I don’t know whether it’s a legal term in relation to drugs. I used to to mean use of drugs other than for medical purposes. It wasn’t intended to imply that drug-taking is a pleasurable or everyday activity.

“Social drinking” is a term I personally would not use.

[That only God can 'create', and Man merely alter, will be a quite minor and secondary premise in this reasoning].

‘Social’ drinking is a misleading oxymoron too; for “One more for the road” only leads to less socially-responsible/response-able people.

{[Think of the Class-cases that could be claiming literally billions of pounds of compensation and damages for 'ruined-lives', all because The Government and The Private Sector and The Industry and The proprietor had all ruled that "The consumption of alcoholic-beverages is a good social activity and builds stronger relationships", when it just doesn’t ] }.

The originators, the powers-that-be, who wrote and publicised such lying adverts are liable, surely ? By commission of deliberate error.

Likewise liable is any schoolteacher who fails to make pupils aware of such lying.
By omission of right-teaching.

Surely ?

Cheerio !
(JSDM2354F2506).

Jonathan, your subsequent stuff has been infiltrated by an insidious form of communicational-virus called Ad Hominem, attacking the person (when what is needed is a thorough tackling of the Problem).

(Retorts such as “But s/he is The Problem” only drag in further Fallacies and Crooked Thinking (see also Thouless).
(jsdm0915F250610).

No they don’t. There are many questions unanswered. There are lots of posts of mine asking questions that have been sensored, and yet we have one Lord breaking the rules of the blog and making personal attacks.

On the question of canteens, that’s one thing.

However, please tell me how many firms subsidise the drinking of their staff in bars. Do they provide vouchers for Weatherspoons for example?

It’s not a one track issue. It’s fundamental. What do we get for 2,000 plus pounds a day per Lord? The answer is that the Lords can’t tell us. Even Phillip states its a difficult question to answer.

So I’ve proposed various measures of productivity. Since the Lords here have a inkling about the real answers, they have decided that the answer is to make personal attacks, in a effort to avoid answering the question of productivity.

Now you can do this sort of research for yourself. You don’t have to take my word for it, and it won’t take long.

Pick a Lord, any Lord. Go to the Hansard site, and select them. Pick a year, I suggest the last complete year’s record, and look at how many days you can find them asking a question, written or spoken. Look at each day, and ask yourself the question, are these comments worth 2,000 pounds for the day?

Then go and look at the expenses for that Lord. Look at the number of days they claim attendance allowances. Now you need to multiply the number of days by 2,000 and then re-ask the question. Are the contributions worth the cost?

Ask again, is it worth one person on minimum wage working for a year to keep a lord going for one day?

That’s the problem. You can’t isolate the Lords from their effects, good or bad.

Lord Blagger.

Why always single out the Lords for criticism? Why not other organisations? The Lord Bloggers politely reply to you every time, but I think many other readers are now becoming very tired of your one-track, stuck-record approach.

Surely possession and presence in the blood are two different things. How are tests done for presence in the blood of cannabis or cocaine?

It’s not as though you carry alcohol around with you in your car, after you have been to a drinks party.

Given that only a relatively small number of people need to use cannabis-derived medicines, and many of them are already unable to drive, I don’t see why they shouldn’t be asked to surrender their licences if the amount prescribed by the doctor would impair their ability. It isn’t like alcohol where people are free to drink as much as they want without medical supervision. The doctor can examine the patient and calculate whether the prescription would cause problems.

Using diamorphine to treat heroin addicts is a different issue. We’re talking about using cannabis to relive pain in people with other conditions, for which diamorphine is already used. Actually, I can see a field of opium poppies from my office window that will probably be used for just this!

Medical use of cannabis discreetly goes on. There are also trials in the UK of heroin being used instead of methadone to reduce or eliminate dependency because its more effective than methadone alone.

The problem is with law enforcement. Random breathalyser testing might reveal somebody at a 50mg level but its unlikely because the breath test devices are go-no-go at 80 mg and not linearly calibrated. Somebody could be on medical heroin or cannabis at such times taking the effective measure of intoxication well over 100mg ethanol and get away with it.

Parliament could do what it has been doing of late and pass a law that has no hope of being an effective deterrent just to get the public off its back. And when somebody dies in a road accident Parliament sticks its hand in the air and says: well, we passed a law to stop this. Not acceptable!

The question is will putting a limit on THC encourage cannabis use generally? The police need to test for both ethanol and THC and if THC is found and the user is on prescription then a legal limit should apply otherwise book them.

Ref: Science and Technology – Second Report; Mar 2001
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200001/ldselect/ldsctech/50/5001.htm
Science and Technology – Ninth Report; Nov 1998
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199798/ldselect/ldsctech/151/15101.htm
Medical Cannabis: Opioid Dependence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis
Hansard: Jun 15, 2010 Column 959; Lord Adebowale
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/100615-0010.htm#10061548000059

I believe it is generally considered bad manners, certainly in the other place, to comment on members’ drinking habits.

On the subject of the trenches, they say that country boys who had pink healthy lungs from all the fresh air of their your never suffered from gassing in the same way as the townees, most of whom died of it.
I have heard of some who returned from the trenches gassed, and recovered to live long and healthy lives on the farm.

I am in favor of a nil tolerance of alcohol while on the road but will it allow drivers to drive faster and faster and will they tailgate more and more and more?

I am all in favour of “bonnetgating” in which you see how slowly you can go on a busy road
to avoid catching up any where near with the car in front.

Adjust your mirrors now so that you can not see a thing behind you and you will enjoy an empty and open road.