Do not argue with an idiot

Of course this statement rather narrows the field for having an argument but I don’t suppose that is a bad thing. Perhaps it could be the key to a masterplan for world peace?

The original quote comes from that fabulously intelligent and witty man Samuel Clemens (or Mark Twain as he was more commonly known) although some sources credit George Carlin who only revived it in his own paraphrased version. The full original quote is actually “Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

And it’s pretty hard to argue with such blindingly obvious logic really. However we all try to argue with idiots from time to time because, let’s be honest, idiots are among the most frustrating creatures ever to walk upright. They look like Homo sapiens but are really a separate species which I shall call homo cretinus.

None of this would matter if they were as rare as Mountain Gorillas or Orang-utans (or Dodos), but the fact is, they are not. As George Carlin once said, “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” Likewise it is a numbers game with idiots and they are gaining the upper hand in terms of numbers. This is not surprising considering that idiots breed like rabbits without any thought for how they can support or nurture their retarded offspring and thus the gene pool gets further weakened and the imbalance between the imbalanced and the rest of us widens rather like the gap between the rich and the poor. Which is actually an appropriate analogy considering how inbred and stupid so many rich people are.

So who are some of these idiots to whom I refer THIS week?

Well I’d say the man with the silliest hairdo in our Parliament would be a good ‘starter for ten’ in these stakes. Peter Dung (or should I say Peter Dunce) has had to be beaten over the hair with a psychotic moggie before he agreed to make some recommendations to the Ministry of Health “to look at avoiding animal testing wherever possible” in relation to testing party pills.

Now to be fair (or at least legally blonde), Mr Dunce is not the only noo-noo here; the micro-brain who compiled the prosaically entitled report Regulations governing the control of novel psychoactive drugs defining parameters associated with toxicity. Although this report was almost certainly commissioned by Dunce and his cronies, the un-named idiot or possibly a committee of idiots) certainly wrote it.

The reason for the report is that Dunce is getting worn out from trying to prove how unsafe all the party pills and synthetic marijuana substitutes are. As things stand at the moment it is up to the Government rather than the MOH to prove how dangerous these combinations of chems are because they are considered novel psychoactive drugs rather than clinical pharmaceuticals. This has become a burdensome process for the man with the pointy hat because he has decided to be such a nob about it and throw out ridiculous statements he was never going to be able to follow up.

The biggest problem for people like Dunce is that they are trying to prohibit substances that people like to take for fun. History tells us that such prohibitions never work and actually cause more harm than good by ensuring the substances that are prohibited immediately fall into the hands of criminal gangs and everyone except those gangs and the lawyers (who always benefit no matter what the issue) are the losers.

When Pompadour Pete told the party pill and synthetic dak manufacturers he would outlaw their products he laid down a challenge and these backyard chemists are simply changing formulae faster than he can keep up with. Hence the masterplan to draft up new regulations specifically for these substances and put the burden of proof back upon manufacturers.

Now that might sound like a good idea but I believe it is fatally flawed for a number of reasons. To start with, why would you entrust such testing to someone who has everything to gain by a positive outcome and nothing to gain by a negative one? Surely this is like asking the wolves to look after the sheep.

Now supposing the manufacturers actually played this with a straight bat (if not a straight face), how are they to do it? Well it seems the recommended method in this report is for them to conduct the LD50 test – on animals. For those who don’t know; the LD50 test is a test that involves administering the dose required to kill half the members of a tested population after a specified test duration. In other words at least half of those animals tested will be killed by the test and the rest will simply suffer in varying degrees according to the toxicity and specific effects of the substance being tested.

I would have thought that was bad enough in itself, but just when you think they are done (Dunne) the idiots baffle you with even more evidence of their idiocy. Taking into account these measures are being considered to test party pills or novel psychoactive drugs if you prefer, consider this quote from the Minister of Stupid Measures:

The Government is committed to minimal use of animal testing, but the hard truth is that scientifically, animal testing is unavoidable to prove that products are safe for human beings. It is an unpleasant but necessary reality."

Now just exactly how can one extrapolate the effects of a novel psychoactive drug on a dog into how they will affect a human being? Does the dog fill out a questionnaire afterwards and list all the side effects he experienced? Did the dog have suicidal thoughts? Did he want to rape or murder or did he experience impotence or get headaches? How the fuck will we know. The idea like the dog is barking.

There is an irony in all of this just as the guys from Switched on gardener are contemplating a spell in the big hoose for trying to make an honest living out of a trade the Government would rather see in the hands of criminals. You see if plants like cannabis sativa were legal nobody would be bothering whipping up a cocktail of toxicity in their back shed and there would be no need for people like Dunce to spend half of his time in Parliament drafting regulations that will be redundant by the time they become enacted.

But you can’t successfully argue with an idiot.