|
Post by musik on Aug 10, 2024 11:22:35 GMT
Denmark manage stricter border rules for Swedes to avoid criminality.
Swe news Sat
|
|
|
Post by Kpsje on Aug 10, 2024 14:14:35 GMT
^ swedish, weird and not normal stuff………………… racist?
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 10, 2024 14:48:26 GMT
^ swedish, weird and not normal stuff………………… racist? It's an invention just about after this song was written in 1975 to see a caricature doll as part of being racist. So who has decided then that dark skin, large lips and hair is discriminating? ... To decide just that is being racist!! It's always like that. Furthermore, the whole point with a caricature of something is to exaggerate. The song btw was Gulleplutt originally (means sweetie).
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 10, 2024 14:51:24 GMT
Being #4 in Euro Champs, World Champs, Olympics in Ladies Handball.
|
|
|
Post by Kpsje on Aug 10, 2024 15:09:33 GMT
^ swedish, weird and not normal stuff………………… racist? It's an invention just about after this song was written in 1975 to see a caricature doll as part of being racist. So who has decided then that dark skin, large lips and hair is discriminating? ... To decide just that is being racist!! It's always like that. Furthermore, the whole point with a caricature of something is to exaggerate. The song btw was Gulleplutt originally (means sweetie). thank you for clarifying that, ‘sweetie’ (winky face)
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 10, 2024 15:23:19 GMT
A new environmental Law from 1st of July here. If a landlord's service team or any other controlling person notice you've thrown a milk container made of plastic and paper in your garbage bag, you'll have to pay 2000 SEK!! (£155).
It's very tough and idiotic, I'd say. Do they really have the time to do that? What's more, it's confusing where you should throw it instead to say the least. The package is made of paper, the capsule of plastic. But you shall not separate them. Why? The whole package shall be thrown into the plastics container.
😵
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 17, 2024 16:24:46 GMT
The Swedish police took the young guy who murdered a person in the 30ies. The murderer got almost exactly 10 years and was only 16 when he committed the crime.
This is a new phase the Law system representatives say. Noone can no longer have the age as an excuse in Sweden for not going to prison.
Most people blame drug use to be the cause of this crime. And the Law experts see the new written laws as a vital start for the struggle with drug use for real, since gang recruiting will decrease, they say.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 17, 2024 18:04:35 GMT
The Swedish police took the young guy who murdered a person in the 30ies. The murderer got almost exactly 10 years and was only 16 when he committed the crime. This is a new phase the Law system representatives say. Noone can no longer have the age as an excuse in Sweden for not going to prison. Most people blame drug use to be the cause of this crime. And the Law experts see the new written laws as a vital start for the struggle with drug use for real, since gang recruiting will decrease, they say. In what way do they blame drug use? Is the problem with what people do under the influence of the drugs, like people do with alcohol, or do they put the blame on the drug market?
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 17, 2024 18:09:43 GMT
The Swedish police took the young guy who murdered a person in the 30ies. The murderer got almost exactly 10 years and was only 16 when he committed the crime. This is a new phase the Law system representatives say. Noone can no longer have the age as an excuse in Sweden for not going to prison. Most people blame drug use to be the cause of this crime. And the Law experts see the new written laws as a vital start for the struggle with drug use for real, since gang recruiting will decrease, they say. In what way do they blame drug use? Is the problem with what people do under the influence of the drugs, like people do with alcohol, or do they put the blame on the drug market? They put the blame on drug use, since with no drug use there would be no drug market and no shootings. In this specific case they assume he was under the influence of some drug, since shooting a person you don't know is no normal behaviour. Most people think 10 years is too little though.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 17, 2024 18:24:56 GMT
In what way do they blame drug use? Is the problem with what people do under the influence of the drugs, like people do with alcohol, or do they put the blame on the drug market? They put the blame on drug use, since with no drug use there would be no drug market and no shootings. In this specific case they assume he was under the influence of some drug, since shooting a person you don't know is no normal behaviour. Most people think 10 years is too little though. Isn't it almost a year since they proclaimed a heavy crack down? There'll always be a drug market and there'll always be someone to supply it, just like alcohol. They used to do all the 'killer used cannabis' headlines back in the Reefer Madness days, invariably turned out to be bollocks 😃
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 17, 2024 18:27:32 GMT
Is terrible goalkeeping typically Swedish? (Weird or normal)
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 17, 2024 19:19:40 GMT
They put the blame on drug use, since with no drug use there would be no drug market and no shootings. In this specific case they assume he was under the influence of some drug, since shooting a person you don't know is no normal behaviour. Most people think 10 years is too little though. Isn't it almost a year since they proclaimed a heavy crack down? There'll always be a drug market and there'll always be someone to supply it, just like alcohol. They used to do all the 'killer used cannabis' headlines back in the Reefer Madness days, invariably turned out to be bollocks 😃 They have seized lots of drugs in containers the last year and recently, in harbours. Their goal is probably to show there is no point sending it here. Loads come from Spain. Heard something about 70-90% more findings compared to last year. Obviously, the customs have more resources now, maybe that's why. Perhaps there will always be a market, but their goal is to decrease it, I guess, even though zero tolerance is what they aim for. I think most people here don't see them cannabis users as killers. I also think that would be bullshit actually.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 17, 2024 19:21:42 GMT
Is terrible goalkeeping typically Swedish? (Weird or normal) That is a controversial issue. Good or bad? I quoted a post in the match thread where some lord wrote he was a great signing. Hopefully, I'll will see and judge myself soon.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 17, 2024 20:20:25 GMT
Isn't it almost a year since they proclaimed a heavy crack down? There'll always be a drug market and there'll always be someone to supply it, just like alcohol. They used to do all the 'killer used cannabis' headlines back in the Reefer Madness days, invariably turned out to be bollocks 😃 They have seized lots of drugs in containers the last year and recently, in harbours. Their goal is probably to show there is no point sending it here. Loads come from Spain. Heard something about 70-90% more findings compared to last year. Obviously, the customs have more resources now, maybe that's why. Perhaps there will always be a market, but their goal is to decrease it, I guess, even though zero tolerance is what they aim for. I think most people here don't see them cannabis users as killers. I also think that would be bullshit actually. It'll be more likely to increase the price, therefore increase the profit, therefore increase the violence. On the police programmes I watch it's rarely (if ever) someone on something other than alcohol causing issues 🤷 Seems like the usual 'its bad because it's illegal and it's illegal because it's bad' circular argument to me 🤔
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 17, 2024 21:42:15 GMT
They have seized lots of drugs in containers the last year and recently, in harbours. Their goal is probably to show there is no point sending it here. Loads come from Spain. Heard something about 70-90% more findings compared to last year. Obviously, the customs have more resources now, maybe that's why. Perhaps there will always be a market, but their goal is to decrease it, I guess, even though zero tolerance is what they aim for. I think most people here don't see them cannabis users as killers. I also think that would be bullshit actually. It'll be more likely to increase the price, therefore increase the profit, therefore increase the violence. On the police programmes I watch it's rarely (if ever) someone on something other than alcohol causing issues 🤷 Seems like the usual 'its bad because it's illegal and it's illegal because it's bad' circular argument to me 🤔 Let me tell you about their policy plan. No price increase since hardly anyone will be left dealing buying. You're missing their policy point here, which is - if not going all the way to 0% of today's market (their unrealistic goal) - at least going to 1-5% of today's market. And more importantly - with 5% of the market (the goods market), also only 5% of the people involved left. The rest will be sent away. So violence increase is not part of the plan on an almost wiped out market. This is their policy. I'm not sure it will work. Furthermore, we now also have three of the eight established parties opening up for the next step. Simultaneously, they go after sugar, fat and energy drink users as well now - ordered ongoing investigations. Btw, today on a documentary I heard it's Sweden who implemented and suggested anabolic steroid prohibition first of all; they were leading the way. But they make it easier to get the hands on alcohol! Selling it in more places etc. Can you get that?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 18, 2024 5:38:07 GMT
It'll be more likely to increase the price, therefore increase the profit, therefore increase the violence. On the police programmes I watch it's rarely (if ever) someone on something other than alcohol causing issues 🤷 Seems like the usual 'its bad because it's illegal and it's illegal because it's bad' circular argument to me 🤔 Let me tell you about their policy plan. No price increase since hardly anyone will be left dealing buying. You're missing their policy point here, which is - if not going all the way to 0% of today's market (their unrealistic goal) - at least going to 1-5% of today's market. And more importantly - with 5% of the market (the goods market), also only 5% of the people involved left. The rest will be sent away. So violence increase is not part of the plan on an almost wiped out market. This is their policy. I'm not sure it will work. Furthermore, we now also have three of the eight established parties opening up for the next step. Simultaneously, they go after sugar, fat and energy drink users as well now - ordered ongoing investigations. Btw, today on a documentary I heard it's Sweden who implemented and suggested anabolic steroid prohibition first of all; they were leading the way. But they make it easier to get the hands on alcohol! Selling it in more places etc. Can you get that? No, not in the slightest, it's a more extreme version of the ridiculous laws we have in the UK. An increase in violence might not be part of their plan but it's what they're likely to get
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 18, 2024 16:15:22 GMT
Let me tell you about their policy plan. No price increase since hardly anyone will be left dealing buying. You're missing their policy point here, which is - if not going all the way to 0% of today's market (their unrealistic goal) - at least going to 1-5% of today's market. And more importantly - with 5% of the market (the goods market), also only 5% of the people involved left. The rest will be sent away. So violence increase is not part of the plan on an almost wiped out market. This is their policy. I'm not sure it will work. Furthermore, we now also have three of the eight established parties opening up for the next step. Simultaneously, they go after sugar, fat and energy drink users as well now - ordered ongoing investigations. Btw, today on a documentary I heard it's Sweden who implemented and suggested anabolic steroid prohibition first of all; they were leading the way. But they make it easier to get the hands on alcohol! Selling it in more places etc. Can you get that? No, not in the slightest, it's a more extreme version of the ridiculous laws we have in the UK. An increase in violence might not be part of their plan but it's what they're likely to get A hypothetic example. At the start 100.000 people are selling/buying. After the governments' action 5000 are selling/buying. Will these 5000 people shoot and use violence even more than what the 100.000 people did altogether? Or do you simply think it won't be such a decrease in both goods and people involved? There will be more trying to make a profit?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 18, 2024 17:00:42 GMT
No, not in the slightest, it's a more extreme version of the ridiculous laws we have in the UK. An increase in violence might not be part of their plan but it's what they're likely to get A hypothetic example. At the start 100.000 people are selling/buying. After the governments' action 5000 are selling/buying. Will these 5000 people shoot and use violence even more than what the 100.000 people did altogether? Or do you simply think it won't be such a decrease in both goods and people involved? There will be more trying to make a profit? That's how it usually goes.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 18, 2024 23:24:35 GMT
No, not in the slightest, it's a more extreme version of the ridiculous laws we have in the UK. An increase in violence might not be part of their plan but it's what they're likely to get A hypothetic example. At the start 100.000 people are selling/buying. After the governments' action 5000 are selling/buying. Will these 5000 people shoot and use violence even more than what the 100.000 people did altogether? Or do you simply think it won't be such a decrease in both goods and people involved? There will be more trying to make a profit? Worth a read musik - en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_prohibition
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 7:49:53 GMT
A hypothetic example. At the start 100.000 people are selling/buying. After the governments' action 5000 are selling/buying. Will these 5000 people shoot and use violence even more than what the 100.000 people did altogether? Or do you simply think it won't be such a decrease in both goods and people involved? There will be more trying to make a profit? Worth a read musik - en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_prohibitionI read it, and went on reading even more. Mark Thornton "Economics of prohibition". It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve. However. I find it very hard to see how these facts would change attitudes. It seems like our politicians are aware of it but argue "if they under prohibition go for something else, something more dangerous, they have themselves to blame". That's the only explanation.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 19, 2024 8:59:04 GMT
I read it, and went on reading even more. Mark Thornton "Economics of prohibition". It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve. However. I find it very hard to see how these facts would change attitudes. It seems like our politicians are aware of it but argue "if they under prohibition go for something else, something more dangerous, they have themselves to blame". That's the only explanation. "It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve" That's how drugs like Spice and Monkey Dust came about, there's probably many others in the pipeline. But they don't have themselves to blame if they become alcoholics or obese due to sugar/fast food addiction? 🤔 I've posted this before but I believe it's very important at the author's credentials in the field are impeccable - julianbuchanan.wordpress.com/blogs-2/Here's a video of a webinar hosted in Sweden that he addressed, from 2021, one of the participants predicted what's happening in Sweden now quite accurately. The guy on 25 minutes made me laugh 😃 "Pardon my language but what's going on in this country right now is fucking ridiculous"
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 9:04:27 GMT
I read it, and went on reading even more. Mark Thornton "Economics of prohibition". It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve. However. I find it very hard to see how these facts would change attitudes. It seems like our politicians are aware of it but argue "if they under prohibition go for something else, something more dangerous, they have themselves to blame". That's the only explanation. "It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve" That's how drugs like Spice and Monkey Dust came about, there's probably many others in the pipeline. But they don't have themselves to blame if they become alcoholics or obese due to sugar/fast food addiction? 🤔 I've posted this before but I believe it's very important at the author's credentials in the field are impeccable - julianbuchanan.wordpress.com/blogs-2/Here's a video of a webinar hosted in Sweden that he addressed, from 2021, one of the participants predicted what's happening in Sweden now quite accurately. The guy on 25 minutes made me laugh 😃 "Pardon my language but what's going on in this country right now is fucking ridiculous" I believe they see alcoholics a bit differently since alcohol is not forbidden. Drinking it is not against some law. I'll watch it.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 9:17:33 GMT
I read it, and went on reading even more. Mark Thornton "Economics of prohibition". It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve. However. I find it very hard to see how these facts would change attitudes. It seems like our politicians are aware of it but argue "if they under prohibition go for something else, something more dangerous, they have themselves to blame". That's the only explanation. "It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve" That's how drugs like Spice and Monkey Dust came about, there's probably many others in the pipeline. But they don't have themselves to blame if they become alcoholics or obese due to sugar/fast food addiction? 🤔 I've posted this before but I believe it's very important at the author's credentials in the field are impeccable - julianbuchanan.wordpress.com/blogs-2/Here's a video of a webinar hosted in Sweden that he addressed, from 2021, one of the participants predicted what's happening in Sweden now quite accurately. The guy on 25 minutes made me laugh 😃 "Pardon my language but what's going on in this country right now is fucking ridiculous" "You must be drug free for three months before you get treatment", Mats said. I think that's correct. And by then you don't need it ... 🤠 Basically, it's all about saving money. And all responsibility is put on an individual level.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 19, 2024 10:28:34 GMT
"It seems to be a fact during prohibition even more dangerous synthetic drugs evolve" That's how drugs like Spice and Monkey Dust came about, there's probably many others in the pipeline. But they don't have themselves to blame if they become alcoholics or obese due to sugar/fast food addiction? 🤔 I've posted this before but I believe it's very important at the author's credentials in the field are impeccable - julianbuchanan.wordpress.com/blogs-2/Here's a video of a webinar hosted in Sweden that he addressed, from 2021, one of the participants predicted what's happening in Sweden now quite accurately. The guy on 25 minutes made me laugh 😃 "Pardon my language but what's going on in this country right now is fucking ridiculous" "You must be drug free for three months before you get treatment", Mats said. I think that's correct. And by then you don't need it ... 🤠 Basically, it's all about saving money. And all responsibility is put on an individual level. Responsibility isn't put on a personal level wholly tho is it? If it was they wouldn't be breaking the law, they're not responsible for the law. Edit - a lot of the Forces Veterans I know/have met that suffer from PTSD say the pharmaceutical products they're prescribed make them feel 'like a zombie' and induce suicidal thoughts. They've found cannabis to be their best option. If they can't afford or can't be bothered to get it legally should they break the law or run the risk of topping themselves thanks to pharmaceuticals? They're 'trying' to take responsibility. Personally I'd rather be illegally alive than legally dead 🤷
|
|
|
Post by marylandstoke on Aug 19, 2024 13:23:28 GMT
No, not in the slightest, it's a more extreme version of the ridiculous laws we have in the UK. An increase in violence might not be part of their plan but it's what they're likely to get A hypothetic example. At the start 100.000 people are selling/buying. After the governments' action 5000 are selling/buying. Will these 5000 people shoot and use violence even more than what the 100.000 people did altogether? Or do you simply think it won't be such a decrease in both goods and people involved? There will be more trying to make a profit? Prices go through the roof for a couple of weeks until the market re-alignes. winky face
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 14:50:32 GMT
"You must be drug free for three months before you get treatment", Mats said. I think that's correct. And by then you don't need it ... 🤠 Basically, it's all about saving money. And all responsibility is put on an individual level. Responsibility isn't put on a personal level wholly tho is it? If it was they wouldn't be breaking the law, they're not responsible for the law. Edit - a lot of the Forces Veterans I know/have met that suffer from PTSD say the pharmaceutical products they're prescribed make them feel 'like a zombie' and induce suicidal thoughts. They've found cannabis to be their best option. If they can't afford or can't be bothered to get it legally should they break the law or run the risk of topping themselves thanks to pharmaceuticals? They're 'trying' to take responsibility. Personally I'd rather be illegally alive than legally dead 🤷 Of course. The PTSD sufferers take responsibility for themselves in your example. I just meant how "they" see it, the politicians. :"It's your own responsibility to not break the law." And I don't know what stats in an international comparison would say, but I would be surprised if more than 1% of the population here thought some single law within the whole law system we have is wrong, basically since they are ... the laws. They must be correct? The reliability within the population is huge, I'd say. I can see the three months rule he mentions in the video to be a contradiction. But I'd guess they see the drugs and not the PTSD as the main problem.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 19, 2024 14:53:41 GMT
Responsibility isn't put on a personal level wholly tho is it? If it was they wouldn't be breaking the law, they're not responsible for the law. Edit - a lot of the Forces Veterans I know/have met that suffer from PTSD say the pharmaceutical products they're prescribed make them feel 'like a zombie' and induce suicidal thoughts. They've found cannabis to be their best option. If they can't afford or can't be bothered to get it legally should they break the law or run the risk of topping themselves thanks to pharmaceuticals? They're 'trying' to take responsibility. Personally I'd rather be illegally alive than legally dead 🤷 Of course. The PTSD sufferers take responsibility for themselves in your example. I just meant how "they" see it, the politicians. :"It's your own responsibility to not break the law." And I don't know what stats in an international comparison would say, but I would be surprised if more than 1% of the population here thought some single law within the whole law system we have is wrong, basically since they are ... the laws. They must be correct? The reliability within the population is huge, I'd say. I can see the three months rule he mentions in the video to be a contradiction. But I'd guess they see the drugs and not the PTSD as the main problem. However, as explained on that video and by other experts in the field, it isn't the drugs that are causing the problem. Do you think 'they' would be able to successfully counter any of the 75 myths on the link I provided?
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 16:18:27 GMT
Of course. The PTSD sufferers take responsibility for themselves in your example. I just meant how "they" see it, the politicians. :"It's your own responsibility to not break the law." And I don't know what stats in an international comparison would say, but I would be surprised if more than 1% of the population here thought some single law within the whole law system we have is wrong, basically since they are ... the laws. They must be correct? The reliability within the population is huge, I'd say. I can see the three months rule he mentions in the video to be a contradiction. But I'd guess they see the drugs and not the PTSD as the main problem. However, as explained on that video and by other experts in the field, it isn't the drugs that are causing the problem. Do you think 'they' would be able to successfully counter any of the 75 myths on the link I provided? According to them, 75 out of 75. According to me, not.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 16:24:58 GMT
Swedish security police Säpo have taken a 40 year old terrorist, who has committed terror crimes in another European country. He speaks Russian.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 19, 2024 19:14:58 GMT
In Sweden young kids 12-14 years old do murder, attempt to murder or plan to murder individuals more than anywhere else, 93 last year.
If we add all the cases (several hundreds) where the police have stopped the attempts in time, little Sweden have more cases than a large part of Europe altogether!
Tv news studio In shock
Noone mentions drugs.
|
|