User Tag List

First 162425262728 Last

Results 251 to 260 of 280

  1. #251
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Would you say that ecstasy is THE gateway drug?
    No, sir.

    <--(I am not ExTJ.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Or are there other gateway drugs?
    Yes!

  2. #252
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536
    We've just beaten the tobacco companies. Why would we set up an ekstasi company?

  3. #253
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Yep, $26 billion is the FEDERAL spending. That doesn't include state and local spending. I've heard estimates from $50-$70 billion a year spent between all levels of government. I'll admit that $70 billion is probably on the high side, but it's a difficult number to quantify, precisely. The states spend at least as much as the federal government, each year. So you should at least double that $26 billion.

    You're suggesting that legalization promotes "dirty" versions of drugs. If that's an effect of legalization, there should be "dirty" alcohol". Where is it?

    And? This only happens because it's not regulated.

    I don't believe in angels. But you apparently love straw men.

    What you mean is, ignore data and go with your gut.

    Care to show me where it has failed? I'm going to take a shot in the dark here and say that if any nation has legalized drugs and it had a negative effect on the society, it was probably a third world nation, a nation with political instability, a nation that is nothing like the US. Portugal is the closest example we have to the US, it is therefore the most valid example.

    In your mind, apparently gold and ecstasy have a lot in common. Gold has an elastic demand curve. You believe ecstasy does, too. I disagree.

    You're trying to say that violence increased BECAUSE of decriminalization. That's simply not true. Violence has increased because the government is being more forceful with the cartels. Those are two distinct actions by the Mexican government. Decriminalization is distinct from the increased pressure on cartels from police. Why is this true? Because you can have one without the other.

    You have made one breakthrough. You admit that being more aggressive in the war on drugs leads to an increase in violence. Eventually, you'll think this through, completely.
    Let me ask you something. You mentioned that you’re particular about what drugs, if any, that you’re willing to consume. And I think that is admirable and the world needs more people like you. But if that’s what you want for yourself, and if that’s what the majority wants for themselves, then why uphold the minority value above your own when their values are arguably more detrimental to themselves and society than their violence, as their values are the catalyst to their actions and contagious to sheeple? Besides, aren’t they the leeches on society? And aren’t there more of us (non-users) than them? Why not step up our ass kicking game so they will either learn how to follow community values and rules or get the hell out and hopefully go to Portugal?

    Technically, drug related crime wouldn’t exist, if people placed a higher value on long-term health goals and didn’t buy highly addictive recreational drugs. But because highly addictive drug users do buy at any cost, we should accommodate them and legalize their drugs to theoretically lower the overall cost on society and possibly profit from the tax revenue?

    BTW folks, some of the gateway drugs like ecstasy are coming to a pharmacy near you, if they haven't already arrived.

    It’s not often I argue with an ENTJ on a controversial topic like this where legalization essentially spells d-e-f-e-a-t against folks that are stereotypically the unproductive leeches on society. For peace of mind, tell me the hidden agenda is survival of the fittest and I shouldn’t worry because the leeches will quickly die off from cheap drugfest overdoses and legalization is the most efficient way to git-er-done. :S

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    We've just beaten the tobacco companies. Why would we set up an ekstasi company?
    Don't. If that's the case, then you're already way ahead of the game and setting the standard.

  4. #254
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    You're suggesting that legalization promotes "dirty" versions of drugs.
    Absolutely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    If that's an effect of legalization, there should be "dirty" alcohol".
    Classic. Lateralus reaching out to Uncle Newton for a law that "should" have universal application. This is where Te starts to annoy. And no there shouldn't be dirty alcohol. Ask yourself...
    Was there dirty alcohol during prohibition? No.
    Are there dirty drugs during prohibition? Yes. Adulteration is a common practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    But you apparently love straw men.
    Not really, but you sure seem hearts & flowers over them. In fact, you seem to love them so much you can't stop talking about them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    What you mean is, ignore data and go with your gut.
    Right back at ya.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    In your mind, apparently gold and ecstasy have a lot in common. Gold has an elastic demand curve. You believe ecstasy does, too. I disagree.
    In your mind, you associate gold with ecstasy. I would not make that comparison, even though they are elastic, they are two different types of commodities.

    Ecstasy is a 'want'. Ne-Ti gives two thumbs up for 'elastic'. No doubts. For. Now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    You have made one breakthrough. You admit that being more aggressive in the war on drugs leads to an increase in violence. Eventually, you'll think this through, completely.
    Yes, I'll admit, I'm coming around on this point, with regard to Mexico. However, it will take an act of God to get me to commit that logic on a grander scale; say, to the entire universe and beyond like you might be inclined to do.

  5. #255
    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
    Let me ask you something. You mentioned that you’re particular about what drugs, if any, that you’re willing to consume. And I think that is admirable and the world needs more people like you. But if that’s what you want for yourself, and if that’s what the majority wants for themselves, then why uphold the minority value above your own when their values are arguably more detrimental to themselves and society than their violence, as their values are the catalyst to their actions and contagious to sheeple? Besides, aren’t they the leeches on society? And aren’t there more of us (non-users) than them? Why not step up our ass kicking game so they will either learn how to follow community values and rules or get the hell out and hopefully go to Portugal?
    Because the cost of "winning" the drug war is too great. If you want to take the authoritarian approach to winning the drug war, what we're doing right now isn't even close to what needs to be done. Saudi Arabia (supposedly) has the lowest rate of drug use in the world, but in order to copy their techniques, we would have to spend even more money and give up our individual rights. Maybe that's a price you're willing to pay, but I'm not. I'm reminded of the Benjamin Franklin quote, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Technically, drug related crime wouldn’t exist, if people placed a higher value on long-term health goals and didn’t buy highly addictive recreational drugs. But because highly addictive drug users do buy at any cost, we should accommodate them and legalize their drugs to theoretically lower the overall cost on society and possibly profit from the tax revenue?
    You're right, if everyone valued long-term health more, they wouldn't use any illicit drug. I wish everyone thought like me, but I can't force my values on them. It's one of the costs of having a free society, some people will live their lives in a way that is self-destructive.

    It’s not often I argue with an ENTJ on a controversial topic like this where legalization essentially spells d-e-f-e-a-t against folks that are stereotypically the unproductive leeches on society. For peace of mind, tell me the hidden agenda is survival of the fittest and I shouldn’t worry because the leeches will quickly die off from cheap drugfest overdoses and legalization is the most efficient way to git-er-done. :S
    Defeat? Is this about pride for you, then? I wasn't yet born when these policies were instituted. I have no emotional attachment to them. I have no vested interest in them, either way. What I want is for us to have the most efficient policy (both economically and socially) within the framework of our individual freedoms. For me, that means you can do whatever you want with your body, until you cause harm to someone else. That's the line I believe drug users should not be allowed to cross.

    I will say this though, I value the lives of the innocent people who become collateral damage of the drug war far more than I value the life of any addict. And I believe the collateral damage of prohibition is greater than the collateral damage of legalization. That's why I'm passionate about this issue. What we're doing to innocent people, in our zeal to stop some idiots from being self-destructive, is disgraceful.
    "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."

  6. #256
    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
    Absolutely.
    Well, your evidence supporting that position is lacking.

    Classic. Lateralus reaching out to Uncle Newton for a law that "should" have universal application. This is where Te starts to annoy. And no there shouldn't be dirty alcohol. Ask youself...
    I love MBTI related insults. They're always grounded in reality. /sarcasm

    Was there dirty alcohol during prohibition? No.
    Ahem...moonshine...

    Are there dirty drugs during prohibition? Yes. Aldulteration is a common practice.
    Yes, prohibition promotes "dirty" drugs. During alcohol prohibition, the demand for moonshine skyrocketed. After prohibition ended, the demand for moonshine plummeted.

    In your mind, you associate gold with ecstasy. I would not make that comparison, even though they are elastic, they are two different types of commodities.
    I don't think you understood what I was talking about because you say I associate gold with ecstasy. I don't. I was only referring to their economic traits, nothing more. Gold has elastic demand and ecstasy's demand is inelastic.

    Ecstasy is a 'want'. Ne-Ti gives two thumbs for 'elastic'. No doubts. For. now.
    For an addict, the drug becomes a need. As for the rest of this line, I have no idea what you're talking about.

    Yes, I'll admit, I'm coming around on this point, with regard to Mexico. However, it will take an act of God to get to me to commit that logic on a grander scale; say, to the entire universe and beyond like you might be inclined to do.
    The increased violence is due to the traits of our species. It would not apply to species on other planets or even other species on this planet.
    "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."

  7. #257
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post
    But because highly addictive drug users do buy at any cost, we should accommodate them and legalize their drugs to theoretically lower the overall cost on society and possibly profit from the tax revenue?
    Some people will buy drugs no matter the cost. Making them illegal do little to dissuade them but will drive up the price and enrich the violent drug cartels. That will cause more harm than good. Decriminalization might not help the addicts neither, but it might benefit the rest of society by removing a source of income for the criminal organizations.

    Is your position based on personal moral convictions or on cost/benefit analyses?

  8. #258
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Was there dirty alcohol during prohibition? No.
    Are you on crack? Should we be sending you to rehab?

  9. #259
    SingSmileShine
    Guest

    Default

    I think that it should be legalized but harder to acquire.

  10. #260

    Default

    I'm for decriminalizing all recreationals gradually (economic collapse = scary) and watching the drug cartels wither into nothingness. And you thought tobacco, gun, and alcohol lobbyists were bad. You watch the shit hit the fan when drug lords start losing their source of income. Hooooowah folks.

    However, I'm all for similarly applied legislation and attitudes towards it, as with consuming alcohol. ...Private properties can ban it, don't do it while operating a motor vehicle or heavy machinery, excessive use warrants a medical treatment program for insurance/legal purposes. I'd prefer the minimum age for all substances (including alcohol) be 18 --not 18, 19, or 21 depending on your state blah blah blah. Take away the taboo and you'll take away a lot (not all) of the appeal. Take away the criminality and you'll have less collateral crime.
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

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