1000's die each yr in Africa because of DDT bans ...
... where mosquito populations would otherwise be managed
they MIGHT one day die from cancer, but at least the lived longer to get cancer
Here we go again, it's only a matter of time
- Thread starter RPMDAD
- Start date
1000's die each yr in Africa because of DDT bans ...
... where mosquito populations would otherwise be managed
they MIGHT one day die from cancer, but at least the lived longer to get cancer
Larry Gude
Strung Out
1000's die each yr in Africa because of DDT bans ...
... where mosquito populations would otherwise be managed
they MIGHT one day die from cancer, but at least the lived longer to get cancer
Not a complete picture. DDT was not, is not a silver bullet. Skeeters do develop resistance so, from that standpoint, it makes sense to have ended it's use as we've found rotations of chemicals to do the job while reducing the risk of DDT.
while I don't believe in a permanent welfare system, Gov should not have replaced churches for taking care of the poor ....
do what you want - drugs, stick a .38 in your mouth and pull the trigger .... if you want public assistance, you will be drug free ...
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
And people don't die from direct ties to Nicotine?
People die from all sorts of things, every day. On a much grander scale than drugs (Including "legal" drugs such as alcohol and nicotine).
You rant a rave about people buying what the govt. says about nictonie because you have/had a vested interest in it. Now you're repeating anti-drug lines ad nauseum probably because you feel some druggie who broke in to your house. I get it, but your reasoning is way off, even on a fundamental level.
Really, why is it so hard to disassociate nicotine from smoking? Do some research, please. Nicotine in its purest form is highly toxic. However when smaller doses are used it can have great benefits. There are several studies that show it can help prevent many psychological disorders, it works as a natural anti-depressant with far less side effects of pharma grade anti depressants. It has also been show to help expand and regrow damaged blood vessels. The nicotine is not what kills people, the cocktail of chemicals that tobacco is treat with are what causes the major problems. Also the nicotine used in ejuice is 9 times out of 10 extracted naturally from fruits and vegetables.
Why do people automatically resort to drugs when vaping comes up? I see it in comments on news articles, I have heard it in the public and it is sad. To associate something with drugs, because they do not understand it is just ignorant. I have no problems with legalizing pot, go smoke your self to the point of stupid I dont care. Right now the entire vaping community is under a microscope with the FDA, any bad press does nothing to help us in the long run.
kwillia
n/a
Chris, I'm with you on your stance only if the court system would stop entertaining the excuse of "not being in my right mind when I broke the law because I was on drugs". If someone choses to go the path of drugs they are also chosing to face the consequences of what happens short and long term from being on drugs. That means we let them go to and stay in jail for crimes they commit and we let them die broke and broken in a gutter of that's the end result of their addiction. If they have family that wants to support them to keep them from commiting the crimes and/or dying homeless in a gutter than so be it, but don't expect the county, state or federal government to subsidize the dependency.
People die from all sorts of things, every day. On a much grander scale than drugs (Including "legal" drugs such as alcohol and nicotine).
You rant a rave about people buying what the govt. says about nicotine because you have/had a vested interest in it. Now you're repeating anti-drug lines ad nauseum probably because you feel some druggie who broke in to your house. I get it, but your reasoning is way off, even on a fundamental level.
I'm pro-freedom. Freedom to choose what you put in your body. We have laws against robbery, and break-ins. Keeping drugs illegal has not curbed that, but what is has done is locked up and entire generation of people (mostly non-violent people), at the immense expense of tax payers.
So, while you want to argue that some people will become "dependent on Uncle Sugar" from drugs (while ignoring those same folks doing it now with alcohol) on top of the money we spend on this "war on drugs", I argue that money will be saved, and it should be treated like a health issue. Much like Portugal has done.
I'm sure the Mexican cartels agree with you though.
You know nothing about me, and my record is spotless. Please do not assume that because I advocate an end to this worthless war on drugs (that hasn't accomplished a damned thing) that I'm some drug addict. I work my ass off for what I have. I pay my taxes, and I'm a productive member of society.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Except doing drug tests is expensive (not to mention being struck down by a federal judge). In FL, when the law was in effect, only 2.6% of people tested positive and it cost FL taxpayers $113,037 for reimbursements of the cost of the test, regardless of whether they passed it or not. And then, they had to pay out just shy of $595,000 in retroactive benefits to families who were initially denied welfare because they either failed the test or refused to take it, plus pay for staff and administrative costs for the drug-testing program, AND pay the $400,000 legal fees to defend the policy against court challenges.
That's just FL. In Missouri they spent $493,000 on drug testing for the 2012 fiscal year. It received 32,511 welfare applications and referred 636 for drug testing. Only 20 came back positive, although nearly 200 refused to comply. But even if all 200 were drug users, that still comes to more than $2,200 per positive result, which is more expensive than the median benefit in the state.
Minnesota reported their testing scheme as a flop.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/235888681.html
So, do you want an overhauled welfare system that is sure to get even more bloated?
Actually, I was going to post a thread on (sort-of) this same subject here shortly.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
I have no problem with vaping or smoking, and for the record I vape, and even smoke on occasion. Point is, that's my right.
This isn't about resorting to the drug argument. It's about Vrai's fundamental argument and her rant that literally could be made about every banned substance with the change of a few words.
Why is ok to argue that vaping doesn't deserve the same level of scrutiny that marijuana (or other drugs) get?
No doubt. You commit a crime (geardless if you're on a substance) you pay the price. I see no problem with that (though I don't think I've ever heard of drug use as an excuse, and it working
)I'm not advocating my tax dollars to pay for the drugs themselves (the addicts will get them anyway), but I would make the argument that I'd rather see my tax dollars used on the war on drugs be used to pay for the health aspect of it. Unfortunately I have intimate knowledge of this county's heroin problem and personally know someone serving time right now for heroin (not that I enjoy having that connection), but they literally have nothing to help these people that are in recovery when they get out of jail. The jail send them to the health department, which we all know is lacking in their ability to get funding or do their duty.
I'd like to follow Portugal's model of decriminalizing all drugs, and if you get popped, you go in front of a panel of experts. Doctor, judge, physchologist, etc. and they determine if you have a problem and need help, or if you should pay a fine. The money they saved allowed them to provide addicts with the help they need, including things like clean "utensils". I know it sounds crazy, but heroin addicts in particular were sharing needles and spreading HIV big time. Of course most people will simply say "let them die off", but that's more an indication of where we are as a society.
Last edited:
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
I simply have a hard time believing that if drugs, lets say Crack Cocaine, becomes legal; people will start free basing simply because they can.
Will you find a few people if you look hard enough, sure, but a majority of people will keep going about their life.
Of course we could argue the real addiction rate of these drugs, the "meth mouth" ads, and the overall lies of D.A.R.E and other prevention programs.
Will you find a few people if you look hard enough, sure, but a majority of people will keep going about their life.
Of course we could argue the real addiction rate of these drugs, the "meth mouth" ads, and the overall lies of D.A.R.E and other prevention programs.
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
Every banned substance? So vaping can be equated to cocaine? Heroine? Crystal Meth? Comparing something that causes very little to no harm to something to creates a major biological dependency and destroys organs is not a good comparison. I see the point you are trying to make, however saying that vaping deserves similar scrutiny to marijuana is ignorant. I know pot has some beneficial factors as well, but equating the two still gives the stigma that people who vape are drug users.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Again, I'm not comparing substances. I'm comparing ARGUMENTS, and arguments alone.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Excellent points!
I'm in the greenhouse business. We grow beauty and food. Yet, the public thinks, greenhouses gases, that we produce DEATH. And the number one gas that comes out of a greenhouse???
Anyone? Bueller?
AIR!!!!!!!
Well, that would free up all the police so they can continue to arrest moms who let their kids walk to and play in the neighborhood playground unsupervised. More jail space for them too.
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
Clean, fresh air.
More CO2 should be a good thing, we should have thriving forests and plant life all over the planet based on the doomsday premise that the climate change folk proclaim. However it is the other gases that also "contribute" that they do not focus on. I want to say I read an article awhile back that said that many of the stations used to measure CO2 concentration were purposely placed in areas to attain higher concentrations.
So where were you fight the power types when they were banning smoking and jacking up the tax on cigarettes? I didn't see a huge crowd of stoners and fatsos crying about government abuse of power then. Too busy getting high and stuffing your face with snack cakes?
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
Doing what I am now, eating snack cakes and bitching about the situation at hand. Also how did you know I was a fatty?
Honestly, I sent my letters to my senator and other local government who are supposed to speak on my behalf. Made phone calls and attended a few gatherings to protest. Same thing I did with the gun control debacle. In the big scheme of things, slight regulation of the e cig market wont be bad. The taxes they want to impose are what I fear will decimate the industry. It will put some juice manufacturers out of business, it will hinder others from putting the effort forward to produce a better product, and it will make it just as costly as analog cigs. I would like no government intervention, however knowing how people are these days, that cannot happen.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
I've posted a few stories on them. (ok, at least 1 story
)But there's always the internet.
http://reason.com/archives/2013/08/28/the-clueless-crusade-to-ban-e-cigarettes
One must wonder though....is this really about "safety" or is it the big tobacco company lobbyists? Same things goes for marijuana legalization. One must wonder if these polticians are really that out of touch, or are they being feed lines from pharmaceutical companies?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
EXACTLY!!!! CO2; Death gas!!!!! That's like saying food is bad for you. Or air...
There is NO larger indictment of public education than the twin failures of a, basic science, including photosynthesis and basic understanding of the scientific method and b, uh, well, whatever class we should have taken that covered logic and reasoning.
The very core of the man made global cool warming change cult is this "The science is settled!" and that should, reflexively, be laughed at and understood to be the embodiment of Chicken Little meets Peter and the Wolf.
The fact remains that the majority of citizens in this country voted for the people who are enacting these laws, both on a local and a federal level. They wanted this and the sane folks like me were outvoted.
So sit in it. I'm totally down with taking away your cakes and pies, and if you think I'm going to vote to legalize your medical marijuana, you better think again. You *should* have to suffer for your stupid voting decisions.
So sit in it. I'm totally down with taking away your cakes and pies, and if you think I'm going to vote to legalize your medical marijuana, you better think again. You *should* have to suffer for your stupid voting decisions.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Only 57.5% of voters turned out in 2012.
I agree though. We get the govt. we vote for.
Reality is, most Americans would rather watch Keeping up with the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo while updating the Facebook status than be bothered by watching the news (as if that's even a good thing) or doing some research. Most Americans allow a simple letter to determine who they are voting for (R) or (D). Most Americans focus on 1 or 2 core issues from a candidate rather than what may be best for the country, state, county, etc as a whole.
Most Americans will say they don't want govt. controlling their lives when it comes to something they agree with. Then turn around and say the govt. should control the lives of people whom they don't agree with. Gay marriage, drugs, smoking, health care, etc.