The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Let's talk about drugs!
Vincent Grayson
Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
Hey so, let's discuss drugs! Is their use inherently selfish? Should we treat all drugs the same, or recognize the massive differences in dangers, addiction likelyhood, and other factors? Should all free people have the choice to make use of whatever pleases them, such that it does not infringe on the rights of others? Is there an objective scale we can consult that determines the value of a given experience, such that experiences involving drugs are worthless and benefit no one?
Let's meet our first poster, Unnamed!
TLDR; Drugs are always bad and slowly destroying mankind and no one has the right to use any of them, as they are all equally bad and inherently worthless? Or perhaps our good friend here is grossly misinformed and refuses to put any effort into understanding even his own position?
Let's meet our first poster, Unnamed!
Your such a liberal. There are many vices in the world, but the one that will bring mankind to a complete and utter end someday, will be drugs. When we eliminated prohibition and brought back alcohol it was because of people like you speaking out too much and too hard.
And if they eliminate the criminalization of drugs someday it will be once again because of people like you, speaking out too much and way too hard.
You say people should have the freedom to do anything right? The freedom to shoot themselves in the face? No fuck that. I'll tell you what freedom people should have. The freedom from vices, and freedom from drug, the freedom from crack deals going down in their neighborhoods and freedom from people killing themselves every single day due to drugs. The human spirit is not such a denigrated thing as to require drugs. Tell me, will we someday just regress to a point where a human life is composed of stimulating drugs in a person 24/7 putting them in a state of constant euphoria and orgasm until they burn out and die? You may say no, but I say yes if we continue this drug induced decline. Often I have presented people with strange and bizarre ideas, and they ask me "Are you on drugs?" And I just want to strangle them to the ground and say "No you fuckhead, I'm not on drugs, I've never been on drugs and I never will. These ideas are not the result of unnatural chemicals and demons in my blood, they are the result of pure human thinking, and if this is what you think drugs are capable of then you should be very afraid."
All useless and soul rotting drugs should be purged, no matter how niggardly their effects may be.
Only then, will men rise above the vices they have created.
What are you a fucking retard? There's nothing special about drug induced experiences. It's just your god damn brain fucking creating stupid errors and shit. Nice to see you are a fan of such profound content.
Why don't you go do something real with your life. You and every drug user out there. Go visit another country, or take up a hobby, or see the wildlife, or go jetskiing. Or do you somehow plan to argue that drug use is better than all those things?
Fuck you, go sit in a corner and degrade.
Don't worry about how I argue. A drug is a drug is a drug.
Even Alcohol should be banned, it's worse than even some of the least harmful of illegal drugs.
Yet harmless does not mean something suddenly has value, nor that it should be excusable. Recreational Drugs have no value, they are pointless pieces of shit. When all is said and done, all you find is that you've fucking wasted hours of your life doing jackshit.
Hey bitch, read this:
At the end of the day, you will have nothing to show for your acid trip. You'll just have a bunch of stupid memories that no one will ever believe. And toward the end of your life, you will question if you ever really lived.
A drug user's experience will always be entirely selfish, and thats what we need to avoid in this growing world.
TLDR; Drugs are always bad and slowly destroying mankind and no one has the right to use any of them, as they are all equally bad and inherently worthless? Or perhaps our good friend here is grossly misinformed and refuses to put any effort into understanding even his own position?
Vincent Grayson on
0
Posts
Why should my good time be disallowed just because you might not like the same activity? I don't keep people from downhill skiing even though it's dangerous (what if you hit a tree?) and I don't like it (seriously, it's cold out there) so why should you be able to disallow my good time (an occassional drinking episode) if I'm not hurting you or imposing on your good time and/or rights?
Depends on if you have other responsibilities to take care of, say, childcare or something like that.
I have no issues with alcohol (I actually think the drinking age should be gotten rid of) and marijuana should be legal (like how alcohol is now, and taxed accordingly). I don't think that drugs like cocaine or heroin should be legal, however, since they're so physically addicting.
Is there a tangible difference between spending the evening hanging out with your friends watching TV, and spending the evening hanging out with your friends tripping? I would say no, save the degree to which any given person might enjoy either experience, making one better than the other depending on who you ask.
Hell, some people might not like either one, and would rather spend the evening reading a book. I have a hard time ascribing an objective value to any of those three to rank them for anyone other than myself.
never mind cigarettes, though! :roll:
most of all, most of all
someone said true love was dead
but i'm bound to fall
bound to fall for you
oh what can i do
Not a good start.
He doesn't have an argument, just an opinion.
As far as responsibilities go, I agree...but that applies to anything. I shouldn't be getting high if I'm supposed to be watching my kids, but I also shouldn't be playing videogames, or out driving around, or anything else.
Regarding the physical addiction issues, I agree they are a problem, but I still believe they would be easier to address without the legal issues/stigma that currently plague addicts. Additionally, better control of the substance itself would likely lead to "cleaner" drugs with less potentially dangerous/lethal effects.
Since cigarettes can kill you on your first hit. And you can OD on nicotene so easily. And nicotene is such a mind-altering substance.
hurr, that wasn't the argument
the argument was that they shouldn't be legal because they're physically addicting
hence my cigarette comment, mr. overly sensitive smoker
most of all, most of all
someone said true love was dead
but i'm bound to fall
bound to fall for you
oh what can i do
The reason we legalized it was that prohibition created a fucking huge untaxed black market in alcohol, run by very unsavory elements who accrued an enormous amount of influence based on it, and legalizing it elminated a fucking shitload of crime and corruption.
The real issue is personal responsibility, not "drug use" or "eating fatty foods" or "shooting yourself in the face" (whatever kind of inane comparison that was supposed to be).
You seriously think the richest 1% of corperations and lobbyists should control what we can do in private to our own bodies?!?...
hurr, just pointing out that putting cigarettes in the same league as hard drugs is ridiculous, hurr
hurr, I don't smoke, hurrrrrrrr
I think that's a separate issue. If I'm an irresponsible parent it's going to be obvious regardless of whether drugs are legal. Alcohol is physically addictive, and we haven't outlawed that. So are cigarettes. And cough syrup. And sleeping pills.
Seriously, can't we treat people like adults? If I decide to get high and it turns out that my actions were detrimental to my (hypothetical) child's well-being then charge me with child neglect or child abuse. Seriously, the problem there is shitty parenting not shitty parenting due to drug use.
Gooey summarized it pretty nicely but yeah.........comparing the physically addicting properties of nicotine with the properties of, say, cocaine is kind of retarded. Are you really going to make the argument that the nicotine in cigarettes is so physically addicting that it needs to be illegal?
And if you read closely, I said those drugs (and those like them) should be illegal because they're "so" physically addicting. Meaning that degree is of prime importance. Which you conveniently ignored. Well done.
Btw, I'm not sure LSD should be legal. It stays in your system and can cause relapses without notice when you are, say, driving or doing something else dangerous. That's different than shrooms or other drugs that clear your system without any problems.
How so? Cigarettes account for far more death than any illegal drugs. Hell, it's almost worse, since they let you stick around long enough to kill some other people too
...And handed out to each boat on the "It's a Small World" ride at Disney World.
I generally agree with you but alcohol doesn't make you physically addicted with casual use. There are certain drugs that are nearly impossible to use casually; it is those drugs that I believe should be outlawed, along with other ones that have proven to cause violent/dangerous behavior practically all of the time (PCP, for example).
Again, I have no issues with casual use of alcohol or marijuana or shrooms. But I do think that certain drugs fall within a certain threshold of immediate and long-term danger due to their direct effects or the power of their addictive properties.
I would like to see statistics on the number of cigarette smokers vs. the number of hard drug users, actually.
Prohibition was the best thing to ever happen to the mob and organized crime in the same way that teh drug schedule we have is doing nothing but helping Columbian Cartels and harming American citizens. If you actually thought prohibition worked and was in any way beneficial, well, what drug are you on?
They don't actually kill you, though. They increase your chance of developing certain medical conditions. Restrictions on cigarette use is fine by me, honestly; smoking in public should be banned. Similarly, I don't think people should be allowed to smoke around children. At the same time, price manipulation via taxation can effectively control cigarette use to make it less hazardous to everyone (the less you smoke, the better off you are) without making it illegal. Essentially, cigarettes can be used casually so there are better methods of controlling use without simply banning it.
This is in direct opposition to what we know about, say, crack.
I have a friend who seems to manage to work himself into a frenzy when he drinks or smokes pot. The smallest amount of alcohol and he's trashed, a hit or two from the bong and he's giggling like a madman. Once a bunch of us decided to buy shrooms and he wanted in. After debating it for awhile we decided that it would be hypocritical to not let him try it, as another person we were doing it with was going to eat them for the first time too. So we gave him a 1/16 and hung out for a bit having a good time. He kept asking how he'd know when it hit him and we gave the stock answer of 'You'll know when it does.' A few hours before I peaked we split up. I was playing with some crap I had with me, some other dudes wanted to go to a party, and the two people who were sober decided to go with them. I didn't really notice, but my one friend came in and sat down with me. He kept talking about what he was feeling, but I was ignoring him because I was busy doing whatever it was I was doing and couldn't be bothered. Next thing I know I'm outside chasing him as he's screaming at the top of his lungs in his underwear.
The lesson I learned that day was some people shouldn't do hard drugs. So many things could have gone wrong that day. I'm lucky as hell no one else called the police or came out to stop him. If you're a friend you're doing them a disservice by supplying them.
[/After School Special]
But if THC was legal I'd have less hangovers.
I can't say it better than Mr. Hicks himself.
In the past, banning these substances (including alcohol), was made on moral or even social grounds (see: marijuana). Now, they stay banned (at least on a federal level) because the effort to legalize them is not worth the potential side-effect of being voted out.
From a personal standpoint, I have no problem with individuals imbibing in all sorts of chemicals, and scientific information being readily available on the effects (Erowid, not DARE). If you want to drink bleach, go ahead, you can win your very own Darwin Award.
I'd also be willing to bet that there are numerous thrill-seekers (base jumping, mountaineering, stuntmen) that engage is far riskier activities then even the hardest drugs (heroin, coke, crack).
Myth. Anecdotally I can vouch that this is false, or at least what you're implying. Part of the hallucinatory effects include warping of light or textures. If you stare at something the "right way" this warping effect might kick in. However, you won't all the sudden have bat shriek out of the sky, etc. Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lsd#Flashbacks_and_HPPD
|daydalus.net|
==========
...and I'm the antedote to pretty much any anti-drug anecdote.
yeah and I don't trust people not to hit me with their cars when I cross the street.
but I can't tell them not to drive.
edit - I meant to imply that they might drive drunk... got ahead of myself.
The government can if they hit enough people or get caught driving drunk.
Yeah, guess I was wrong on that one. Put LSD in the category of ok by me.
Btw, I see lots of research on price manipulation on cigarettes and they all tell me higher prices actually do work. You can just google the following phrase: "relationship cigarette price use" and see for yourself.
So where are u getting your info on that?
But driving while impaired is already banned; un-banning drugs won't affect that. Plus, even though drunk driving is illegal, getting drunk in your home isn't.
exactly. hell, people (according to the current laws) shouldn't have coke or acid etc. etc. but they still get it and on occasion manage to hurt themselves and/or others. If every tom, dick, and jane had easy access to some more potent drugs I'd hate to see the state of things.
Yeah, furthermore LSD does not stay in your system. It's all flushed out after 48 hours or so. Flashbacks are purely psychological, not biochemical remnants of the experience.
This isn't true at all. Numerous studies show that increasing taxes on cigarettes decreases smoking rates. Here's a PDF I found with more information; granted, it is from an anti-smoking website, but it is thoroughly referenced and includes citations from Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds.
Agreed; the problem already exists. Mainstreaming more drugs could potentially make the problem worse.
The elasticity of demand is a key factor; I don't think you see similar elasticity in hard drugs. People honestly don't CARE how much it costs once they're sufficiently addicted. And if given a chance to become freely marketed and sold, you'd see huge spikes in usage rates which is not particularly healthy.
We can still have relatively productive citizens if they're addicted to cigarettes. The same cannot be said if they are addicted to, say, heroin.
This is a minor point, but cocaine isn't physically addictive. Not that it really matters because it is super duper psychologically addictive.
You're probably right about hard drugs. I don't really want to get into this argument, anyway; I just wanted to correct the gross misinformation I saw.
really?
because I've done a lot of it and I'm pretty sure it's some kind of addictive.
if it didn't have that I'd take the info seriously. There's tons of propaganda on both sides of all drug issues, thats just more of it.
here's one of the best examples: http://www.abovetheinfluence.com/ I dare you to take them seriously
and what program are billions upon billions of dollars be dumped into with very little result? the FDA, shocking... :roll: