Options

FUCK the DEA!

123457

Posts

  • Options
    CrimsonKingCrimsonKing Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    ALocksly wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    grayson have you ever seen anything like the things I've witnessed? things that would never have happened save for a massive drug addiction?

    just curious.

    We get that you've seen bad shit.

    However, we think that if drugs are legal, fewer people will see shit that bad.

    Ergo, you should agree with us.

    That's about as simple as I can put it.

    I disagree. If drugs are presented as legal more people will use them leading to more and escalating addictions.

    and yet where they are legal that has not happened

    Which is in the fucking Netherlands, not the Bronx, or Harlem or Newark but the fucking Netherlands.

    Good point. Now feel free to say something of substance, like exactly what is different between the two that makes you think, logically, there would be a huge difference in the outcome.

    You cannot make a comparison like that, between the Netherlands and America. I don't know if they have remotely the same socio-economic problems there as we do here, but I am willing to bet they do not. As far as general culture goes, they are completely different to be sure.

    Personally I am against legalization, being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit, which is why I stayed away from this topic. However to use the evidence that another country with, again, an entirely different culture did it and its fine so it should be fine here is false.

    CrimsonKing on
    This sig was too tall - Elki.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Personally I am against legalization,

    What is your opinion of gun control?
    being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit,

    Three questions:
    Does this include caffeine?
    Is depression a legitimate medical reason?
    Is non-debilitating chronic pain a legitimate medical reason?

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    ALocksly wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    grayson have you ever seen anything like the things I've witnessed? things that would never have happened save for a massive drug addiction?

    just curious.

    We get that you've seen bad shit.

    However, we think that if drugs are legal, fewer people will see shit that bad.

    Ergo, you should agree with us.

    That's about as simple as I can put it.

    I disagree. If drugs are presented as legal more people will use them leading to more and escalating addictions.

    and yet where they are legal that has not happened

    Which is in the fucking Netherlands, not the Bronx, or Harlem or Newark but the fucking Netherlands.

    Good point. Now feel free to say something of substance, like exactly what is different between the two that makes you think, logically, there would be a huge difference in the outcome.

    You cannot make a comparison like that, between the Netherlands and America. I don't know if they have remotely the same socio-economic problems there as we do here, but I am willing to bet they do not. As far as general culture goes, they are completely different to be sure.

    Right. Because Europe doesn't have poor people or minorities (don't tell me you weren't thinking about that when you wrote "Harlem," even though "rural Oregon" or "the hick south" are actually far more overcome with drug problems these days (Meth)). Yeah, all those riots in France? Totally a big April Fool's joke. (Admittedly France is among the worst in this respect, but what?)
    Personally I am against legalization, being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit,

    Right. So, you think they're fuckwits. Therfore they deserve to go to prison and remain in a cycle of addiction and poverty. That's reasonable.
    which is why I stayed away from this topic.

    That was a good idea. You should have stuck with it.
    However to use the evidence that another country with, again, an entirely different culture did it and its fine so it should be fine here is false.

    See: Locks' posts on prohibition, and the fuckton of arguments in this thread that have nothing to do with the Netherlands.

    Also, the cultures aren't that different. It's not Canada, but it's not fucking Thailand or Iran, either.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    The new word for black people is "articulate". "Socio-economic problems" is embarassingly outre.
    Feral wrote: »
    I just don't want the "heroin = death" myth to be replaced by an equal but opposite "you can't die from pure heroin" myth.

    Can you imagine. This is off topic but I predict most myths vastly overstate rather than vastly understate actual risk. Hmmm this is interesting. Need to research.

    themightypuck on
    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    The new word for black people is "articulate". "Socio-economic problems" is embarassingly outre.
    Feral wrote: »
    I just don't want the "heroin = death" myth to be replaced by an equal but opposite "you can't die from pure heroin" myth.

    Can you imagine. This is off topic but I predict most myths vastly overstate rather than vastly understate actual risk. Hmmm this is interesting. Need to research.
    Unless the myth is extrapolating say, having a papercut -> bleeding to death type of exaggeration, in cases when the other option is death most of the time I can't help but think it's a good idea.

    Much like the bad luck myths, a way to communicate with idiots.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Unless the myth is extrapolating say, having a papercut -> bleeding to death type of exaggeration, in cases when the other option is death most of the time I can't help but think it's a good idea.

    Much like the bad luck myths, a way to communicate with idiots.

    Ok this is threadjacking a bit so apologies and ignore or whatever as required but: where the statistical correlation between the other option = death and the activity claimed to lead to this outcome is extremely low and the benefits of engaging in this activity are relatively high -- say leaving your house on Friday the Thirteenth or not wasting time and energy worrying about stepping on a crack and breakiing your mother's back--isn't the opposite true?
    Much like the bad luck myths, a way to communicate with idiots.

    This makes a fair bit of sense but doesn't it have the potential to end in tears for women with a better than average knowlege of the medicinal uses of herbs and whatnot.

    themightypuck on
    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • Options
    GrundlterrorGrundlterror Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Heroin is an interesting drug... and I've never tried it. But I have a friend that is very addicted to it. I haven't talked to this friend in months (hes in rehab right now... he's been calling my other friend for heroin though). He is so addicted to it, he was in a car with this girl (that he hates) going to get heroin (and I'm pretty sure they were already fucked up) and driving down the highway they hit the median and flipped the car (luckily they both were wearing seatbelts). I was the only person who went to the hospital and waited while he got his head sewn back together (his brother just sat on his ass and got drunk). He cried in my car, telling me how his life is fucked up and people like me are the only saving grace he has. And a couple of months later, after getting back on the heroin that had destroyed his life up to that point, he shunned me because I didn't want to do any hard drugs. This is a friend of several years, we've had many bonding moments and no one has been as good of a friend to him as I had. The friend of his that was driving the car? Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    Now I'm a minor alcoholic (I drink every day but I rarely get wasted). I smoke a lot of pot. I love to take mushrooms (and recently found a liking for ecstasy). I can't quit smoking cigarettes. I'm an addict.. but nothing I do is as harmful as my friend's habits. I don't see anything wrong with what I do. Nothing I have ever taken has ever put me in the state that my friend was in. I used to be an advocate for the legalization of all drugs, no matter what.. but things like Heroin and Crack and Meth... those things need to be kept illegal. The punishment might need to be changed, but there is no fucking way that things like that should be able to be purchased off the streets.

    But I guess with Pharmaceuticals prescribed and abused the way they are (and thats another thing, dont get me started... pills are, in my opinion, probably worse then heroin) we might as well make everything legal.

    I think Bill Mahr, on his show, said something about how Anna Nicole was killed by something her doctor prescribed her, but he could go to jail for the weed he had. How the fuck does America justify that? Why the fuck is weed illegal?

    I think Jimmy Carter said something smart (surprise!)... he said something along the lines of... the punishment for any illegal drug should not exceed the harm it itself does to its user. Well why the fuck is weed illegal then? It's been proven to have very little, if any, negative effects.

    Anyway, Nickle... your story is amazing and just made me think of my friend.

    Sorry if this post is a bit incoherent... I've had a few.

    Grundlterror on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    ComahawkComahawk Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    I just want to throw in my two cents. I was a heroin addict, for about 4 years, and I just recently quit at the end of last summer. The reasons why inclue the enotional a financial burden I was placed in, but the main reason I quit was because of my 'overdose'. I never injected, I hate needles, but rather snorted it, it was usually mixed with some sort of sleeping pill. One night, I was getting a damn good deal from my dealer, so I bought a bit too much, and did every last bit of it (minus the one bag you always keep for the morning). That morning I woke up and vomited so hard that I burst every blood vessel in my face and eyes, and did severe damage to my lungs in the process. After my time at the hospital, I was made to understand that the reaction I had wasn't even due to the heroin itself, but the substance that it was 'cut' with.

    I'm in no way advocating heroin, because, like I said, I spent all of my money and time doing it (though I never did anything illegal to obtain it, and this isn't something that should be assumed of all drug addicts, either), but I do think strongly that if heroin were legal and regulated, that this never would have happened. The fact is that I was buying my drug from a dealer who I doubt very severely wanted to harm me (I was paying his kid's way through college, after all), but rather just did not have any idea that he was mixing the drugs improperly.

    I will say though, that I was entirely functional, I kept my jobs, and appearances up, throughout the entirety of my addiction (until, of course, that morning). People are assuming that anyone who does a drug is going to automatically go on to commit other crimes, and that's just blatant idiocy. If a person is an idiot, yes, they're bound do do idiotic things, with or without drugs, and if a person is at least decently intelligent, they're not going to automatically rob a liquor store because they like to smoke some weed. When Gun control advocates can say "Sure guns kill people, but they're guns that are obtained illegally, and the people using them this way are already criminals", but aren't willing to give that same benefit of the doubt to a drug user, that's something I like to call 'hypocracy'. Guns don't force anyone to kill anyone else, and neither do drugs. They're both 'tools' and either can be both harmful and beneficial.

    That being said, I'm almost positive that there aren't that many people sitting on the sidelines, saying to themselves 'Man, I'd LOVE to smoke some crack! If only it were legal...'. Not everyone owns a gun because they're legal. Not everyone smokes cigarettes (I still can't quit those, and I quit HEROIN for god's sake.) because they're legal. Not everyone becomes an alcoholic because it's legal. Why can this logic not not be applied to drug use, as well?

    You can't say that people who shoot other people, or commit armed robberies, aren't representing all gun owners, and say that the people who do these things under the influence of drugs ARE indicative of all drug users. That's just idiotic. You think that drug use invariably leads to armed robberies and other crimes, but aren't you glossing over the 'armed' part of the robbery? If those people weren't 'armed' they wouldn't be commiting the robberies in the first place. To be clear, I'm not trying to say we should make guns illegal, just pointing out the hypocrasy in your stance.

    Wow. This is a perfect example of exactly the kind of thing we're talking about -- minimizing harm.

    Also, while you are smart enough to go to rehab, a lot of people end up in prison instead. Would you agree, from your experience, that this would be a terribly ineffective way of getting you clean, that would have far more negative consequences than positive?

    Also, congratulations on gettting clean!

    Oh, and as to my own drug use (@ Xaquin): I've smoked a little pot. I've had a little alcohol (actually, onyl once ever, come to think of it) I don't smoke often, I mainly just do it because it's some mindless fun to have with friends. Like going to a shitty, but entertaining film. Probably 2-4 times a month, tops.

    If it were legal, I'd still probably smoke. But I definitely wouldn't go out and buy it, either. My usage would in no way increase. But I personally don't get off on "being a rebel man." I, however, am not the same as everyone who does any kind of illicit drug. But my point is my use wouldn't increase.

    Also, I wouldn't try anything else, because that shit scares me (yes, including cigarettes). Not because of its legal status, but because I'm scared of the health effects and the possibility for addiction.

    Drugs are illegal for the simple matter of deterrence, there is really no such thing as personal control when it comes to highly addictive substances. As well, any healthy uses of illegal narcotics can be derived by trained pharmaceutical professionals in a clean, healthy manner and then prescribed to those who are actually in need of said help by a trained, professional, qualified doctor.

    Comahawk on
  • Options
    Nexus ZeroNexus Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    The point is that this probably wouldn't have happened had heroin been legal and pure.

    Nexus Zero on
    sig.jpg
  • Options
    AurinAurin Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Drugs are illegal for the simple matter of deterrence, there is really no such thing as personal control when it comes to highly addictive substances.

    Ban cigarettes and alcohol.

    The war on drugs is not deterring anyone from getting the drugs they want. They just make the bad guys get a bigger profit when their competitors are taken out by the cops. Then they mix all sorts of fun shit into the drugs, thus more people die.

    I'd rather all the addicts get clean drugs coming from companies that can take responsibility if the drugs are killing people because they've been mixed with BLEACH.

    Edit: Also, I'd like to point out that lives that have been wasted by addictive drugs are the same thing that lives have been wasted by alcohol. No matter what, there will always be fuckwits who don't know how to control themselves.

    But then again, many people aren't very good at taking responsibility for their own actions.

    Aurin on
  • Options
    ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2007
    Personally I am against legalization, being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit, which is why I stayed away from this topic. However to use the evidence that another country with, again, an entirely different culture did it and its fine so it should be fine here is false.

    And I am of the opinion that people who take religion seriously and let it affect their decisions are fuckwits. However I'm not so huge a prick (or moron) as to think my opinion of gullible people is justification for legislation.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Unless the myth is extrapolating say, having a papercut -> bleeding to death type of exaggeration, in cases when the other option is death most of the time I can't help but think it's a good idea.

    Much like the bad luck myths, a way to communicate with idiots.

    Ok this is threadjacking a bit so apologies and ignore or whatever as required but: where the statistical correlation between the other option = death and the activity claimed to lead to this outcome is extremely low and the benefits of engaging in this activity are relatively high -- say leaving your house on Friday the Thirteenth or not wasting time and energy worrying about stepping on a crack and breakiing your mother's back--isn't the opposite true?
    What the fuck? That was exactly my point. Taking something that's unlikely - dying from bloodloss because of a papercut, is a retardedly bad myth to have about.

    Don't open an umbrella inside coz it's bad luck, don't walk under a ladder coz it's bad luck, don't break a mirror coz it's bad luck - are all good myths when your target audience is superstitious plebians.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Wow. This is a perfect example of exactly the kind of thing we're talking about -- minimizing harm.

    Also, while you are smart enough to go to rehab, a lot of people end up in prison instead. Would you agree, from your experience, that this would be a terribly ineffective way of getting you clean, that would have far more negative consequences than positive?

    Also, congratulations on gettting clean!

    Thanks for that.

    Anyhoo, just to clarify, I never went to a rehab clinic. Luckily enough, for me, anyway, I still maintained enough of my friendships outside of my circle of 'heroin friends' to fall back on. Looking back, I can sorta see why I should've gone to a place that could've helped me, but at the same time I think that the pain that I had to go through cold turkey was a pretty good motivation to quit. When it gets to a point where you're draining all your money away, and you're effectively doing the drug soley to stop feeling sick, there comes a time to draw the line. Luckily for me, the line was drawn for me, and the reaction I had that day served as a wake-up call to my other friends who were using. All but one of 'us' quit that following day, some checking in to rehab, others tapering off a bit on their usage, until eventually they 'broke free'. Though, freedom is a relative word, being as even though I don't feel the urge to do it really, at all, I still would, given the opportunity and the motive. This is where self-control steps in. Yes, drugs are addicting, so are a good deal of things in life. People can get 'addicted' to roller coasters, to the adreneline rush, not to mention several mundane things, like television, etc.

    I guess the point I'm trying to make is that, yes, drug addiction is a bad thing. But the properties of addiction aren't neccessarily 'mind controlling'. No drug will ever take away your free will entirely (not yet, but I'm sure the government is working on one :P), and trust me, my group of friends and I were pretty stuck, but once we became determined to stop the cycle of being broke, high, or sick, we were able to take control of our habits, one way or another. People seem to be giving undo 'power' to addiction, imagining it to be unbeatable and unavoidable. Never underestimate the power of free will, no matter how great a drug is.

    Oh, and an interesting footnote: The one friend who wasn't able to quit subsequently spent 6 months in prison and is now a dealer. I still haven't lost all contact with him though I don't talk to him very often at all, due to obvious reasons, he's doing alot better with his addiction (you can't make money if you use all the product), but now I'm a bit worried about the 'people' he works for. This is another problem that could be diminished with the regulation and decriminalization of certain drugs.

    Sure, I met plenty of really cool people that happened to deal in drugs, but when you go up higher in the food chain, you start to realize that the people that are running the drug business now are not very good people. And these people are gaining power because drugs are illegal. In any case, it's obvious to me that it would be completely impossible to wipe out drug use altogether, especially using our current trend of recycling drug users through prison, ignoring the power of rehabilitation, and pushing these drug problems 'under the rug'. All manner of vermin can live under the rug. The 'war on drugs' is an exercise in futility, and it's time to explore other options.

    EDIT: tl;dr - Drugs exist. You can't make them stop existing, and you definitely can't acheive anything by stamping them 'illegal' and moving on. People need education, not propoganda. Drugs are not all-consuming, mind-controlling demons, and they don't destroy free will. If you're worried about so many people immediately becoming addicts when drugs are made legal, you should try focusing more on WHY those people would turn to drugs to make their lives better. Being as this is a capitalist society, I believe that the widening gap between the rich and the poor has a great impact on the quality of lives of a great deal of our society. This is a subject for another thread though. Also, I'm aware that this has become a pretty long 'tl;dr', but I'm a rebel like that.

    Nickle on
    Xbox/PSN/NNID/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • Options
    ALockslyALocksly Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    The point is that this probably wouldn't have happened had heroin been legal and pure.

    better avoid this stuff too
    [in the US]The annual average number of deaths for which alcohol poisoning was listed as an underlying cause was 317, with an age-adjusted death rate of 0.11 per 100,000 population. An average of 1,076 additional deaths included alcohol poisoning as a contributing cause, bringing the total number of deaths with any mention of alcohol poisoning to 1,393 per year (0.49 per 100,000 population).

    edit: also bear in mind that this ignores drunk driving fatalities and people who just got hammered and tried to dodge arrows or jump off a balcony into a pool or chocked on their own vomit or something.

    ALocksly on
    Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
  • Options
    CrimsonKingCrimsonKing Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Personally I am against legalization, being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit, which is why I stayed away from this topic. However to use the evidence that another country with, again, an entirely different culture did it and its fine so it should be fine here is false.

    And I am of the opinion that people who take religion seriously and let it affect their decisions are fuckwits. However I'm not so huge a prick (or moron) as to think my opinion of gullible people is justification for legislation.

    Niether do I, I am arguing that using example from another country on this topic are meaningless. If if wasn't clear thats what I meant, I apologize but to reiterate, thats all I wanted to say.

    CrimsonKing on
    This sig was too tall - Elki.
  • Options
    GrundlterrorGrundlterror Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    The point is that this probably wouldn't have happened had heroin been legal and pure.

    Yeah, I agree. I was just kinda in a vengeful anti-heroin mood. Just thinking about my friend in rehab right now, sneaking out to get that... it just infuriates me. He's not the same person he used to be, the drug transformed him into something different. Hanging out with him is like hanging out with the shell of something that used to be a man.

    But thats a shitty argument for why something should be illegal I guess, because it makes your friends lame to hang out with. Girlfriends are still legal :P

    Grundlterror on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    The point is that this probably wouldn't have happened had heroin been legal and pure.

    Yeah, I agree. I was just kinda in a vengeful anti-heroin mood. Just thinking about my friend in rehab right now, sneaking out to get that... it just infuriates me. He's not the same person he used to be, the drug transformed him into something different. Hanging out with him is like hanging out with the shell of something that used to be a man.

    But thats a shitty argument for why something should be illegal I guess, because it makes your friends lame to hang out with. Girlfriends are still legal :P

    You know what they say: You can always judge a drug by it's users. Pot makes people goofy. Alcohol makes them dumb. Coke makes them raging fucktards. Aand Herion just destroys them

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    GrundlterrorGrundlterror Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    Yeah, she recently died of a heroin overdose. She was fucking 26 years old. Thats a shitty fucking drug right there, I don't give a shit how you package it.

    The point is that this probably wouldn't have happened had heroin been legal and pure.

    Yeah, I agree. I was just kinda in a vengeful anti-heroin mood. Just thinking about my friend in rehab right now, sneaking out to get that... it just infuriates me. He's not the same person he used to be, the drug transformed him into something different. Hanging out with him is like hanging out with the shell of something that used to be a man.

    But thats a shitty argument for why something should be illegal I guess, because it makes your friends lame to hang out with. Girlfriends are still legal :P

    You know what they say: You can always judge a drug by it's users. Pot makes people goofy. Alcohol makes them dumb. Coke makes them raging fucktards. Aand Herion just destroys them

    Wow, never heard them say that, but I like it.

    Grundlterror on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Them is this case is me

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Unless the myth is extrapolating say, having a papercut -> bleeding to death type of exaggeration, in cases when the other option is death most of the time I can't help but think it's a good idea.

    Much like the bad luck myths, a way to communicate with idiots.

    Ok this is threadjacking a bit so apologies and ignore or whatever as required but: where the statistical correlation between the other option = death and the activity claimed to lead to this outcome is extremely low and the benefits of engaging in this activity are relatively high -- say leaving your house on Friday the Thirteenth or not wasting time and energy worrying about stepping on a crack and breakiing your mother's back--isn't the opposite true?
    What the fuck? That was exactly my point. Taking something that's unlikely - dying from bloodloss because of a papercut, is a retardedly bad myth to have about.

    Don't open an umbrella inside coz it's bad luck, don't walk under a ladder coz it's bad luck, don't break a mirror coz it's bad luck - are all good myths when your target audience is superstitious plebians.

    Yeah I think we're on the same page here. My bad.

    themightypuck on
    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • Options
    ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2007
    thats all I wanted to say.

    No it isn't, you also wanted to launch a direct personal-attack on a bunch of people on grounds of your own personal delusions.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Options
    PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    I like how anyone against the idea of ending the prohibition which has clearly been oh so very effective thus far seems obsessed with the notion that this also means that no one will be responsible for what they do high, and that it wouldn't be illegal to shoot up in the middle of a nursery school playground in the middle of recess or drive around whacked out on meth.

    Assholes, no one proposing legalization and effective legislation and support mechanisms to handle addiction is so stupid as to not realize that yes, regulations similar to what are in place for alcohol and tobacco would obviously be necessary, and that some drugs might require tighter regulation than others.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • Options
    ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2007
    pheezer FD wrote: »
    I like how anyone against the idea of ending the prohibition which has clearly been oh so very effective thus far seems obsessed with the notion that this also means that no one will be responsible for what they do high, and that it wouldn't be illegal to shoot up in the middle of a nursery school playground in the middle of recess or drive around whacked out on meth.

    Assholes, no one proposing legalization and effective legislation and support mechanisms to handle addiction is so stupid as to not realize that yes, regulations similar to what are in place for alcohol and tobacco would obviously be necessary, and that some drugs might require tighter regulation than others.

    Actually Ohio's DWI laws already cover all substances. I'm pretty certain you can potentially get a DWI on prescription pain-meds that impair your ability to operate machinery if you end up wrecking someone's shit.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Options
    PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    pheezer FD wrote: »
    I like how anyone against the idea of ending the prohibition which has clearly been oh so very effective thus far seems obsessed with the notion that this also means that no one will be responsible for what they do high, and that it wouldn't be illegal to shoot up in the middle of a nursery school playground in the middle of recess or drive around whacked out on meth.

    Assholes, no one proposing legalization and effective legislation and support mechanisms to handle addiction is so stupid as to not realize that yes, regulations similar to what are in place for alcohol and tobacco would obviously be necessary, and that some drugs might require tighter regulation than others.

    Actually Ohio's DWI laws already cover all substances. I'm pretty certain you can potentially get a DWI on prescription pain-meds that impair your ability to operate machinery if you end up wrecking someone's shit.

    I strongly suspect most laws dealing with being under the influence would be of that nature. There's the problem of detection though, and some places will allow the police officer to make that judgement, and others will require proof along the lines of a breathalyzer. Assuming that a jurisdiction has every patrol car equipped with a tamper proof video recording system recording both through the windshield and into the back seat however, I think we can safely rely on the judgement of the police and have a tool for anyone legitimately falsely arrested to use in their defence in court.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Actually Ohio's DWI laws already cover all substances. I'm pretty certain you can potentially get a DWI on prescription pain-meds that impair your ability to operate machinery if you end up wrecking someone's shit.

    It's that way almost everywhere in the US.
    Technically, you can get a DUI in many states for cold medicine. California law says that any drug which may cause impairment of your ability can be grounds for a DUI.
    pheezer FD wrote:
    I think we can safely rely on the judgement of the police and have a tool for anyone legitimately falsely arrested to use in their defence in court.

    Assuming the judgment of the police is sound and the evidence is admitted to a jury trial.
    Unfortunately this is not typically the case with DUI proceedings in the US.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    DUI laws in the US are in need of a massive overhaul. I'd go so far as to call the current DUI laws themselves a form of backdoor prohibition.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Personally I am against legalization, being of the opinion that drugs are idiotic and anyone who does them without a legitimate medical reason is a fuckwit, which is why I stayed away from this topic. However to use the evidence that another country with, again, an entirely different culture did it and its fine so it should be fine here is false.
    I smoke pot every day and am not a fuckwit.

    Azio on
  • Options
    gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Feral wrote: »
    DUI laws in the US are in need of a massive overhaul. I'd go so far as to call the current DUI laws themselves a form of backdoor prohibition.
    Arguably so... but American drunk driving rates (and drunk driving fatalities per capita) are almost triple those of, say, the UK, despite the fact that the average UK citizen drinks more per capita than the average American.

    gtrmp on
  • Options
    LewishamLewisham Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    gtrmp wrote: »
    Arguably so... but American drunk driving rates (and drunk driving fatalities per capita) are almost triple those of, say, the UK, despite the fact that the average UK citizen drinks more per capita than the average American.
    Having been a UK person living in the US, the drunk-driving I found to be astonishing.

    The drink-driving rate in the US, as I see it, is created by several factors:

    1. Dispersed populations and reliance on motor vehicles means that if you want to go to the bar, there is a fair chance you will need someone to drive you. This is either because it's too far away, or there is no provision for pedestrians or public transport.

    2. Drink-driving deterrents are just plain abysmal. Adverts in the US: "If you drink-drive, you will get a ticket." Adverts in the UK: "If you drink-drive, YOU WILL KILL YOURSELF AND OTHERS." Shock tactics might be cheap, but if you do it young enough, it does work. I don't give a shit if you want to kill yourself behind the wheel, but, more often than not, it's the innocents that die.

    3. It simply isn't frowed upon all that much. I was once told "People in the US know their limits, they can make the choice of how much." Fuck no they can't, there is nothing different about US people to anyone else in the world about handling their drink. My friends and I have a straight rule if you're driving: You get one pint, and you're done. Over a whole night. I personally will have nothing. If we're only there for an hour, the driver doesn't get anything either. We buy him the non-alcoholic drinks he wants. In the UK, drinking and driving makes you a complete and utter twat, and is way beyond "uncool". In the US, it's like "man, if he wants to get a ticket, it's his choice".

    The whole culture has to change. It isn't the DUI laws.

    Lewisham on
  • Options
    PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    American culture surrounding drinking and driving IS bizarre. I was astounded when I first visited LA as an adult to see the number of people who had no problem driving to a bar, having two or three drinks, and hopping back in the driver's seat like an hour later.

    Here's what happens for DUI in Manitoba:
    If your BAC level is over .08 or you refuse to provide a breath or blood sample to police, you will face additional consequences:

    * an automatic three-month licence suspension
    * vehicle impoundment (except SMMs)
    * a mandatory Impaired driver’s assessment* at your expense
    * an additional licence insurance premium of up to $999**
    * a requirement to take a driver’s exam or a driving course, at your expense

    Some consequences of driving while suspended or disqualified

    Vehicles and off-road vehicles operated by suspended or disqualified drivers will be impounded. Owners must pay the costs of towing and storage, plus an impoundment charge, before a vehicle is released.

    Criminal Code offences

    Driving any vehicle while impaired, with a BAC over .08, and/or refusing to provide a breath or blood sample to the police on request, are criminal offences.

    Other related criminal code offences include:

    * impaired driving causing bodily harm or death
    * driving or having care or control of a vehicle while impaired by drugs or alcohol
    * driving while disqualified

    If you are convicted of an impaired driving offence under the Criminal Code, your driver’s licence will be suspended and you will be disqualified from driving any kind of vehicle. A conviction will result in a number of sanctions which may include:

    * a court-imposed minimum one-year driving prohibition
    * participation in Manitoba’s Ignition Interlock Program
    * fines from $600 to $2000**
    * imprisonment for up to five years for impaired driving
    * imprisonment for up to life and a court-imposed prohibition from driving any type of vehicle for up to life, if you cause an accident that results in the death or bodily harm of another person

    *Mandatory Impaired Driver’s Assessment

    An impaired driver’s assessment from the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba (AFM) of your alcohol or drug use is required after an alcohol or drug-related driving suspension. You will be required to sign a release authorizing the AFM to access your driving record. A copy of the assessment is sent to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles.

    You may be referred to an educational workshop, a program for high-risk drivers or an AFM treatment program. You may also lose your licence and be disqualified from driving until your alcohol or drug use is under control.

    ** Charges and Fines are subject to change.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    The War on Drugs is primarily a law enforcement endeavor. As I explained before small time drug charges are arguably the best bargaining chip law enforcement has when it comes to scaring people. That's because so many damn people do drugs the cops have leverage on just about everyone. Not to mention the mandatory sentences for stupid drug possession charges are so ridiculous in lots of states. NY just recently appealed some of theirs because people were fucking going to jail for 15 years for selling weed and crap.

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    ALockslyALocksly Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I got no problem with a zero tolerance DUI policy.

    I found out in Japan the legal limit is zero. If you take a sip of beer then get behind the wheel you're breaking the law. I like this because it removes the subjective "well, I think I'm ok to drive" type jugements from the equation.

    ALocksly on
    Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
  • Options
    ShadeShade Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    American prisons are hellholes? You need to go to other countries, and get arrested more.

    Shade on
  • Options
    AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    Azio on
  • Options
    ShadeShade Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Azio wrote: »
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    get arrested in argentina sometime, or cuba.

    Shade on
  • Options
    The SaviorThe Savior Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Shade wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    get arrested in argentina sometime, or cuba.

    Isn't the "western world" generally considered to be Canada, the US, Japan, and Western Europe?

    The Savior on
  • Options
    RandomtaskRandomtask Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    The Savior wrote: »
    Shade wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    get arrested in argentina sometime, or cuba.

    Isn't the "western world" generally considered to be Canada, the US, Japan, and Western Europe?

    Get arrested in some godforsaken little European shithole.

    Randomtask on
    Most men pursue pleasure with such breathless haste that they hurry past it.
    - Soren Kierkegaard
  • Options
    ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2007
    I recommend avoiding getting arrested anywhere, frankly. Although in regards to the discussion in this thread, many drugs are cheaper and easier to get in prison than outside.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Options
    gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Randomtask wrote: »
    The Savior wrote: »
    Shade wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    get arrested in argentina sometime, or cuba.

    Isn't the "western world" generally considered to be Canada, the US, Japan, and Western Europe?

    Get arrested in some godforsaken little European shithole.
    In Western Europe?

    gtrmp on
  • Options
    Lord Cecil EaglelaserLord Cecil Eaglelaser Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    gtrmp wrote: »
    Randomtask wrote: »
    The Savior wrote: »
    Shade wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I would venture to say that American prisons are by far the worst in the Western world.

    get arrested in argentina sometime, or cuba.

    Isn't the "western world" generally considered to be Canada, the US, Japan, and Western Europe?

    Get arrested in some godforsaken little European shithole.
    In Western Europe?

    Try getting arrested in France, all you can eat is wine and cheese. It's cruel and unusual.

    Lord Cecil Eaglelaser on
Sign In or Register to comment.