechanism they do.

Garfield Samuels (: 04:44

Well, actually, let me, let me, let me re-answer. prosecutor, director of public prosecutions. I could see a, I could see a path as to why genuine profit would be okay. And that would be on the basis that what happens is let's say I'd done this and I can make $10 million to tell a story and it can go into drug rehabilitation centers or it can go into a charitable thing. If the law said, yes, you can sell the rights. However,

all proceeds go to, you know, and not the tax office, something it's charitable or something that aligns with the crime, then it would be a different story. But again, I just don't see much of that happening. Yeah. But it doesn't work the way eventually goes back to the the national conference. Yeah, of course it does. But the other thing that's happening at the moment and this I'm not too sure in the US UK, Western, most of Western Europe, but in Australia, there's this push at the moment because we had

We've had a number of people that overdose on things like ecstasy at dance parties. And to give a little bit of backdrop, we had, we had laws that were changed cause they felt young people were drinking too much, getting too drunk and getting into all sorts of problems. So they thought they'd solve this issue by taxing alcohol so high that people, obviously when you go out, you couldn't afford.

You know, say you had a hundred dollars and you could buy 20 beers at $5 each and get really drunk and cause a problem. Let's make beers $20 each and you can only have five solves a problem. All that did is it's pushed people towards illicit drugs because they get, you know, LSD or they get an ecstasy tablet for 20 bucks and then they're gone. so one thing to be careful of here, and I'm aware of that, that, bit of a whack-a-mole, young, you're young and stupid because you're young and stupid. We've all been there. Some.

take drugs, some do other things. So whilst I never did drugs, did plenty of stupid shit. You know, I'm the king of stupid. I'm still doing stupid. You just asked my other half, the beautiful Mauritian queen. But so I'm not, I'm not advocating to eradicate stupidity in the young. but one of the things that concerns me at the moment is this push for drug testing, pill testing at dance festivals. Should it be done or not? think it's absolute folly for a number of reasons. I think the first thing is

Garfield Samuels (: 07:05

what you're doing is you're, effectively green lighting it. You're saying it's okay. We'll test it for you. Like, okay. Now here's, here's the issue. Let's even, let's run with it and say pills. I'll be just saving lives. Well, are you, because the reality is you could take the same batch of drugs and give it to a hundred people and it will have a different effect on everyone. So if you happen to be that one person that, for example, I give you this, you know, there's a batch of pills going around.

And a hundred kids go through this pill testing at a music festival and the pill tester stands there and goes, yep, there's nothing there that will kill you. Nothing that will kill you. Nothing that will kill you. You're testing the chemicals within the pill, but you're not testing the physiology of the taker and the physiology of the taker can react differently to the pill. So if you've turned around and said, yep, that pill is good. There's nothing in that pill that is, is a problem. And then that kid dies. Who's liable for that.

But I think, what the testing is doing, you're quite right, the physiology of people are different and reaction hence is also different. But what the pill testers are essentially testing for as well two years, the level of dangerous, because there is within a certain range where, just like alcohol, we know that a certain purity of gin, vodka, whatever, as it is distilled,

is, can be fatal in X amount of, I don't know, shots or, or whatnot. We know that. So it's the same principle applied when they do testing to the pills, pill testing to say within a range that if they find a few pills, are beyond that range, then that is how they will call out to say, Hey, look, this is dangerous. Yes. But that doesn't turn around and say, they then don't print out a list and go, by the way,

Here are the, the 1,011 chemicals we found, which of those you're allergic to, because you know what you buy a pack of the fucking and M's. It's not an allergy thing. It's not an allergy thing. What it is is the range within. Yeah. So it's not an allergy. So it is, it is a range within which that's my argument. Correct. That's what I'm saying. What they're all they're telling you is a range. So the kid then sees, you know, anywhere. don't even know how many chemicals, but I'm assuming there's got to be at least 20 because cigarettes have

Garfield Samuels (: 09:28

hundreds, not thousands. So, so let's turn around and for argument's sake, and I'd be happy if someone corrects me here, but let's just call it 50 chemicals in your, your MDMA table. Right? Maybe we the toxicologist to have a second follow up to this one. What 18 year old to 25 year old, cause generally that's the range knows exactly all those chemicals, a what they are, what does to their body and what they're allergic to.

But we turn around and we say may contain nuts on the packet because you know, little Johnny over there, his idiot mom never exposed him to peanuts. Now he's got a peanut allergy and come on. everyone. Some people would naturally, but no, it's on both some people naturally. No, there's actually, well, yes there is, but that's actually been proven. I wish I could remember the name of the study. I should look this up. I'll mention another episode, but basically what happened was it's proven that by not exposing people to

peanuts, we created the problem. So it went from being the 100,000 kid that happened to, to, have that allergy. We created that. the advice now to mothers is actually back to expose your kids. So the point is that list of chemicals that you've now tested and you print off and you think you're the, you're the hero because you're working at the music festival telling someone else's child that they're responsible and they're raised, no care for you're the hero now.

telling them how good their pill is. Okay. When that kid dies, when this happens, because the pill testing is starting to bring in the day this happens, I want you to march that fucker. I want you to march that fucker that told the kid it was okay. And they thought that was so kindhearted and stand them in front of the parents and make them the one to tell the parents that Sarah or James is dead. I'm sure they have all sorts of, for anyone doing testing of pills, there's going to be the cave yet.

You know it is only advice only I and that's the problem which is don't tell them get back to saying get back to saying No, these are illegal for a reason. We don't know what's in them We don't know how it reacts to your body. We we don't know if you'll become addicted We don't know all it how about we stick with that instead of this constant moving towards what are we consider the political spectrum to the far left of this? Everything be kind, you know

Garfield Samuels (: 11:48

Yeah, we had, we had a third year science student. She was so such a lovely girl, but she OD'd at music festival. Well, guess what? You know what I hate hearing is all this stuff. was like, she was the light of the party. She was wonderful. He was great. Okay. All right. To a certain extent, I agree, but they're fucking taking drugs at dance festivals. So don't, don't, don't give me sweet angel story in the news. How about you say he used to be sweet. He got into drugs. He overdosed.

How about we have that story instead of trying to backfill and tell me all the time how wonderful these overdose people are? Well, we will of course delve into that and much more after these kind words from our sponsors.

Garfield Samuels (: 12:37

Well, Gary, that was a good time for a break because I getting pretty pissed off. No, I'm still pissed off. Why are you pissed off? Because of pill testing because the, because what it is is you're, taking away, right? What, what you're doing is, and, and this is central to something we'll go into in a whole nother episode. You're starting to invest the care of that child. And I know legally we're talking 18, right? But to any parent out there and everyone knows this.

your child, your child to your six feet under. They may be 50, you still worry about them, you still love them, care. What you're doing is you're starting to say, no, no, the state knows better. So you may be telling your kids stay away from drugs, have a good time today, Sarah, but please, please don't take drugs. Please stay away, stay with your friends. Don't take drinks off anyone. Don't talk to strange guys. You're giving them all that care because you love them. You want them to learn to adult. You want them to have a good time. And then some person,

at the dance party thinks that they know better than you. And their advice is, ignore everything your parents told you. Cause we, we, we've pill tested. It's okay. That's why I get pissed off. And if anyone can't understand that, I'm really worried. don't know if the pill testing or testers are exactly saying that, but no, what I'm, I'm not saying literally, but that's what it says. So imagine, all right, let's put it this way. We've both got daughters. Let's say our daughters go out to a dance party together. Right. And we both say to them, be careful.

don't take drinks from guys because we know they could have been spiked. Spikes. Right. We tell them all this stuff. We tell them to be careful. We, we say all this thing and they don't listen to us because we know at times they just, you know, cause they've, they've now got into a group and our two daughters feel like they want to be the cool one. So the mean girls type thing you're telling that's all right. It's just, it's just a pill. Don't worry about your bald fat dad. He knows nothing. It's just a pill. Right. So then they go and we'll go and get it tested.

They walk up to another adult because that adult's doing the testing and doing the testing while you're, I'm assuming that you're qualified to a certain level to be doing that testing. I would assume so. And from what I understand in like a camber and wherever else is permitted, they are proper testing or professionals. you've got an adult and a professional that's now, instead of turning around and saying to these girls, you sure you really want to be doing this? Is this a good life choice?

Garfield Samuels (: 14:58

You know, they're turning around and then negating all the care and love and advice we've given by the implication of saying everything's okay, because they're saying, hand me your pill. And then they say, it's a, okay, it's all good. It's good for you to take. So all the love, the care, the support that we've just given some stranger has just turned around and a serp their authority because the state has now said, we'll pill test. Does that make it clear? That's why I'm pissed off. No, the.

The pill testing apparatus, which has been going on, for example, in Canberra for a while, or the ACT, the territory, which is a territory in Australia. And there hasn't been a report of any pills which have been tested, which have gone on to cause mayhem or harm to any of people yet.

Now everything's legal in Canberra by the way. Sorry. Yeah. The porn, the drugs, like where I suppose the betters are making all their decisions. Fireworks, everything. They stop everyone else in Australia from doing you can do in Canberra or in the ACT. Yeah. So that being said,

that there has not been a death as a result or from the pill testers approving, I can How long have they been testing, by the way? Look, I'd have to look it up. I'm not sure. But they've been doing it at different, or for different festivals, music festivals, is. Now, the premise by which this is being put forward

And New South Wales and other states in Australia are actually thinking about or in the process of seeing whether they will adopt it or not. The Pell Testing Principle. Now, if the principle behind it is this, is that, and it's something you also said earlier, is that irrespective of what you do, people in society are going to do the things they want to do.

Garfield Samuels (: 17:02

whether it is getting illegal cigarettes, whether it is getting alcohol if they're underage, etc. It is the nature of people to do so. Now, what would be, and there two things I'll say here, would it be better to focus a lot more on the educational side of things, not only just doing pill testing, or not only just as you're suggesting, banning or not having pill testing.

Would that be, and again, through the school system or whatever it means in terms of education about these things? And also, the testing itself would be that last gate, if you want to call it, that would say to people, we'll test the pills, but not necessarily an endorsement to say, hey, you should take drugs. look, again, the education aspect, I think, should come in there to say, hey, look.

We've tested it, it within the range of X, it doesn't seem to have anything dangerous in it or dangerous enough to kill you, but we advise you do not take drugs. That to me would be the messaging that would be appropriate. Look, I agree with that. And one thing I acknowledge that's becoming very difficult from even 20 years ago is a social media YouTube. Now, the reason why...

is because what's happening is aside from it being a megaphone and, and you know, you're getting a larger audience. What we're getting is far more transnational information. So a kid at 14, 15, 16, 17 years ago didn't tend to pick up the newspaper and read what was happening overseas. Apart from watching TV shows that were from the U S or whatever. So when now you can watch a Joe Rogan and I love Joe Rogan. I think he's the, the epitome.

gold standard of, of, well journalism slash podcast. think he Well, I think he, I think he is. He doesn't call himself one, but I think the way, when you see him ask questions and tough questions and call bullshit, he does things that journalists should be doing. the slash podcaster is that he's not his main goal when he gets into something is not to dig in the dirt and find out the way a journalist does. It's to have a conversation like a podcaster, like we do.

Garfield Samuels (: 19:22

but he obviously asks the tough questions. Now the problem with someone like a Joe Rogan that I do have, I hate his flippant attitude towards drugs because it may work for him. He may have a body that tolerates it. Even to the best of my knowledge, he says he doesn't, you he stays away from hardcore drugs. likes pot. So even himself, acknowledges some of these other drugs you shouldn't touch. But what that does is because we have kids that are

that are seeing these amazing people that talk about openly or flippantly. Yeah. They think it's okay. But you know, it's a bit like anything you can, you know, not everyone can drive a Formula One car or a, or a fighter plane. And I'm not talking about the skillset here. I'm saying, let's imagine you have the skills of Max Verstappen to drive. You have the skills of a fighter pilot to fly, but still your physiology, you might be not be able to take the G force and you might black out. Right.

So again, just because someone else that doesn't affect them doesn't mean it, it worked for you. So I note that we're up against it here in terms of the information and what they see and what they get. So I think the education part is, important. If we're going to go down the path of, of pill testing on a wider scale, think the way in which to do it is not the way they're doing it. So what they're doing is a blanket thing to just say, here you go. Your parents don't even know you've got the drugs. Some parents might.

But I think if you're more concerned with that, create a home pill testing thing or do a registration. So if you say that, you know, your, your daughter, your son's going and you're like, no, no, I'm for pill testing. Well, let's create something that you jump online before they go to music festival X and you register them for the test and you do all those things and you acknowledge and you take the responsibility that, that if it goes wrong and you go down that way. And for me, my daughter can't go up and get

pill tested because she's not on the register. It hasn't been, hasn't been approved. Now you'd never, never say never. I'm very confident, but my daughter wouldn't do, wouldn't do drugs anyway, because this gets back to when you talk about education, he's where the responsibility is on the parent. Right? So before we even get the pill testing, my argument comes from a place that means me and my other half are responsible because for us to ensure that she doesn't say,

Garfield Samuels (: 21:49

Yes, to us and go out and get 20 ecstasy tablets is that we have that trust that she knows what the damage can do. She knows how we feel about so you don't hide things. And this will be something again, that there's a whole other episode of, I think people make the mistake that in Australia, for example, 18 is the age in which you can vote. you know, you can sit an adult for all purposes. And I think a lot of people, when their kids get to 18 is when they start to talk to them about a few adult things.

where for me it's like, no, no, no, you've got someone that can legally walk out the door. They don't need you. They can walk out the door and do anything they want, legally. And you know, obviously things like this illegal. you be much earlier, much earlier. That's nearly like a finish line. I don't mean boot them in the button and kick them out of the house, but that's a finish line at 18. Your kids should know about drugs. They should know about sex. They should know about alcohol, all those things. And they, you should make them aware of having a drink.

can be nice. Having too many drinks can cause a problem. know, having sex, it can be nice with the right person, the right context, all these sorts of things. So in this situation, I think that's where the drug, the drug taking falls in. The main thing falls into the individual, the parents before we extrapolate out. Well, should, should the society and whether it is government or a government organization leads it or it be farmed out to private private sector, should

there then be legal drugs for a certain quantity or certain amount per person across the board, whether it be ice, whether it be marijuana, whether it be whatever, and limit the amount. Or do we say only a certain type of, on certain types of drugs, which is already done in some places, which in marijuana, for example, it is considered in small quantities legal in some countries.

Should we look at, well, that option A where all drugs, small amounts for anyone who wants to take it can be legal? Or we only make some drugs legal and limit the amount they can take because we know that people are to take drugs anyway. Gary's looking at me moving like Stevie Wonder at the moment. Back and forth.

Garfield Samuels (: 24:10

No. Well, why not? Well, there are some drugs, especially when talking about ice, that the first use can be addiction. So that's number one. So that's a strike against ice. Yeah, straight off the bat. You don't want it. I just think it's, and even marijuana, like it's still proven, think it's something like it can still cause issues up to 25 years of age while your brain is still developing. So again, there's this misconception that smoking pot doesn't hurt.

And actually the evidence is, the other way. and while the issues here too, and this transcends drugs, this is, this is alcohol, this is, chocolate, this is anything. When this is a porn addictions, when you start taking something and what you say is a small dose, eventually you get used to it.

And it's not enough. So I never used to drink coffee, right? I actually was a tea because when Australia used to be more British, that was American. grew up, our house was a tea. tea only. Drank tea. And I started my apprenticeship and I remember sort of the first day the, the, the business owner slash, yeah, master craftsman slash is now like my dad, is dead to me. I remember saying to him, he says, there's,

Fridge, if you want bring your lunch, microwave to things up. There's coffee and sugar. I said, do you have any tea? says, no one drinks tea. You want any tea, you buy it yourself. And I was like, first year, perhaps not much money. I'm like, fuck that. I'll start drinking coffee. So the first time, yeah, free. So the first time, like, this tastes terrible. Anyway, I got used to it. And now I need a strong coffee. I don't have any sugar, no strong, get addicted to it. With chocolate.

really gonna not keep it in the house because I can't eat a row. I have to eat a block. for, for a long time, here's, here's something, for a long time, porn addiction, a single man just watching porn and you start again, you need, you need more, you need more aggressive. You need, you know, we'll go into this another episode for those out there. Why? know that how bad it can get and why you shouldn't do it. but the point is that you can't have a small amount because your body adjusts and it needs more.

Garfield Samuels (: 26:26

And we know this from most things we consume and watch. gotta be careful. So no, I think it's a, it's a dangerous thing to glorify and deify the drug lifestyle. I think it is a whole new challenge that parents and society has as we do have YouTubers and some very famous people that sort of are far more flippant or positive towards it.

and especially when you've got people like Elon Musk that are incredibly smart and you say, it's like, clearly it doesn't affect. Look, I could, I could go into planetary and still do this. It's like, no, as I said, some people can handle the G forces. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't mean it'll work for you. doesn't mean everybody can do it. So you need to need to be incredibly, incredibly careful. It's, interesting. Very, very interesting.

topic and people always have a different take on whether yes or no towards it. But given, like I said, this is something universal. People are going to take drugs. the responsibility, so we're looking at it now in terms of responsibility. Should individuals be by themselves, should be in charge of their own individual

aspect of whether what they take into their bodies or not. And should society take a step back and allow people to do as they fit, as they see fit? Yes, you mentioned earlier about manufacturing your own drugs, but what if you can't and you'd like to have a small amount of something? Should people be, or the responsibility be put on them to effectively, well, if you take it and it does and you cross the line by doing X, then well,

the result for you is jail. but, as long as you take it and it doesn't do anything that, know, you're okay. Should, should that be, another way of looking at it? Another thing principle to adopt? sounds good in theory, but I've, I've seen sort of a real life example of it recently. We just had a couple of weeks in Thailand and, in Kosovo, I highly recommend to anyone. and one of our sponsors actually have our new sponsors.

Garfield Samuels (: 28:44

from the beach residents there. Hi, Philip. How are you? Anyway, the Thai government sort of legalized marijuana. And I've been, yeah, I've been going to Thailand for 20 years. I highly recommend it. Wonderful people, wonderful food. However, lovely people, lovely food. are lovely beaches. But sort of every fifth shop now is a, is selling marijuana. And then the type of people you now see there, what are the tracks? That's like all these people that just want to sit around like a zombie all day. And it's

It's creating an ugliness to a beautiful place. And I did read something that the Thai government is looking at reversing its decision because it has been more negative than why it was positive. So everything from sort of the crime, the type of people it's bringing in. And as a tourist economy, you got to remember, if you're a heavily tourist economy and you go from backpackers, families, honeymooners, and on average, they spend a good amount of money.

that you go to stoners that just buy drugs, sit around, get the munchies and spend stuff all. They're not going on tours. They're not eating out at your high end restaurants. But who says that all of the smokers are bar one are doing that? Well, actually, that's what you see when you see it going around. You see far. You see that the tours are not as busy as what they should be, but there's still plenty of people around and see them sitting in the pot smoking. I don't know. I know a lot of smokers, salmons.

Smokers and they still go on tours and do all this I'm not saying everyone but the the proofs in the pudding because the Thai government itself is seeing a downturn and seeing intraction of the wrong type of people and it's saying the client in the dollars well somewhere like Jamaica is renowned it's quite well renowned for marijuana but it's quite the different thing because people still go on tours in droves and still smoke marijuana or consume it in well portable forms as well. put you this way demonstrate to me

leading economies and by that it doesn't even, I'll accept cities. doesn't have to be the whole sovereign state. Tell me amazing economies that have legalized drugs and that things are going absolute gangbusters for it, as opposed to countries that it's illegal and they do, they're doing well. Like everything and encompass everything. I just mean the dollar value. mean safety. mean cleanliness. mean, economy.

Garfield Samuels (: 00:00

Why do that? Why did the Dutch revert? Why did they loosen it and then retie it? Well, let's talk about the period when it wasn't. And it was doing quite well. Well, why didn't they stay that way? Well, think conservative, more conservative government won. I think they're, especially after the breakup of the so-called Eastern side of Europe, they thought was they were attracting people who

they weren't necessarily wanting within their country. Which is what I was just mentioning, right? You attract the wrong type of people at times. But, but, but the years before when they had it very open, it still was having a gangbuster economy and whatever. you're Jamaican.

You know, this is, and I could be really stereotyping here, but to the best of my knowledge, we're talking the Rastafarian sort of lifestyle, the pot smoking lifestyle. How many people in the, the upper middle class and the upper class, yeah, the professionals and the trades people and the things that making the economy turn smoke a lot of dope and how many people that sort of don't work or do the bare minimum smoke heavily.

tend to have, you know, it's Jamaica or otherwise, more people who do or more on daily basis. productive? Yeah, you have the people who smoke less, of course, are more productive. That's without a shadow of a doubt. So it would be a danger to society to turn around and encourage everyone to, yeah, take it easy mind. But bear in mind, the Dutch still allow

so, you know, recreational use of marijuana. So it's not like it's the, it's all banned. And now remember that he's the, he's the, he's the thing I said, though, let's get back to one thing I said, cause he's in defense of Jamaica. Yeah. You cool motherfuckers. Cause you are when I grew up, you know, the coolest people in the world. And I still, I still feel this way now to me, the coolest people in the world are Jamaicans. Have you ever noticed that everyone always wants to do a Jamaican accent? It just, yeah. And I think, I think it's a bit.

Garfield Samuels (: 02:17

It's probably Marley put sort of Jamaica more on the map, it could be Barbados. It could be Trini. It could be anywhere. just, you're, you're just a cool peoples. but anyway, the point point being I said earlier, if you're cultivating yourself and that's the one thing. if I, if I was going to concede anything, I'd say marijuana, cause people can grow a pot of marijuana themselves in the backyard. They don't need to be going out and, and stealing.

They don't need to be distributing and they're consuming themselves, you know, on that limit libertarian basis that you do, you, you're not harming anyone. Right. And the only thing I would say in here is where I have absolutely zero understanding is getting back to the Australian context of the social con contract. I'd want to know two things. One, if people are consuming marijuana at a rate of, I don't know, let's call it more than more than one day.

more than one day a week, you your risk of lung cancer is blah, blah, blah, blah. Or two, that because you're smoking so much that I'm out working and paying more taxes for the universal health care, because you're just stoned at home with the munchies and not doing anything. And there's where you need a balance. And I think like, as I mentioned about the Dutch, they were really, it became a nuisance to have all the crime that went along with it. So while they're still personal use permitted,

recreationally. And there's been some clamping down on the broader use in more recent times. But they're still permitting, and so too in Jamaica now. The law changed some years ago where you are allowed to carry very minute amounts for your personal use. It hasn't significantly caused, as far as I know,

any, any harm or, or changed what compared to what used to happen before when it was illegal. Cause not many people knew that, marijuana was illegal in Jamaica for pretty much most of the history, except for more recently when it was changed, the laws change. Well, the one, the one thing that a years ago, some years ago, well, the one thing is a through line in this whole discussion. Every discussion we have about, you know, government is I hate big government as well. So I'm, I'm always, there's always tension within myself.

Garfield Samuels (: 04:43

on my position on a lot of things, cause I'm a small government person. think the last thing I want is to create, yeah, the department for recreational drug use. It's like, another department, another bunch of leeches on a 30 hour week with 25 % super. So I hate that concept too. So that's always a challenge for me anytime that I'm, saying we shouldn't have this. We shouldn't have that. Cause I'm a less laws guy. think why the things I hope to see how the Trump administration.

that has a flow on effect to other nations in the Western sphere is deregulation. Let's start unwinding some of the laws and get back to the freedom. that, that's the one counter I have to my, my own position. otherwise I think for the most part we've, know, without going too deep down the rabbit hole on, on research on this drug, on that drug, I think effectively, you know, it's, it's a conversation that hopefully people listen to and something I said they'll agree with, they'll disagree with something you said.

they'll agree with, they'll disagree with, they might disagree with both of us, but hopefully there's at least some understanding as to why some people don't want pill testing, why some people think, you know, distribution and whatnot should be illegal and that, you know, sympathy for those that are trading your child's life off for their financial benefit, you know, very little sympathy for them. anyway. Yeah, there has to be.

consequences for those who are going to be putting poison essentially into society and hoping in their regard to benefit from it financially. Interesting. Thanks for listening. As we said, you know, you have a right to be wrong. And whatever your opinion on this, we also always welcome it. Of course, we hope to have a part two to this where we will have a toxicologist and go further into whether pill testing and the business of drugs.

whether it is beneficial to society, whether to, well, commercially have it available or on the consumption side. Catch you then. Thanks for listening.