PDA

View Full Version : Debate time!



Ness
May 19, 2005, 07:13 AM
What do you guys think about the legalization of drugs, or a certian one in particular?

Scrub
May 19, 2005, 08:03 AM
If they legalized it, less people would do it because then it wouldn't be all "rebellious" and "hardcore."

Ness
May 19, 2005, 12:54 PM
I agree. Not only that, but it would ruin all the smugglers and drug gangs that are fighting and killing each other--and innocent people--over who will control the drug flow. Also all the money we are using to keep drugs out of the US could be used for something better.

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 01:42 PM
Ness as far as I know legal things are still smuggled.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 02:11 PM
That doesn't even make sense, give me an example.

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 02:14 PM
On 2005-05-19 12:11, Ness wrote:
That doesn't even make sense, give me an example.



Televisions, audio equipment, cars, etc.

Shadowpawn
May 19, 2005, 02:16 PM
If drugs were legalized we would see the rebirth of the real Coke Cola.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 02:34 PM
On 2005-05-19 12:14, Solstis wrote:


On 2005-05-19 12:11, Ness wrote:
That doesn't even make sense, give me an example.



Televisions, audio equipment, cars, etc.



Why would they smuggle something if importing it is legal? Unless, you are talking about banned cars and stuff like that.

Nonetheless, my point still stands; gangs will no longer be able to make money off of them because they could be bought in stores for 1/5 the price.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ness on 2005-05-19 12:37 ]</font>

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 02:50 PM
There are various import taxes, stuff like that. Sometimes it would be cheaper.

I imagine any legalized drugs would be expensive or have massive taxes. They should too, I don't want coke running as free as the other coke.

So it would smuggled and illegally sold.

ABDUR101
May 19, 2005, 02:53 PM
Pfft. Ness even cigarettes are smuggled.

In Pennsylvania, cigarettes are rather expensive, like $5+ a pack. People go to Maryland and buy them in bulk, and then smuggle them into Pennsylvania as they are much cheaper.

There, simple enough? A complete legal item, smuggled because of the cost difference from one place to the next. The reasons for smuggling vary depending on who and what. >=

Ness
May 19, 2005, 03:40 PM
On 2005-05-19 12:53, ABDUR101 wrote:
Pfft. Ness even cigarettes are smuggled.

In Pennsylvania, cigarettes are rather expensive, like $5+ a pack. People go to Maryland and buy them in bulk, and then smuggle them into Pennsylvania as they are much cheaper.

There, simple enough? A complete legal item, smuggled because of the cost difference from one place to the next. The reasons for smuggling vary depending on who and what. >=



Ahhh, I understand that now.

But chances are we wouldn't put that much of a tax on them. I think that people should be allowed to do whatever they want to their bodies, even if it means putting drugs in them.

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 04:14 PM
On 2005-05-19 13:40, Ness wrote:


On 2005-05-19 12:53, ABDUR101 wrote:
Pfft. Ness even cigarettes are smuggled.

In Pennsylvania, cigarettes are rather expensive, like $5+ a pack. People go to Maryland and buy them in bulk, and then smuggle them into Pennsylvania as they are much cheaper.

There, simple enough? A complete legal item, smuggled because of the cost difference from one place to the next. The reasons for smuggling vary depending on who and what. >=



Ahhh, I understand that now.

But chances are we wouldn't put that much of a tax on them. I think that people should be allowed to do whatever they want to their bodies, even if it means putting drugs in them.



Though I'm usually against morality based legislation, I'm firmly for logic based legislation.

Sure, legalize pot, but please keep the cocaine, opium, ergot, and other crap out of the country.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 04:34 PM
I say let it all in. If people are foolsih enough to use that stuff, then let them.

dude3282
May 19, 2005, 04:47 PM
On 2005-05-19 14:34, Ness wrote:
I say let it all in. If people are foolsih enough to use that stuff, then let them.


I find that a bit inhumane. I'd like to think that we should care more about the well-being of others. Alas, I must be a romantic or something.



On 2005-05-19 06:03, GreyPhantasm wrote:
If they legalized it, less people would do it because then it wouldn't be all "rebellious" and "hardcore."


Then why do people abuse perfectly legal substances like alcohol? Because they like the buzz and because of the addiction factor, not as much the rebelliousness. Although I will agree that rebellion may be a primary factor, it's usually not the only factor.

Also, following your argument, it could be said that all laws should be abolished. If there weren't laws against stealing cars then people wouldn't do it because it just wouldn't be as cool and hardcore, right?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dude3282 on 2005-05-19 14:52 ]</font>

ABDUR101
May 19, 2005, 05:14 PM
Ness I think you even misunderstand that having drugs like cocaine and so on illegal is because of their natures. They aren't merely like pot that you can smoke afew times and be on your way, they are highly addictive, and easily overdosed on.

If a kid gets a pack of cigs from his parents room, not that big of a deal, even if a kid gets some pot from his parents, not a big deal, but when kids start OD'ing on cocaine that their parents bought, or the kids start getting addicted and heavy users because their parents are users, then you have a problem of epidemic proportions.

Also, passing a roach amongst a group of friends is one thing, passing an unsanitary needle is entirely different.

Use your head, you're not even looking at the longterm effects, nor how the problem would trickle through all the cracks and layers of society as a whole. For wanting a debate, you're not using your head in the slightest.

Deathscythealpha
May 19, 2005, 05:20 PM
Im not for the legalisation of any drugs. Because its not illegal people will do it less? Have you seen how much harm Alcohol Abuse does? Drug Abuse can be just as dangerous, if not more so, then Alcohol Abuse, and making this legal is only inviting a lot of upset and harm.

People will still get addicted, there will still be a lot of drug related crime (it may be sold in a shop but it still costs money for your next fix) and I just feel its not worth it.

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 05:42 PM
Ness, look at drunk drivers. It doesn't just affect the user. Hell, beer and such is legal too.

BOC
May 19, 2005, 06:21 PM
legalise drugs? not really a good idea.

lets put it like this, does anyone know any drug users/abusers who continualy use the stuff and are upstanding, successful human beings?

NO!

drugs destroy lives, families and communities and legalising it will not reduce the problem it would probably only increase the problem.

Know all those evil criminals who are illagally supplying the shit, killing one another and stuff over it? well if it was made legal, whats to stop them from attacking/killing/threating the legal suppliers, so they can still maintain their profits?

pot is not really THAT bad, its hardly like your shooting it up and turning into a smackhead, but it is still a dangerous drug! apparently, it does less physical harm to your body than alcohol or even normal ciggies, but its the mental damage it does.

one of my friends started smoking it really heavily. He became so paranoid he refused to leave his house, for anything or anyone. he lost so many friends because of it, includng me because i couldn't allow myself to watch him destroy himself. People who would visit his house would tell me that he was totally different. At the end of it he tried to kill himself.

course, he was smoking it almost daily, and maybe adopting an approach similar to holland concerning weed wouldn't too terrible, because lets face it, so many people smoke it these days, it may as well be legal. legal to smoke it (in certain places - special cafes/bars), legal to possess a certain quantity of it, but illegal to sell it or grow it.

it would be interesting to find out was a reformed drug addict would think about this issue.

PEACE!!!

Ness
May 19, 2005, 06:25 PM
@Abdur

I took all that into consideration, but you should also be aware that jsut because you are a drug addict doesn't mean you can't be a functional memeber of society. Sure there are several cases when drug addicts live on the streets, but there are several drug addicts that do good in school and go on to become successful people.

Also, if the kid gets his hand on any of his parent's drugs, it's the responsiblity of the parent's, not the government's. If they don't want their kids to use their drugs, then they should keep them where their kids can't get them.

As for passing needles, they know the risks, or should know the risks, so it's their choice if they decide to start.

It's not nice to insult people just because they disagree with you.

@D55

Well if they get behind the wheel while under the influence, we can punish them, just like we punish drunk drivers. It's not fair to reuin it for everyone just because some people are irresponsible.

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 06:35 PM
On 2005-05-19 16:25, Ness wrote:


@D55

Well if they get behind the wheel while under the influence, we can punish them, just like we punish drunk drivers. It's not fair to reuin it for everyone just because some people are irresponsible.




Well when your ruining the use of powerful mind altering substances I could care less. The bottom line is that if drugs were legalized I think deaths and injuries would go up, not down.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 06:38 PM
Some would go up and others would go down. Gang related deaths would go down and auto accident deaths would go up. However, I think the decrease in deaths will outweight the increase, not including overdoeses beccause they are the fault of the user (in most cases).

ABDUR101
May 19, 2005, 07:10 PM
The hell? So you're saying that gang related deaths would go down and auto-accident deaths would go up, and that sounds fine to you?

And don't try and tell me about being an addict doesn't make you unfunctional in society. Trust me, I've seen both spectrums, people fully capable of working while being stoned, and people who lose all track of their life.

It has nothing to do with going on and making something of oneself, I see enough welfare cases of people who have better educations than I do, and they are just lazy fucks because they don't care, and they don't even do drugs on a regular basis. You're making an arguement out of something that was never even brought up.

And it's funny to say it's the responsibility of the parent, but have you honestly seen a cocaine user thats heavy into it? A friend of mine has a brother that drove three hours on a highway to get to Philadelphia to get a fix, all while having a withdrawl-fit from cocaine. Entirely unsafe for anyone on the highway with him, and entirely unsafe for himself. So you're saying people like that who have kids need to take responsibility and teach their kids not to do it, or to keep it out of reach? People who have kids and shoot up hardcore lack responsibility in the first place. It's a double negative and makes no sense. It's people like that that the government enforces laws.

Overall, you're judging everything on a utopian, flawless society of do-gooders and people who are fully aware of the risks, when infact, society is anything but that.



It's not nice to insult people just because they disagree with you.

You're the one that wanted to debate, but in order for that to happen, you have to use your head. If you were offended by that, oh well.

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 07:18 PM
On 2005-05-19 16:38, Ness wrote:
Some would go up and others would go down. Gang related deaths would go down and auto accident deaths would go up. However, I think the decrease in deaths will outweight the increase, not including overdoeses beccause they are the fault of the user (in most cases).




Gang related deaths would not go down. Just because gangs couldn't fight over drugs, they would find something else to fight and kill over. That is just how people work.

Frankly we don't need 25% of the population walking around stoned or on withdrawl.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 09:17 PM
On 2005-05-19 17:10, ABDUR101 wrote:
The hell? So you're saying that gang related deaths would go down and auto-accident deaths would go up, and that sounds fine to you?


So you would rather have people killed in cold blood than a few more accidents every year?


And don't try and tell me about being an addict doesn't make you unfunctional in society. Trust me, I've seen both spectrums, people fully capable of working while being stoned, and people who lose all track of their life.

I never said it didn't make you unfunctional, I'm just saying that the street walking drug addict is just a stereotype.


It has nothing to do with going on and making something of oneself, I see enough welfare cases of people who have better educations than I do, and they are just lazy fucks because they don't care, and they don't even do drugs on a regular basis. You're making an arguement out of something that was never even brought up.

So are you. I never mentioned anything about welfare, education, or work ethnic.


And it's funny to say it's the responsibility of the parent, but have you honestly seen a cocaine user thats heavy into it? A friend of mine has a brother that drove three hours on a highway to get to Philadelphia to get a fix, all while having a withdrawl-fit from cocaine. Entirely unsafe for anyone on the highway with him, and entirely unsafe for himself. So you're saying people like that who have kids need to take responsibility and teach their kids not to do it, or to keep it out of reach?


Exactly, he was driving under the influence. He should be punished for something like that, but if he's doing it in his own home then let him. Also if cocaine was legal, he wouldn't ahve to drive three hours to get it.



People who have kids and shoot up hardcore lack responsibility in the first place. It's a double negative and makes no sense. It's people like that that the government enforces laws.

Then when drugs addicts neglect their kids, they can be punished for it, but that doesn't give anyone the right to make it illegal for everyone. I agree, however, that drug addicts should take it onto themselves not to have children.


Overall, you're judging everything on a utopian, flawless society of do-gooders and people who are fully aware of the risks, when infact, society is anything but that.

No I'm judging everything on a society where laws are made for reasons other than moral ones.


You're the one that wanted to debate, but in order for that to happen, you have to use your head. If you were offended by that, oh well.



I wasn't offended, I was just making a statement.


@D55

Your point is only partially correct. Sure the fighting won't stop over night, but eventually they will relaize that they ahve nothing to fight over. As fro 25%, where did you get that number?

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 09:28 PM
Ness... you have the idealistic view of someone that lacks "real world" experience.

I admit that I cannot formulate a well-backed arguement in this thread, and if I can't (considering the places and people I've seen/taken classes about), I doubt that you can.

Listen to D55 and Abdur. They know what they're talking about.

Look, legalized Morphine (even worse than Cocaine)? C'mon Ness. Look... do you really want someone slipping Cocaine into your drink?

I mean, it's legalized and all, so... y'know, it's your fault for leaving your drink unprotected.

Ness, do you really want a society based on the attainment of just another high? People won't be working for their families, some notion of an American dream, or any other reason than to get another fix. You think that you would be immune to the peer pressures of a steady flow of drugs? Accidental ingestion, even?

It only takes ONE time to become addicted. ONE slip-up. But, y'know, it's the addict's fault, right?

Hah!

Ness
May 19, 2005, 09:41 PM
On 2005-05-19 19:28, Solstis wrote:
Ness... you have the idealistic view of someone that lacks "real world" experience.


There are peltny of people who share my views that have "real world" experience.


I admit that I cannot formulate a well-backed arguement in this thread, and if I can't (considering the places and people I've seen/taken classes about), I doubt that you can.

Because we are so similar in skill and personality that you can make such judgements.


Listen to D55 and Abdur. They know what they're talking about.

I beg to differ.


Look, legalized Morphine (even worse than Cocaine)? C'mon Ness. Look... do you really want someone slipping Cocaine into your drink?

I mean, it's legalized and all, so... y'know, it's your fault for leaving your drink unprotected.

Drinks are spiked regardless so what's you point? Also spiking drinks is illegal even if drugs aren't involved.




Ness, do you really want a society based on the attainment of just another high? People won't be working for their families, some notion of an American dream, or any other reason than to get another fix. You think that you would be immune to the peer pressures of a steady flow of drugs? Accidental ingestion, even?


Because we all know that everyone everywhere will use drugs as soon as they are legalized and that you will never be able to go anywhere without being exposed to them. Nevermind the fact that it works for alcohol, cigarrettes, robotussin, and pain killers. Nevermind the fact that it's easy to throw a socail gathering without alcohol or cigarretes. nevermind the fact that not everyone drinks and smokes. Drugs are different! If drugs are legal everyone will use them and America the beautiful will become America the stoned!



It only takes ONE time to become addicted. ONE slip-up. But, y'know, it's the addict's fault, right?




I never said that.

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 09:47 PM
Nevermind the fact that it works for alcohol, cigarrettes, robotussin, and pain killers.

Hahahahah!

You're talking about the legalization of every sort of drug.

LSD, Cocaine, Morpine (except for a few cases), Heroin, X, etc are a tad more harmful and addictive. Painkillers are generally deriatives of Morphine (such as Codine) and are already bad enough (Rush Limbaugh, anyone?).

I'm not sure how these things are going to be sold, but I laugh at the prospect of going to the doctor's office to refill my LSD perscription. Over the counter availability, though not EVERYONE will use it, would be devastating for the first few months.

To enact whatever plans you have, you'd need an Authoritarian government with the power to regulate the usage in everyday life. Our current system lacks the power to efficiently curb illegal use of the prospectively legalized drugs.

So no, don't legalize the darn things. It's not like it would be "Hey! They're legal now. Man, it's not cool anymore!"

More like: "Hey! They're legal. Y'know, I've always wanted to see the world in 4 dimensions."

Ness
May 19, 2005, 09:53 PM
Hahahahah!

You're talking about the legalization of every sort of drug.

LSD, Cocaine, Morpine (except for a few cases), Heroin, X, etc are a tad more harmful and addictive. Painkillers are generally deriatives of Morphine (such as Codine) and are already bad enough (Rush Limbaugh, anyone?).

I know they are much more harmful, but the point I'm making is that people should be allowed to cause harm to themselves.


I'm not sure how these things are going to be sold, but I laugh at the prospect of going to the doctor's office to refill my LSD perscription. Over the counter availability, though not EVERYONE will use it, would be devastating for the first few months.

They would probably be sold at stores like Walmart or Eckerd's.


To enact whatever plans you have, you'd need an Authoritarian government with the power to regulate the usage in everyday life. Our current system lacks the power to efficiently curb illegal use of the prospectively legalized drugs.

Not true. We enforce the laws when currently legalized durgs are used illegally. If minors are cuaght using cigarrettes, then they are punsihed for it. Likewise, if minors are caught using pot or LSD, they can be prosecuted.




So no, don't legalize the darn things. It's not like it would be "Hey! They're legal now. Man, it's not cool anymore!"

More like: "Hey! They're legal. Y'know, I've always wanted to see the world in 4 dimensions."



My point is that he should be allowed to "see the world in 4 dimensions" if he wants too. We have no right to stop him.

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 10:02 PM
Have you considered the possible social havok this would cause in the countries where the drugs are produced?

Who would make the stuff? The heavily armed cartels? The weak Latin American governments? Laboratories?

It is doubtful that the cartels would stop pushing their wares after legalization, and would probably just lower their prices.

Either that, or we'll be hiring 16 year olds to tend to Coca plantations. Oooh... wait... Florida would be the only place that the plant could grow, and only during the summer seasons. Not to mention that it takes a while to grow.

Ergot and Poppy would probably be the only "easily" obtained supplies of hallucinogens. Ergot (LSD) easily obtained from Europe, and Poppy from Afganistan, or similar locations.

Also... Morpine is a deriative of LSD, not Cocaine (I think). Oops. Er... kinda wish that I had my notes with me.

Jehosaphaty
May 19, 2005, 10:03 PM
So I read through this, and what I seemed to glean from it is that we should legalize drugs because we can. We should be allowed to do whatever we want in regards to drugs whether it be for good or ill. That is asking for waay more responsibility than most of society could handle, especially given the addictive nature of such drugs.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jehosaphaty on 2005-05-19 20:06 ]</font>

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 10:05 PM
On 2005-05-19 20:03, Jehosaphaty wrote:
So I read through this, and what I seemed to glean from it is that we should legalize drugs because we can. We should be allowed to do whatever we want in regards to drugs whether it be for good or ill. That is asking for waay more responsibility than most of society could handle, especially given the addictive nature of such drugs.



Thank you.

Society has a hard time absorbing the concept of Homosexuality, broadcasted nudity, offensive language, and many other stupid little things, much less physiologically addictive substances.

Jehosaphaty
May 19, 2005, 10:08 PM
On 2005-05-19 20:05, Solstis wrote:
Society has a hard time absorbing the concept of Homosexuality, broadcasted nudity, offensive language, and many other stupid little things, much less physiologically addictive substances.



Welcome, and heartily agreed as well.



No I'm judging everything on a society where laws are made for reasons other than moral ones.


My recomendations is: try reading Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and then come back and talk about laws made in reason vs. morality.

ABDUR101
May 19, 2005, 10:15 PM
Come on now guys, we're in america, we should be able to just shoot up on any given sunday, and if it gets out of our systems in time, a second dose before monday morning rolls around.


...unless you can handle it and still operate heavy machinery, then it's ok. God forbid you goto work on monday without your pick-me up dose of coke and speed.

Oh how the factory workers will flourish on that. Sure, their life expectency will go down, and they'll prolly be off work more than at due to attributed health problems, but by god, the time they do spend at work, their quotas will GLEEM!

*edit*
oh wait, just got a memo. Bob from second shift OD'd in the bathroom, BOOYA! I was next in line for his job.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ABDUR101 on 2005-05-19 20:17 ]</font>

Ness
May 19, 2005, 10:16 PM
On 2005-05-19 20:02, Solstis wrote:
Have you considered the possible social havok this would cause in the countries where the drugs are produced?

Who would make the stuff? The heavily armed cartels? The weak Latin American governments? Laboratories?

It is doubtful that the cartels would stop pushing their wares after legalization, and would probably just lower their prices.

Either that, or we'll be hiring 16 year olds to tend to Coca plantations. Oooh... wait... Florida would be the only place that the plant could grow, and only during the summer seasons. Not to mention that it takes a while to grow.

Ergot and Poppy would probably be the only "easily" obtained supplies of hallucinogens. Ergot (LSD) easily obtained from Europe, and Poppy from Afganistan, or similar locations.

Also... Morpine is a deriative of LSD, not Cocaine (I think). Oops. Er... kinda wish that I had my notes with me.



Most of the drug wars in South and Central America are caused because two sides are fighting to get drugs into the US. If we legalized them, then we could deal with both of them.

@Jeo

I have read Brave New World, and there are several key differences. In that society, drug use is not only legal, but encouraged. In fact, people are hypnotized into thinking they need it. In our society, however, such things are beyond the power of the government.

Solstis
May 19, 2005, 10:23 PM
On 2005-05-19 20:16, Ness wrote:


On 2005-05-19 20:02, Solstis wrote:
Have you considered the possible social havok this would cause in the countries where the drugs are produced?

Who would make the stuff? The heavily armed cartels? The weak Latin American governments? Laboratories?

It is doubtful that the cartels would stop pushing their wares after legalization, and would probably just lower their prices.

Either that, or we'll be hiring 16 year olds to tend to Coca plantations. Oooh... wait... Florida would be the only place that the plant could grow, and only during the summer seasons. Not to mention that it takes a while to grow.

Ergot and Poppy would probably be the only "easily" obtained supplies of hallucinogens. Ergot (LSD) easily obtained from Europe, and Poppy from Afganistan, or similar locations.

Also... Morpine is a deriative of LSD, not Cocaine (I think). Oops. Er... kinda wish that I had my notes with me.



Most of the drug wars in South and Central America are caused because two sides are fighting to get drugs into the US. If we legalized them, then we could deal with both of them.

@Jeo

I have read Brave New World, and there are several key differences. In that society, drug use is not only legal, but encouraged. In fact, people are hypnotized into thinking they need it. In our society, however, such things are beyond the power of the government.



You are either very bored, or very naive. Such things are beyond the power of the government indeed.

Such as the mass legalization of currently illegal substances. You have provided no practical means of doing it, and so, I leave this thread until you do so.

Ness
May 19, 2005, 10:32 PM
On 2005-05-19 20:23, Solstis wrote:

You are either very bored, or very naive. Such things are beyond the power of the government indeed.


I meant deal as in trade, not as in go beat them up. That would be stupid.




Such as the mass legalization of currently illegal substances. You have provided no practical means of doing it, and so, I leave this thread until you do so.



Pass laws that legalize then, but impose regualtions on them like we already do with cigarretes and beer. Sure they may require a little more regualtion and some will require mroe regulation that others, but making them illegal is not the answer.

Dangerous55
May 19, 2005, 11:26 PM
On 2005-05-19 19:17, Ness wrote:



@D55

Your point is only partially correct. Sure the fighting won't stop over night, but eventually they will relaize that they ahve nothing to fight over. As fro 25%, where did you get that number?



No, the point is they do have stuff to fight over. It just isn't coke or LSD or whatever the thing is now. It will change, guns will be smuggled, computers, friggin' stem cells. Drugs are not the only thing gangs do.


I came up with that number, I imagine if every single drug was legalized then the amount of people who would do or try them would go up. Twenty five, thirty, fifteen doesn't matter.


What about date rape drugs? Hell I can get anyone high on LSD if it flows from a tap.

navci
May 20, 2005, 01:49 AM
On 2005-05-19 20:05, Solstis wrote:


On 2005-05-19 20:03, Jehosaphaty wrote:
So I read through this, and what I seemed to glean from it is that we should legalize drugs because we can. We should be allowed to do whatever we want in regards to drugs whether it be for good or ill. That is asking for waay more responsibility than most of society could handle, especially given the addictive nature of such drugs.



Thank you.

Society has a hard time absorbing the concept of Homosexuality, broadcasted nudity, offensive language, and many other stupid little things, much less physiologically addictive substances.



Point and point.
Physiologically speaking, the long term effect of something like cocaine on your vital organs, is not as bad as alcohol or nicotine. When I first learn about that in uni I thought to myself what an outrageous thing that cigarettes and alcohol are legal while cocaine is not. Stupid government and their stupid .. whatever!

Sure. Psychoactive drugs doesn't really do permanent harm to a lot of organs. Your lungs will still be functioning, your liver, your brain is technically functioning, yes. However, it messes up your brain chemistry, and do you have any idea how much influence your brain has on your body? You can have a perfectly healthy lung but if your brain disagree with you, you WILL feel like that you have no lungs!

My point is. There are different degree that your body can be affected by drugs, depending on the degree of its psychoactiveness. Majority of these illegal psychoactive drugs do things to you that will endanger you, as well as others around you, in ways that you cannot imagine in your normal state of mind.
You are free to go kill yourself in strange ways. Leave the others out of it.

Yes.

HAYABUSA-FMW-
May 20, 2005, 01:52 AM
Opinion:
I would not leave the house if drugs(any) were legalized, and the rate of death by car accidents, goes up(substantially, at all, whatever) due to it.

This is not an ideal society for me.

That would be terrible.

Save people(drug dealers/gangs) from dying in cold blood(over drugs) but endanger the entire population by a mass of people who are completely legal in using drugs, then driving on the roads?!!

(then here's where you say "driving under the influence will still be illegal," except that using drugs is, and people should and will do whatever they want to themselves. Also, "they should be able to harm themselves at any and all costs, but harming others is out of the picture").

There's many people out there harming themselves and without reprucussions already. They do get to do whatever they want to themselves. You're right in saying we can't police morals, values, and life decisions. We can police crime, and create laws to limit crimes and punish the offenders/lawbreakers.

Go ahead, debate what my opinion is on what was said/brought up here. There's nothing wrong with me forming an opinion. Cross checking my words("I-meaning you-didn't say that or bring that up", etc.)

I know I'm fueling your fire. I don't care what you think of my opinion. I don't care if I brought up valid points to the discussion/debate/arguement or not.

The point is I completely disagree, and I am allowed to do so.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HAYABUSA-FMW- on 2005-05-19 23:55 ]</font>

Deathscythealpha
May 20, 2005, 04:50 AM
On 2005-05-19 19:17, Ness wrote:


On 2005-05-19 17:10, ABDUR101 wrote:
The hell? So you're saying that gang related deaths would go down and auto-accident deaths would go up, and that sounds fine to you?


So you would rather have people killed in cold blood than a few more accidents every year?


Ness, im having a hard time imagining that you would say that! So its fine for an innocent 10 year old child to get hit by a car and die because a foolish 20 something thought "Its only one last drag, it wont matter", or because some moronic gang member doesnt get shot for peddaling his dangerous wares?

What would you think if one of you family members was suddenly run down by someone under the influence of drugs? "Well least it wasnt in cold blood"? It seems more cold blooded to kill a random innocent person then someone who is up to several illegal activities.

Im really hoping some of these comments come from you not thinking out all the possible consequences.

Ness
May 20, 2005, 06:54 AM
On 2005-05-20 02:50, Deathscythealpha wrote:

Ness, im having a hard time imagining that you would say that! So its fine for an innocent 10 year old child to get hit by a car and die because a foolish 20 something thought "Its only one last drag, it wont matter", or because some moronic gang member doesnt get shot for peddaling his dangerous wares?

What would you think if one of you family members was suddenly run down by someone under the influence of drugs? "Well least it wasnt in cold blood"? It seems more cold blooded to kill a random innocent person then someone who is up to several illegal activities.

Im really hoping some of these comments come from you not thinking out all the possible consequences.



Well I guess my comment was a bit stupid. I guess I should have explained it better. What I was getting at wat that i don't think they should be made illegeal just because a few people screw up. If they don't make all durgs legal then they should at least make pot legal.

Jehosaphaty
May 20, 2005, 07:44 AM
On 2005-05-19 20:16, Ness wrote:
@Jeo

I have read Brave New World, and there are several key differences. In that society, drug use is not only legal, but encouraged. In fact, people are hypnotized into thinking they need it. In our society, however, such things are beyond the power of the government.



You're well-read then. However, I would think that seeing a society where drug use is encouraged would change your opinion of the 'goodness' of making drugs legal. In Brave New World, drugs desensitze (sp?) the mind and you get people who flee to their dream worlds when situations become to harsh for them (which happens oh so often). Granted it is programmed into their minds to think they need these drugs, but their are the few who see beyond their programmed preconceptions...I still have yet to see how legalizing drugs would benefit society in any form.

trypticon
May 20, 2005, 12:47 PM
On 2005-05-20 04:54, Ness wrote:

Well I guess my comment was a bit stupid. If they don't make all durgs legal then they should at least make pot legal.



You entire argument is stupid. You are simply demonstrating that you want your new hobby to be legalized so you can get other people in on it. This thread you made was made for the sole purpose of getting permission from people you don't even know to continue in your new addiction.

Seek a 12 step program, you've made yourself perfectly clear here without coming right out and admitting you are a user.

Dangerous55
May 20, 2005, 01:16 PM
On 2005-05-20 10:47, trypticon wrote:


You entire argument is stupid. You are simply demonstrating that you want your new hobby to be legalized so you can get other people in on it. This thread you made was made for the sole purpose of getting permission from people you don't even know to continue in your new addiction.

Seek a 12 step program, you've made yourself perfectly clear here without coming right out and admitting you are a user.







Hahahaha, this guy is awesome.


I heart you.

Ness
May 20, 2005, 01:25 PM
On 2005-05-20 10:47, trypticon wrote:

You entire argument is stupid. You are simply demonstrating that you want your new hobby to be legalized so you can get other people in on it. This thread you made was made for the sole purpose of getting permission from people you don't even know to continue in your new addiction.

Seek a 12 step program, you've made yourself perfectly clear here without coming right out and admitting you are a user.


Saying someone does drugs jsut because they support their legalization is just like saying someone is a homosexaual because they support gay marriage. it sounds to me like you are trying to invalidate my arugment by tkaing a shot at me personally. That's one of the fallacies of arguing. If you want to debate with me then that's fine, but flaming is unnecessary. I expected better from you, Tryp.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ness on 2005-05-20 12:16 ]</font>

Dangerous55
May 20, 2005, 02:39 PM
On 2005-05-20 11:25, Ness wrote:

I expected better from you, Tryp.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ness on 2005-05-20 12:16 ]</font>



I thought it was funny enough. Granted it wasnt laugh out loud funny, but still, good enough.


http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

ABDUR101
May 20, 2005, 03:17 PM
You know the vibe I'm getting from this thread? I'm getting the vibe that this is thread was made only to debate and argue, and no intention to put any thought into the entire concept at hand is being made.

If you want to debate an issue, have some foresight and pre-thought out ideas prepared, instead of merely bringing up a topic and trying to argue on one side without having anything to back up what you're saying than "It should be legal because people should be able to do whatever they want".

Thats a sweeping statement to make, far too general in any respect, and it goes on the pretense that society is utopian and there are no rule breakers, where everyone understands the full extent of cause and effect. Obviously not the case.

Yeah, it'd be nice if people were mature and considerate enough to do whatever they wanted, where every decision and action was weighed heavily to impact those around them in the slightest way possible, but thats not society, and your entire arguement is nullified because of it.

Reality: Laws are made to govern those who can't govern themselves.

Might as well get back to us when everyone and everything is perfect.

Dangerous55
May 20, 2005, 04:06 PM
On 2005-05-20 13:17, ABDUR101 wrote:
You know the vibe I'm getting from this thread? I'm getting the vibe that this is thread was made only to debate and argue, and no intention to put any thought into the entire concept at hand is being made.

If you want to debate an issue, have some foresight and pre-thought out ideas prepared, instead of merely bringing up a topic and trying to argue on one side without having anything to back up what you're saying than "It should be legal because people should be able to do whatever they want".

Thats a sweeping statement to make, far too general in any respect, and it goes on the pretense that society is utopian and there are no rule breakers, where everyone understands the full extent of cause and effect. Obviously not the case.

Yeah, it'd be nice if people were mature and considerate enough to do whatever they wanted, where every decision and action was weighed heavily to impact those around them in the slightest way possible, but thats not society, and your entire arguement is nullified because of it.

Reality: Laws are made to govern those who can't govern themselves.

Might as well get back to us when everyone and everything is perfect.




That was a fine 10000th post.

Scrub
May 20, 2005, 04:54 PM
I UNLEASH MY DOGS OF HELL UPON THIS THREAD.

FKL, ATTACK!!!!!

Solstis
May 20, 2005, 05:02 PM
http://www.maui.net/~discord/eris/pics/pat078.jpg

navci
May 21, 2005, 12:48 AM
lol, internet

dude3282
May 21, 2005, 05:38 AM
On 2005-05-20 14:06, Dangerous55 wrote:

That was a fine 10000th post.



Technically, he was at 10004 or something, then he moved this to FKL, bumping it back down to 10000. But I agree - go Abdur.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dude3282 on 2005-05-21 03:38 ]</font>