User Tag List

First 122021222324 Last

Results 211 to 220 of 280

  1. #211
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post

    So we have the tobacco companies versus the sovereign government of Australia. Who do you think will win?
    The tobacco companies. I not rooting for them necessarily just saying. Also when I smoked the fact that the smokes were in a olive wrapper would do little to slow down my craving to smoke.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  2. #212
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Alcohol is an extremely addictive drug. I believe it is one of the few recreational drugs in the world which can manifest fatal withdrawal symptoms.
    + heroin.

  3. #213
    mod love baby... Lady_X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/so
    Posts
    18,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    It is already against the law to drive while impaired by prescription and recreational drugs, including insulin, marijuana, LSD, alcohol, sleeping pills, etc.

    Likewise, creating a public disturbance through drunkenness is illegal regardless of the legality of alcohol.

    Why would these laws be any different if certain drugs were decriminalized?
    i already know this dude. just mentioning it because anytime in the past that i've mentioned marijuana or mushrooms should be legal someone comes back with so...you think people should be able to walk down the street smoking a joint or tripping on mushrooms at the grocery store or some other stupid thing...so i'm just saying...the same laws should apply.
    There can’t be any large-scale revolution until there’s a personal revolution, on an individual level. It’s got to happen inside first.
    -Jim Morrison

  4. #214
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    The tobacco companies. I not rooting for them necessarily just saying. Also when I smoked the fact that the smokes were in a olive wrapper would do little to slow down my craving to smoke.
    My government has had considerable success in reducing smoking in Australians. The exceptions are teenage girls, the mentally ill, and the drug or alcohol addicted.

    We have raised the price and banned cigarette advertising. And cigarettes must not be openly displayed where they are sold. And as well, we warn Australians that smoking is poisonous and uniquely addictive. Also we have banned smoking in restaurants and indoors. Also we have banned smoking at outdoor tables at restaurants. And we have banned smoking in motor cars.

    And when you take out your green olive packet of cigarettes, everyone will know you are an addict and probably a teenage girl, mentally ill, or are drug or alcohol addicted.

    No wonder the evil tobacco companies are ropeable.

  5. #215
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    We have beaten the richest and most powerful international tobacco companies in the world. Do you think we will be afraid of the criminals who trade in ekstasi and their pathetic customers?

  6. #216
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Yes, you did. By claiming my position was illogical, you said my position was wrong. Then you failed to provide any support for your claim, even though I had already provided some for mine. You have explained why you're against legalizing ecstasy, but your reasoning is refuted by scientific data. Despite the existence of this data, you continue to believe something that is false.

    Do you have a point? Or is this just a blatant appeal to authority?

    You're assuming a lot with these statements. What's out of control is drug trafficking violence. What's out of control is the fact that young, inner city kids see the easy money they can get selling drugs (which is only possible because of prohibition) and decide school isn't that important, so they end up either dead or in prison and the cycle continues. What's out of control is the fact that the US imprisons a higher percentage of its people than any other nation on the planet, including bastions of freedom like North Korea and Iran.

    No one plans on "half-ass" removing any laws. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    You can't write a single post on this subject without accusing your "opponent" of being a drug user. Pathetic.

    We already have laws against that. It's called DUI. While we're on this subject, I would have no problem if the penalty for your first DUI offense was life in prison. Driving under the influence is an incredibly reckless act that we take far too lightly. But what is reckless is the driving while intoxicated, not the drinking. We should punish what is actually a crime, and nothing more. The same should apply to drug use. Use all you want, but once you cross that line and harm someone else, it's over for you.

    Do you feel more freedom knowing that many police officers get corrupted by the War on Drugs? Do you feel more freedom knowing that in certain neighborhoods innocent people get caught in the crossfire of drug turf wars? Probably. As long as it's not your neighborhood, why would you care?

    And if it was legalized, it wouldn't contain these other substances. The FDA would regulate it. What a stupid argument.

    Again, if it was legalized, we could make it so that it is no longer "dirty". What a stupid argument, yet you used it twice in the same post.

    A "free-for-all lawless society"? Really? Can you show me where anyone has said there shouldn't be any laws? A lot of pro-legalization people want most drugs to be handled similarly to how alcohol is handled. Would you characterize the way alcohol is currently handled as a "free-for-all" or lawless? I sure wouldn't. This is another straw man argument by you.

    Mexico did NOT legalize drugs. Get your facts straight. Mexico decriminalized possession of small amounts of some drugs. This does absolutely nothing to address the violence by the cartels because the cartels move drugs in much larger amounts and that is STILL ILLEGAL.

    Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Mexico was run by drug lords LONG before this law was passed. And to try to argue that this law somehow made Mexican drug lords so powerful is beyond stupid. They get their money from selling drugs in the US, and this law had absolutely no affect on the part of the drug trade. Zilch. Zero.

    If this is what you learned, then your teacher sucked. Have you ever heard of the allure of the forbidden?

    There's no need to flip a coin. If it's legal for ecstasy to be advertised, it will be. If it's not, it won't be. We probably both agree that advertising ecstasy on billboards is not a good idea, so I don't think it's something for you to worry about. There's no need for you to grasp for this straw anymore.
    I won’t assume that legalizing drugs like ecstasy will do anything but exasperate the problems you speak of. "Scientific data" reveals that the legalization of alcohol and tobacco did not take the government and laws out of the equation. In fact, there are more laws, more government, more tax dollars involved than there ever was during prohibition. The consumption laws alone contain a wide range of issues from behavior to age, to when and where you may drink. We should expect similar regulations on recreational drugs, if they're legalized. With that, comes a black market for more powerful "dirty" drugs.

    In order to achieve the utopia you so passionately idealize where the legalization of drugs lowers the crime rate, those drugs would have to be cheap and easy to get. But even then, the assumption of legalizers seems to be that drugs like ecstasy have a limited demand; meaning that if their consumption was legal, the demand would not significantly increase because only the people currently taking drugs would continue to do so and they would no longer have a reason to commit crimes. And people like us would not find cheap and legal drugs alluring. The reality is, price and availability have a significant effect on consumers and consumption. The data proves time and time again that the cheaper a commodity becomes, the more it’s consumed. Alcohol is a good example of that.

    In summary, based on simple economics, the number of users/abusers will go up as prices of the legalized drugs fall and as drug usage increases in a community, so does drug related psychosis and criminal activity. It doesn't matter how cheap and legal your drugs are, I'd be willing to bet you're still going find addicts stealing for drugs. And since there will be more addicts in this scenario, there will be more crime.

    One thing is apparent from your posts; you are a very passionate emotional person that takes great liberties in interpreting posts to suit you. There's too much emo value judgment stuff & fluff fillers and not enough interesting substance where I might actually learn something. Instead of bouncing around ideas, it's a windy day at the beach.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Mexico did NOT legalize drugs. Get your facts straight.
    False.

    Fact: Mexico legalized recreational drugs in specific quantities for personal use in 2009; applies to drug users only (not dealers). Decriminalization by definition is legislation that makes something legal that was formerly illegal.

  7. #217
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post



    False.

    Fact: Mexico legalized recreational drugs in specific quantities for personal use in 2009; applies to drug users only (not dealers). Decriminalization by definition is legislation that makes something legal that was formerly illegal.
    Hmm... decriminalization means that jail is out of the equation, eg most types of speeding don't get you into jail. It is counterproductive, and creates more harm than the drugs do themselves usually to put someone in jail for things like that.

  8. #218
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    I didn't realise that being ecstatic was illegal.

    More seriously, all drugs should be legal. More pragmatically, drug prohibition should be local government thing.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  9. #219
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kdk;17)45915
    Hmm... decriminalization means that jail is out of the equation, eg most types of speeding don't get you into jail. It is counterproductive, and creates more harm than the drugs do themselves usually to put someone in jail for things like that.
    Duck tape is to Bubba as dope is was to Michael Jackson. [A quick fix.] R.I.P.

    Just think, if Jackson was in jail for molesting boys, he might still be alive today.

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    More pragmatically, drug prohibition should be local government thing.
    Agreed. God bless Texas!

  10. #220
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post
    I won’t assume that legalizing drugs like ecstasy will do anything but exasperate the problems you speak of. "Scientific data" reveals that the legalization of alcohol and tobacco did not take the government and laws out of the equation. In fact, there are more laws, more government, more tax dollars involved than there ever was during prohibition. The consumption laws alone contain a wide range of issues from behavior to age, to when and where you may drink. We should expect similar regulations on recreational drugs, if they're legalized. With that, comes a black market for more powerful "dirty" drugs.
    1. Of course regulation requires more laws than legalization. It's more far more complex, legally. Having fewer laws is not an end, in and of itself.

    2. How much do we spend on drug prohibition every year? How much do we spend regulating alcohol and tobacco every year? The former is on the order of $70 billion. I'd be surprised if the latter is even 1/10th that amount.

    3. Has the regulation of alcohol created a black market for more powerful "dirty" alcohol?

    In order to achieve the utopia you so passionately idealize where the legalization of drugs lowers the crime rate, those drugs would have to be cheap and easy to get.
    Who said anything about a utopia? This is yet another straw man argument. My position isn't idealistic, it's pragmatic. Legalizing drugs won't solve the drug problem, only education and treatment can do that. Legalizing drugs will reduce our violence problem.

    But even then, the assumption of legalizers seems to be that drugs like ecstasy have a limited demand; meaning that if their consumption was legal, the demand would not significantly increase because only the people currently taking drugs would continue to do so and they would no longer have a reason to commit crimes. And people like us would not find cheap and legal drugs alluring. The reality is, price and availability have a significant effect on consumers and consumption. The data proves time and time again that the cheaper a commodity becomes, the more it’s consumed. Alcohol is a good example of that.

    In summary, based on simple economics, the number of users/abusers will go up as prices of the legalized drugs fall and as drug usage increases in a community, so does drug related psychosis and criminal activity. It doesn't matter how cheap and legal your drugs are, I'd be willing to bet you're still going find addicts stealing for drugs. And since there will be more addicts in this scenario, there will be more crime.
    You don't seem to understand simple economics. Let me introduce you to a term you have probably never heard before, inelastic demand. Drugs have an inelastic demand curve. Comparing drugs to a commodity like gold is just...nevermind.

    Most drug related violence is due to cartels and dealers. How many users do something like this?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...errey-drug-war

    None. It doesn't happen. Most drug users are non-violent. And of the ones who are violent, many don't become violent until after they've been exposed to violent criminals while in prison.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lapl...res-40000.html

    Between 2006 and 2010, 34,000 Mexicans were killed by the cartels. 34,000! That's more than 11 9/11s in just 4 years! How you can possibly try to argue that drug user violence is a bigger issue than drug cartel violence is just mind boggling.

    One thing is apparent from your posts; you are a very passionate emotional person that takes great liberties in interpreting posts to suit you. There's too much emo value judgment stuff & fluff fillers and not enough interesting substance where I might actually learn something. Instead of bouncing around ideas, it's a windy day at the beach.
    I am passionate about this issue because I believe it is one of the most self-destructive social policies this country has ever instituted.

    If you find data to be without substance, that's sad.

    False.

    Fact: Mexico legalized recreational drugs in specific quantities for personal use in 2009; applies to drug users only (not dealers). Decriminalization by definition is legislation that makes something legal that was formerly illegal.
    This makes no sense. You originally said this:

    Edit: Let's look at Mexico for a moment. What has happened south of the border since a 'model' law has been enacted legalizing drugs? There has developed an out and out war among drug dealers that have killed thousands over a four year period during which drugs have been for all intents and purposes legalized. Mexico is practically run by drug lords now.
    And now you say this only applied to users, not dealers (which is something I told you in my previous post). You can't even keep your arguments straight. Or do you believe it's drug addicts going around killing all of these people? Do you?
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

Similar Threads

  1. Article on drug legalization
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 09-13-2012, 06:46 PM
  2. On legality of Infanticide
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 176
    Last Post: 11-24-2008, 07:59 AM
  3. [INFJ] How is the legal profession for INFJs?
    By karenk in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-01-2008, 12:52 PM
  4. Why drug dealing should be legalized...
    By The Ü™ in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-10-2007, 02:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO