Sir, The public money spent supplying a long-term, serial offending drug addict £25,000 is but a spit in the ocean (The Courier, December 13).
What about welfare benefits, lawyers’ fees from legal aid (when obtained probably frequently), custody and court costs, to mention a few other public contributions?
My solution to drug addiction is, sadly, a harsh one. Addicts, especially those with criminal records, would be incarcerated in secure “detox” hostels/prisons on a “cold turkey” basis.
Your articles on drug dealing and addiction published a few months ago, demonstrated (post interview with two addicts, I believe) that it is more effective than methadone treatment.
The only alternative would be to legalise drugs.
But which? And to whom?
We are a nation of addicts smoking, alcohol, gambling, caffeine, sexual matters. Even some healthy pursuits can develop obsessive tendencies the gym, golf and other such hobbies.
Human nature and tolerance, however, has its limits. The balance must not be allowed to descend into the acceptance of criminality as the price to be paid.
All crime has a victim. Don’t let it be society.
A T Geddie. 68 Carleton Avenue, Glenrothes.
Wind turbine witch hunt
Sir, To the young woman who came to my door to complain about wind turbines, at present I am on chemotherapy which may explain my terse reply, but I must say that life is too precious to waste on suicide over such matters.
In January 2008 I was diagnosed with Systemic AL Amyloidosis (medics like such grand names) a very rare, strange and incurable diseases which is treated in the same way as bone marrow cancer Myeloma. According to the manufacturers of my current chemotherapy drug, Velcade, Myeloma is associated with exposure to radiation, petro-chemicals and dioxins.
There are some people who are propagating lies about wind turbines which I know are causing needless alarm and anxiety to others. I would like to reassure anyone alarmed at the prospect of a wind turbine that they stand considerably less chance of coming to real harm from a wind turbine than they will from nuclear power, waste to energy incineration, or even just living beside a major road.
Cancer is now the biggest cause of premature death in the industrialised world. Since there have been no major changes in the human genome this increase in cancer must be attributed to environmental and demographic factors.
I believe that the motive for propagating these lies about wind turbines are political. There is a concerted attempt to scapegoat renewable energy for high energy costs when they only account for 5% of our energy bills.
This witch hunt is being orchestrated in order to protect the memory of the beloved Margaret Thatcher and the reputation of the Conservative Party from the extreme censure they deserve as the creators of the profiteering energy companies.
However, it must be said that these energy companies are not the main cause of high energy costs. With a remarkable lack of reasonable foresight we have managed to use most of the oil and gas in the North Sea and will now have to rely on more expensive alternatives to satisfy our bloated energy needs.
Philip Roberts. Ascurry Mill, by Letham, Angus.
Doesn’t apply in this case
Sir, James Davie, like many others, quotes the Geneva Convention in relation to the recent court martial.
The Geneva Convention only applies when we are officially at war and it only applies if both sides are signatories. Neither criterion applies in this case.
He also says that it is observed by all civilised nations. The United States, to quote just one familiar example, is not a signatory to all of the convention’s protocols.
Laurie Richards. 100 Crail Road, Cellardyke.
Bias claim is ridiculous
Sir, I feel I must leap to Kieran Andrews’ defence. Since the independence debate began I have always thought he has displayed a fair and even hand.
He has not shied away from aiming (mildly) barbed comments at both sides. Similarly, the “Yes” and “No” campaigners have been afforded praise where it was warranted.
For Mr Andrews to be accused of bias is ridiculous. It would seem that honest political comment cannot be tolerated if it does not fit with the Nationalist agenda.
I would also like to echo Mr Parkin’s sentiments on the Sturgeon/Carmichael “debate”. Mr Carmichael could have, and should have, performed better but constant interruptions, shouting down and answering questions with questions is not debating.
It may appeal to those who shout the loudest but apart from avoiding the question posed it is, frankly, boorish.
What kind of society would we face post independence? I shudder to think.
Alan Shepherd. Forfar.
Pointless fine?
Sir, If the investigation into wrongdoing at the Royal Bank of Scotland finds that the bank is culpable what good will it be to impose a hefty fine on the bank? Is this not tantamount to putting a levy on taxpayers who own 80% of the bank?
A A Bullions. Leven.