Legalize drugs?
- Thread starter Betty
- Start date
Re: Huh?
Betty, you might want to do a little reading about Prohibition and the other countries that have tried legalization of hard drugs. Education is a good thing. It's fine to have your opinions but they would hold more weight if there was some fact to back it up.
Yes, during Prohibition there were a lot of gang-related deaths - however most of those deaths were people who were in the business, not innocent citizens. That's a fact - look it up. Today we have a lot of drug-related deaths. But again, the vast majority of those deaths are people who are in the business of drugs.
You're going to have to explain to me why we care if people decide to go into a risky business, then get themselves killed because of it.
Then you're going to have to explain to me why, if drugs are legalized, people will no longer commit crimes to get the money for them. Especially since people kill each other for Nike sneakers (which are perfectly legal and available at any shoe store).
Originally posted by Betty
There are plenty of people who DON'T wear their seatbelts just becasue it is the law. People wear them because they have come to beleive that it will make them safer in their cars.
I'll bet if you did a scientific survey, you'd find that the only reason people started wearing their seatbelts is because of that $50 ticket.
As for drug users everywhere... and the difference would be?
Initially, there would be a slight increase in drug use, but then as people adjusted to the new way of thinking and society was convinced by a GOOD PR campaign about the dangers of using drugs and users who wanted treatment took advantage of treatment faciilites, drug use would drop dramatically.
Help me understand why people would stop using drugs if they were legal
Then the remaining addicts could have somewhat normal lives and not have to rob, embezzel or sell their bodies to get their drugs.
Help me understand how people are going to suddenly get money for drugs and not have to commit crimes any more?
Then there are those who suffer from chronic pain who could get pain medication, REAL pain medication such as morphine instead of Darvocets that have so many dangerous side effects.
#1 - do you think that morphine doesn't have dangerous side effects? Why do you suppose docs prescribe Darvs more than morphine for pain?
#2 - I wasn't aware that morphine was illegal - I thought docs just didn't give it out as readily any more.
we are causing untold suffering to innocent sick people forced to live in constant pain that is only dulled by Darvocets and Percocets which destroy their body.
Again, please explain to me why Darvs and Percs destroy the body, yet crack and heroin don't?
PLUS the real issue is that the government has no right to interfere in your life in this manner.
Listen carefully, Betty, cause I'm only going to say this one more time - JUNKIES INTEREFERE IN MORE LIVES THAN THEIR OWN! They are a public nuisance because they are mentally incapable of using good judgement and societal manners. The government has a RESPONSIBILITY to see that we can walk down the street without being accosted. They have a RESPONSIBILITY to maintain domestic order. If I can no longer leave my house because of drug addicts hanging around all over the place, that infringes on MY RIGHTS to liberty and pursuit of happiness. We're not talking about some guy getting high in the privacy of his own home here.
Betty, you might want to do a little reading about Prohibition and the other countries that have tried legalization of hard drugs. Education is a good thing. It's fine to have your opinions but they would hold more weight if there was some fact to back it up.
Yes, during Prohibition there were a lot of gang-related deaths - however most of those deaths were people who were in the business, not innocent citizens. That's a fact - look it up. Today we have a lot of drug-related deaths. But again, the vast majority of those deaths are people who are in the business of drugs.
You're going to have to explain to me why we care if people decide to go into a risky business, then get themselves killed because of it.
Then you're going to have to explain to me why, if drugs are legalized, people will no longer commit crimes to get the money for them. Especially since people kill each other for Nike sneakers (which are perfectly legal and available at any shoe store).
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Tonio,
We live in a world where the people who support legalization all so tend to be in favor of hitting on poor peoples cigarettes for money, abolishing SUV's, petrified of the 2nd amendment and are licking their chops over fast food and booze can't really be to far over the horizon.
Not all, just most. Especially the elected ones. Throw in being violently pro abortion and wanting CEO's shot on sight and I have a very suspicious eye on the true motives.
So, what do you mean by "decriminalize"? Don't forget the lawyers.
I would love to find a way to address the violence and the corruption. Seems to me that that stuff is already illegal though.
We live in a world where the people who support legalization all so tend to be in favor of hitting on poor peoples cigarettes for money, abolishing SUV's, petrified of the 2nd amendment and are licking their chops over fast food and booze can't really be to far over the horizon.
Not all, just most. Especially the elected ones. Throw in being violently pro abortion and wanting CEO's shot on sight and I have a very suspicious eye on the true motives.
So, what do you mean by "decriminalize"? Don't forget the lawyers.
I would love to find a way to address the violence and the corruption. Seems to me that that stuff is already illegal though.
Aaaaaarrgh...
There are plenty of legal drugs for pain. I got morphine during an operation so it is still used. Synthetic morphine (dilaudid) is prescribed for pain. They are legal but try getting a 'script for one. This is one of the black market drugs.
Even doctors and nurses get hooked on drugs. Do you think they just decided to throw their careers away and become junkies one day? They are intelligent people who know the risks of drug use. Maybe you'd like to be under their care. I can't see unleashing all drugs into society, without penalty...until it is legal for me to shoot the MF's when they try to steal, rob, or cause me harm.
There are plenty of legal drugs for pain. I got morphine during an operation so it is still used. Synthetic morphine (dilaudid) is prescribed for pain. They are legal but try getting a 'script for one. This is one of the black market drugs.
Even doctors and nurses get hooked on drugs. Do you think they just decided to throw their careers away and become junkies one day? They are intelligent people who know the risks of drug use. Maybe you'd like to be under their care. I can't see unleashing all drugs into society, without penalty...until it is legal for me to shoot the MF's when they try to steal, rob, or cause me harm.
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
I think that's too simplistic. Tonio's Theory is that the vocal activists in any movement are more extreme than the rank-and-file. They're in the public eye because they want attention, so they're naturally drawn to the more extreme positions on issues. I see Pat Robertson and Madelyn Murray O'Hair as two sides of the same demented coin. Both insist that their beliefs about religion are right for everyone. Both can take a long walk off a short pier.
I don't believe there's some conspiracy afoot to turn America socialist, or fascist for that matter. Now, I do agree that government control gets into areas that it shouldn't. Some of the older conservatives attribute this to the "for heaven's sake let's do something" syndrome. It's easy for the politicans to feel good when they raise the cigarette taxes, not stopping to realize who is affected or how much the tax promotes smuggling.
If you believe the Libertarians, liberals want unregulated private behavior and regulated economic behavior, and conservatives want the opposite. There's "for heaven's sake let's do something" on both sides of the political aisle. Anti-porn crusaders are not much different from anti-gun activists in that regard. I think most Americans are in the middle--we agree that reasonable restrictions on both should be considered and debated.
Decriminalization means that possession and distribution are civil violations, not criminal violations. I believe this is true for prescription drugs obtained illegally. I think this is worth considering for marijuana at the very least.
Last edited:
H
Heretic
Guest
Morphine is still used in hospitals, my dad just had part of his stomache removed because an ulcer ate through it they gave him morphine.
Ok civil violations don't require nearly as much evidence to convict as criminal. In addition there are no court appointed attorneys for civil cases, so you get accused even if your innocent you have to pay for a lawyer. For a criminal conviction you have to go beyond a reasonable doubt but for a civil settlement you only have to provide "probably" evidence. Talk about a Pandora's box.
Ok civil violations don't require nearly as much evidence to convict as criminal. In addition there are no court appointed attorneys for civil cases, so you get accused even if your innocent you have to pay for a lawyer. For a criminal conviction you have to go beyond a reasonable doubt but for a civil settlement you only have to provide "probably" evidence. Talk about a Pandora's box.
How about decriminalization just for possession but not distribution? Personally, I'd legalize pot tomorrow. Just not hard drugs.
H
Heretic
Guest
I agree that we shouldn't be going after the casual user, small fish just aren't worth the effort. Lets get the people that propogate the crime.
Now if possession is decriminalized but distribution isnt I can hear some two bit pothead whining "its not illegal to have it, why should it be so hard to get, the rich with all their connections get all the breaks"
There is always going to be a catch to whatever is done. Personally I don't see what the big deal is, you want to alter your mind whack yourself in the head with a hammer until you see stuff.
Now if possession is decriminalized but distribution isnt I can hear some two bit pothead whining "its not illegal to have it, why should it be so hard to get, the rich with all their connections get all the breaks"
There is always going to be a catch to whatever is done. Personally I don't see what the big deal is, you want to alter your mind whack yourself in the head with a hammer until you see stuff.
Drugs ARE illegal and we have this??
All of you go on about how bad drugs are and why we need to stop people from using them. DUH! They are illegal, yet all of this is going on, the only difference is that they are expensive because they are legal. BECAUSE they are expensive, people commit crimes to get money to buy them.
Having drugs illegal does not stop any of the drug users I know. As for the morphine, yes it is still legal, but you have to be practically DEAD to get it from a doctor. AND the side effects of mophine are much less than davocets. BOTH are addictive, so trash that argument. IF someone has chronic PERMANENT pain, being hooked on them is no longer an issue becasue they will be taking them the rest of their lives anyway. People who take mophine can have normal lives becuaes it controls the pain. People taking darvacets stiff suffer because it doesn not get rid of the pain. IT DOES however get them addicted to them and destroys their livers.
I am NOT for giving morphine to people with temprary pain, unless it is under close supervisoin, but we have a good many members of soicety who are chronic pain sufferers who have no where to turn. The doctors give them darvocets which damages their bodies and does not kill the pain enough for them to live a normal life. The doctors DO NOT give them morphine Rx because the government makes it illegal for a doctor to write too many Rx for morphine. If he does he will LOOSE HIS LICENSE EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THE Rx WERE for ligitimate sick people. THIS IS A GOVERNMENT LAW. The reason is they are trying to keep the drug abusers from getting morphine. If it will help these sick people who are suffering from unimaginable pain, I say give the damned druggies all they want if it will help the innocent.
SO in other words, to protect idiots who want to abuse their bodies, sick people have to suffer unnecessarily.
If the druggies can get some morphine or other pills they will be happy and MOST will not take PCP or Crack. They only take those because they can't get the good stuff. If cocaine was cheap they would stay away from crack. AND most of the damage to others comes from the aquisition of funds to buy the stuff. NOW I SAID MOST because it is not a perfect world and there will always be exceptions. OK??
in the Netherlands, drug use initially went up, but eventually it went down. BUT crime went down also and the jails were not filled up with drug users. They had more room for the real criminals.
YES many idiots who do drugs or drink too much do plenty of damage to thier families. The best thing to do about that is to make such behavior unacceptable in society and to enourage people (usually women) to take their families out of such situations.
We have too many STUPID women who would sacrifice their kids to "stand by their man" no matter how bad he treats her. IF women would not put up with this crap, men would straighten up and fly right. (men will do ANYTHING for sex) We have made it way too easy for them.
All of you go on about how bad drugs are and why we need to stop people from using them. DUH! They are illegal, yet all of this is going on, the only difference is that they are expensive because they are legal. BECAUSE they are expensive, people commit crimes to get money to buy them.
Having drugs illegal does not stop any of the drug users I know. As for the morphine, yes it is still legal, but you have to be practically DEAD to get it from a doctor. AND the side effects of mophine are much less than davocets. BOTH are addictive, so trash that argument. IF someone has chronic PERMANENT pain, being hooked on them is no longer an issue becasue they will be taking them the rest of their lives anyway. People who take mophine can have normal lives becuaes it controls the pain. People taking darvacets stiff suffer because it doesn not get rid of the pain. IT DOES however get them addicted to them and destroys their livers.
I am NOT for giving morphine to people with temprary pain, unless it is under close supervisoin, but we have a good many members of soicety who are chronic pain sufferers who have no where to turn. The doctors give them darvocets which damages their bodies and does not kill the pain enough for them to live a normal life. The doctors DO NOT give them morphine Rx because the government makes it illegal for a doctor to write too many Rx for morphine. If he does he will LOOSE HIS LICENSE EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THE Rx WERE for ligitimate sick people. THIS IS A GOVERNMENT LAW. The reason is they are trying to keep the drug abusers from getting morphine. If it will help these sick people who are suffering from unimaginable pain, I say give the damned druggies all they want if it will help the innocent.
SO in other words, to protect idiots who want to abuse their bodies, sick people have to suffer unnecessarily.
If the druggies can get some morphine or other pills they will be happy and MOST will not take PCP or Crack. They only take those because they can't get the good stuff. If cocaine was cheap they would stay away from crack. AND most of the damage to others comes from the aquisition of funds to buy the stuff. NOW I SAID MOST because it is not a perfect world and there will always be exceptions. OK??
in the Netherlands, drug use initially went up, but eventually it went down. BUT crime went down also and the jails were not filled up with drug users. They had more room for the real criminals.
YES many idiots who do drugs or drink too much do plenty of damage to thier families. The best thing to do about that is to make such behavior unacceptable in society and to enourage people (usually women) to take their families out of such situations.
We have too many STUPID women who would sacrifice their kids to "stand by their man" no matter how bad he treats her. IF women would not put up with this crap, men would straighten up and fly right. (men will do ANYTHING for sex) We have made it way too easy for them.
No to decriminalization
If you decriminalize pot you are saying it is not as bad as the rest of them. I say they are ALL REALLY BAD. I want to make them legal NOT because they are good for you, but becasue it is NONE of my or the governments business what others do to their bodies (except suicide, which is murder, which IS a crime).
This requires some thinking OUTSIDE THE BOX. We all assume that we have the right to make ANY law if we think it might help someone. We all need to make only those laws that are allowed in the constitution and NO MORE. Sooner or later, some law is going to affect you in a way that YOU won't like.
People thought it would be fine to go into housing projects to check for drugs and illegal guns with out a warrent. They thought that would be good because it would help the people there. NO it would infringe on the rights of people htere. Don't you get it. Those people have the same rights as we do. Jsut because you are poor does not take away your rights. AND DUH, if they can go into their apartments illegally, they can come into YOUR house illegally.
Think through these things.
If you say I can't take certain drugs, then what is next? Ok, now we can't smoke cigarettes in buildings, then we won't be able to smoke in our own homes. Now we are told what we can say, it is called Hate Crimes. It is NOT illegal to hate!!! (I know it is illegal to assault those that you hate, but not illegal to hate them) So now we are told what we can say. People all over America are afraid to say certain things, certain words. Where in the Constitution does it say you cannot say certain words??? No where.
Now the society police are suing the food manufacturers. So next we will be told what we can eat. The liquour makers are next. The tobacco companies have already been sued (i.e. ROBBED) of their legal profits from selling a legal product. People got sick from cigarettes. EVERYONE KNOWS THEY MAKE YOU SICK. SO whose fault is it if you get cancer? YOURS!!!!
Please YOU are responsible for your decisions and you have to live with the consequenses of those decisions. No one else should have to pay for them.
I know someone who is on disability becasue he burned his brains up with drugs. He says he can't work. I bet if he was starving to death he would be able to work. Hunger is a great motivator. It works for most of us, doesn't it?
If you decriminalize pot you are saying it is not as bad as the rest of them. I say they are ALL REALLY BAD. I want to make them legal NOT because they are good for you, but becasue it is NONE of my or the governments business what others do to their bodies (except suicide, which is murder, which IS a crime).
This requires some thinking OUTSIDE THE BOX. We all assume that we have the right to make ANY law if we think it might help someone. We all need to make only those laws that are allowed in the constitution and NO MORE. Sooner or later, some law is going to affect you in a way that YOU won't like.
People thought it would be fine to go into housing projects to check for drugs and illegal guns with out a warrent. They thought that would be good because it would help the people there. NO it would infringe on the rights of people htere. Don't you get it. Those people have the same rights as we do. Jsut because you are poor does not take away your rights. AND DUH, if they can go into their apartments illegally, they can come into YOUR house illegally.
Think through these things.
If you say I can't take certain drugs, then what is next? Ok, now we can't smoke cigarettes in buildings, then we won't be able to smoke in our own homes. Now we are told what we can say, it is called Hate Crimes. It is NOT illegal to hate!!! (I know it is illegal to assault those that you hate, but not illegal to hate them) So now we are told what we can say. People all over America are afraid to say certain things, certain words. Where in the Constitution does it say you cannot say certain words??? No where.
Now the society police are suing the food manufacturers. So next we will be told what we can eat. The liquour makers are next. The tobacco companies have already been sued (i.e. ROBBED) of their legal profits from selling a legal product. People got sick from cigarettes. EVERYONE KNOWS THEY MAKE YOU SICK. SO whose fault is it if you get cancer? YOURS!!!!
Please YOU are responsible for your decisions and you have to live with the consequenses of those decisions. No one else should have to pay for them.
I know someone who is on disability becasue he burned his brains up with drugs. He says he can't work. I bet if he was starving to death he would be able to work. Hunger is a great motivator. It works for most of us, doesn't it?
Keep believing that.
Wrong again, every doper has their drug of choice.
Sick people suffer unnecessarily because of the dopers who abuse drugs.
No they just want the same intensity without the needle.
I don't know where you come up with this stuff---from the druggies? Let them keep using illegally so they can OD and die, that's still legal.
H
Heretic
Guest
Betty, who is to say if they are made legal they will be cheaper?
Druggies have to steal to get money for drugs not because the drugs are expensive but because they are loosers that are dopped out and dont work because they are no longer functional in society.
Druggies have to steal to get money for drugs not because the drugs are expensive but because they are loosers that are dopped out and dont work because they are no longer functional in society.
Heretic! And I'll tell you something else:Haven't you ever heard of someone with a great job, making all kinds of money, who's life goes to sh*t and they end up completely broke because of a drug habit? Celebrities do it ALL the time! The more money they have, the bigger their drug habit becomes because they think they can "afford" it. Rich people, poor people - doesn't matter. Once the junk gets ahold of you, you'll spend all your disposable income supporting your growing habit.
Most people who drink beer, wine or hard liquor stay with the same drinking patterns throughout their life (alcoholics aside). They typically don't dramatically increase their consumption over the years. Druggies, however, ALWAYS increase their consumption. Someone can start out with a low-level coke habit and, before you know it, they're up to a thousand $$$ a day. You hear about it all the time - just check out a VH-1 Behind the Music for some great examples.
H
Heretic
Guest
Just like there was no crime before drugs became illegal...
Hmmm maybe if we make murder legal people will quit killing people.
Hmmm maybe if we make murder legal people will quit killing people.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Tonio,
That's fine, however they are poor examples as neither has one piece of legislation enacted that I am aware of, hence they merely have a podium and an opinion. Dime a dozen. I thought she did walk off a short pier, so to speak?
Not sure where I gave the impression that a conspiracy is involved? The media and the politicians, left and right, are knee jerking on corporate scandals (shooting execs) the left has passed tax laws that assault poor people (smokes and MANY other instances) safe cars (SUVs) are under assault and the Constitution is violated in regard sto the 2nd amendment.
The word "conspire" implies some sort of logic or reason to reach a stated goal. All that is ever necessary for theses things to have happened and continue to happen is for people to vote wrong and then claim to be "in the middle" after another freedom has been taken. Maybe a conspiracy of stupidity?
Libertarians are anarchists. Just look at vote they are for. The last thing liberal’s want is unregulated private behavior. Just look at what they are for. The last thing conservative’s want is unregulated economic behavior. Just look at what they are for and have passed in simply the last few months. You are talking about incorrect stereotypes I think.
Anti porn crusaders of which I can't name any, including the Supreme Court and their idiotic recent ruling on virtual child molesting, I would guess are fighting for community standards. Who's an anti porn crusader?
Anti gun folks advocate, and get, circumvention of the Constitution. I fail to see any comparison between a matter of preference, porn, and a matter of rights, guns, relevant to drug legalization. Being in the middle is a choice. Wanting debate is reasonable. When the law of the land is destroyed by ignoring Constitutional provisions for changing the document (amendment and guns), then being in the middle is an exercise in futility.
We don't live in a pure democracy, yet, and you might want to think about what law will protect you when the law is a matter of mob rule (middle of the roaders getting caught up in the latest excitement) and you are on the wrong side.
So, let's consider it, again. I vote "no". How do you vote?
Thanks for your thoughts!
That's fine, however they are poor examples as neither has one piece of legislation enacted that I am aware of, hence they merely have a podium and an opinion. Dime a dozen. I thought she did walk off a short pier, so to speak?
Not sure where I gave the impression that a conspiracy is involved? The media and the politicians, left and right, are knee jerking on corporate scandals (shooting execs) the left has passed tax laws that assault poor people (smokes and MANY other instances) safe cars (SUVs) are under assault and the Constitution is violated in regard sto the 2nd amendment.
The word "conspire" implies some sort of logic or reason to reach a stated goal. All that is ever necessary for theses things to have happened and continue to happen is for people to vote wrong and then claim to be "in the middle" after another freedom has been taken. Maybe a conspiracy of stupidity?
Libertarians are anarchists. Just look at vote they are for. The last thing liberal’s want is unregulated private behavior. Just look at what they are for. The last thing conservative’s want is unregulated economic behavior. Just look at what they are for and have passed in simply the last few months. You are talking about incorrect stereotypes I think.
Anti porn crusaders of which I can't name any, including the Supreme Court and their idiotic recent ruling on virtual child molesting, I would guess are fighting for community standards. Who's an anti porn crusader?
Anti gun folks advocate, and get, circumvention of the Constitution. I fail to see any comparison between a matter of preference, porn, and a matter of rights, guns, relevant to drug legalization. Being in the middle is a choice. Wanting debate is reasonable. When the law of the land is destroyed by ignoring Constitutional provisions for changing the document (amendment and guns), then being in the middle is an exercise in futility.
We don't live in a pure democracy, yet, and you might want to think about what law will protect you when the law is a matter of mob rule (middle of the roaders getting caught up in the latest excitement) and you are on the wrong side.
So, let's consider it, again. I vote "no". How do you vote?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Murder takes away someone else's right to life
Drugs are not the same as murder. The illegality of murder is not for prevention, though it might prevent SOME murders, it does not prevent all of them. There are still penty of murders every day. The illegality of murder is to set a punishment of the perpretrator and to get him out of the public to prevent him from doing other murders, since the murderer has already proven that he is not a person worth having his freedom.
Now, what law from the Natural Law (laws that most societies see as needed to protect its members) have drug users broken? NONE. The murderer has broken a basic law and he should be severely punished.
Why is the drug user sitting the same cell with this person?
BECAUSE we want to try and legislate behavior and tell people what is best for them. We have become a busy body society.
(for any new readers, I HATE DRUG ABUSE, have never used drugs myself and think that anyone who does is an idiot who is ruining his life)
Yet, it is NONE of my business what others want to do to themselves. As far as the harm that they do to their family, it is up to the other family members to decide what THEY will take from this drug using idiot. NONE OF THIS IS MY BUSINESS.
(of course, if the children are being neglected, they should be removed from the home, preferably by some other member of the family, not by the state, but the state is there as a last resort)
So here we are you don't want anyone to tell you that you should be married before you have kids and that you should try to follow a certain general moral code (one that is accepted by all religions and reasonable people) yet you want to tell OTHERS what to do.
HMMMMmmmmmmmmm interesting beleifs.
Drugs are not the same as murder. The illegality of murder is not for prevention, though it might prevent SOME murders, it does not prevent all of them. There are still penty of murders every day. The illegality of murder is to set a punishment of the perpretrator and to get him out of the public to prevent him from doing other murders, since the murderer has already proven that he is not a person worth having his freedom.
Now, what law from the Natural Law (laws that most societies see as needed to protect its members) have drug users broken? NONE. The murderer has broken a basic law and he should be severely punished.
Why is the drug user sitting the same cell with this person?
BECAUSE we want to try and legislate behavior and tell people what is best for them. We have become a busy body society.
(for any new readers, I HATE DRUG ABUSE, have never used drugs myself and think that anyone who does is an idiot who is ruining his life)
Yet, it is NONE of my business what others want to do to themselves. As far as the harm that they do to their family, it is up to the other family members to decide what THEY will take from this drug using idiot. NONE OF THIS IS MY BUSINESS.
(of course, if the children are being neglected, they should be removed from the home, preferably by some other member of the family, not by the state, but the state is there as a last resort)
So here we are you don't want anyone to tell you that you should be married before you have kids and that you should try to follow a certain general moral code (one that is accepted by all religions and reasonable people) yet you want to tell OTHERS what to do.
HMMMMmmmmmmmmm interesting beleifs.
H
Heretic
Guest
Betty
Very few people actually go to jail for JUST having drugs for their own purpose. Most that go to jail do so for other reasons such as theft, breaking and entering, assult, rape, and murder.
I challenge you to find record of one person in jail for more than 1 month for only having enough pot for their own purposes.
Many drugs are dangerous and if a general consumer product was as dangerous it would be pulled off the shelf.
I am willing to bet that many legal drug companies don't even want to touch stuff like crack, Heroin, Speed and PCP due to liability. Some crackhead dies and his family sues the drug producer. Heck if something that kills you as slow as tobacco can be held liable why wouldnt something that can kill you if you use it once.
DO you want all drugs to be legal? Should the user need a perscription or do you want anyone to be able to buy them at the 7-11?
The fact is that nobody needs to have LSD, PCP, Speed, Heroin for any reason, just like nobody needs to use lead paint anymore. Pot does have some medical benefits but Im guessing that the chemicals that allieve some of the suffering of Glacuma suffers can be synthisized into a pill that doesnt get one high.
Hey Im now pissed that you cant buy lead paint anymore goddamn government telling me what I can and can't paint my house with. Hell walking arround in public buck ass naked doesnt hurt anyone either but I dont think that too many people want that.
Very few people actually go to jail for JUST having drugs for their own purpose. Most that go to jail do so for other reasons such as theft, breaking and entering, assult, rape, and murder.
I challenge you to find record of one person in jail for more than 1 month for only having enough pot for their own purposes.
Many drugs are dangerous and if a general consumer product was as dangerous it would be pulled off the shelf.
I am willing to bet that many legal drug companies don't even want to touch stuff like crack, Heroin, Speed and PCP due to liability. Some crackhead dies and his family sues the drug producer. Heck if something that kills you as slow as tobacco can be held liable why wouldnt something that can kill you if you use it once.
DO you want all drugs to be legal? Should the user need a perscription or do you want anyone to be able to buy them at the 7-11?
The fact is that nobody needs to have LSD, PCP, Speed, Heroin for any reason, just like nobody needs to use lead paint anymore. Pot does have some medical benefits but Im guessing that the chemicals that allieve some of the suffering of Glacuma suffers can be synthisized into a pill that doesnt get one high.
Hey Im now pissed that you cant buy lead paint anymore goddamn government telling me what I can and can't paint my house with. Hell walking arround in public buck ass naked doesnt hurt anyone either but I dont think that too many people want that.
Last edited by a moderator:
benefits of pot
OH give it up on the benefits of pot. I am sure that taking hemlock would help some people with some sort of ailment.
Pot is not good either. Whether they are good for you or not is not the point. THe point is it is NOT my business to regulate you from taking them.
I think the government should sell them to anyone over 18 and that who ever takes them cannot sue regardless.
you see the two main points here are
1. it is none of my business if you want to take them (you idiot)
2. the war on drugs has done as much damage as the drugs themselves. it is just the WAR hurts NON USERS more than the users.
AND if we had an agressive PR campaign, as agressive as the don't smoke cigaretts campaign, we could stop young people from starting to use drugs.
Clinton saying he wished he had inhaled was a horrible example of a decent human being and it was an endorsement of pot to all young people who thought he was cool.
It is time to surrender and say we lost the war on drugs, you CANNOT save an idiot from themself!
OH give it up on the benefits of pot. I am sure that taking hemlock would help some people with some sort of ailment.
Pot is not good either. Whether they are good for you or not is not the point. THe point is it is NOT my business to regulate you from taking them.
I think the government should sell them to anyone over 18 and that who ever takes them cannot sue regardless.
you see the two main points here are
1. it is none of my business if you want to take them (you idiot)
2. the war on drugs has done as much damage as the drugs themselves. it is just the WAR hurts NON USERS more than the users.
AND if we had an agressive PR campaign, as agressive as the don't smoke cigaretts campaign, we could stop young people from starting to use drugs.
Clinton saying he wished he had inhaled was a horrible example of a decent human being and it was an endorsement of pot to all young people who thought he was cool.
It is time to surrender and say we lost the war on drugs, you CANNOT save an idiot from themself!
not directed at anyone
I am not going off on anyone in particular.
I have had many replies telling of the benefits of pot. I include pot in with the other dangerous drugs becuase it makes people forget things and loose ambition and it is a gateway drug. I have never met a single hard core druggie who did not START with pot.
I am not going off on anyone in particular.
I have had many replies telling of the benefits of pot. I include pot in with the other dangerous drugs becuase it makes people forget things and loose ambition and it is a gateway drug. I have never met a single hard core druggie who did not START with pot.