|
Post by K5 on Feb 9, 2013 18:51:10 GMT -5
I mean violence would go down and money would be saved from trying to fight it. If it was legal then you wouldn't have to worry about drug lords or gangs as much. Not saying they wouldn't be a problem but not as big of a problem as they are now. Gotcha. Either way, it would be dumb to even suggest lifting drug restrictions. I graduated school in a small town. My graduating class was like 110...maybe less. I could name at least 10 of them that have OD'd and died since graduation 14 years ago. Ok...so the drugs were illegal. They still got them and died. Sure. But I also know a lot of people who had rounds with drug abuse who, after many brushes with law enforcement etc were able to kick the habit and turn their lives around. Had what they been doing been legal, there would have been no repercussions and there would have been little to no motivation for them to clean themselves up. it is not 'dumb' to suggest at all, what's dumb is incriminating people who need help more than anything else. the 'drug war' has failed, lo and behold people can still get whatever substance they desire with relative ease. instead of punishing the behaviour, which has failed, i think it's time to adopt a different insight. like how condoms are given out and sex is in health classes, safe drug use should be considered the same. people are going to keep sniffing, smoking, and drinking. doesn't make them bad people. so the focus should be on doing it safely. and alcohol, as it's been documented in copious studies, is by far the most destructive drug on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 18:54:22 GMT -5
I mean violence would go down and money would be saved from trying to fight it. If it was legal then you wouldn't have to worry about drug lords or gangs as much. Not saying they wouldn't be a problem but not as big of a problem as they are now. Gotcha. Either way, it would be dumb to even suggest lifting drug restrictions. I graduated school in a small town. My graduating class was like 110...maybe less. I could name at least 10 of them that have OD'd and died since graduation 14 years ago. Ok...so the drugs were illegal. They still got them and died. Sure. But I also know a lot of people who had rounds with drug abuse who, after many brushes with law enforcement etc were able to kick the habit and turn their lives around. Had what they been doing been legal, there would have been no repercussions and there would have been little to no motivation for them to clean themselves up. If someone wants to use drugs then that should be up to them. Granted I would not agree with their decision nor would I ever do it myself, however I believe no one should be punished for what they choose to do with their body (as long as they harm no one in the process). If we treated drug addiction as a mental illness instead of as a criminal problem we could help so many addicts get clean. Also if it were legal then you'd know the stuff they were using was not laced with anything that would make it even deadlier. I know drugs are bad and people do commit crimes while high and they should be punished for those crimes, I won't dispute that at all.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 18:55:43 GMT -5
Gotcha. Either way, it would be dumb to even suggest lifting drug restrictions. I graduated school in a small town. My graduating class was like 110...maybe less. I could name at least 10 of them that have OD'd and died since graduation 14 years ago. Ok...so the drugs were illegal. They still got them and died. Sure. But I also know a lot of people who had rounds with drug abuse who, after many brushes with law enforcement etc were able to kick the habit and turn their lives around. Had what they been doing been legal, there would have been no repercussions and there would have been little to no motivation for them to clean themselves up. it is not 'dumb' to suggest at all, what's dumb is incriminating people who need help more than anything else. the 'drug war' has failed, lo and behold people can still get whatever substance they desire with relative ease. instead of punishing the behaviour, which has failed, i think it's time to adopt a different insight. like how condoms are given out and sex is in health classes, safe drug use should be considered the same. people are going to keep sniffing, smoking, and drinking. doesn't make them bad people. so the focus should be on doing it safely. and alcohol, as it's been documented in copious studies, is by far the most destructive drug on the planet. So let's hear your idea for a safe way that people should snort and swallow pills that were not prescribed to them? I'm not talking about a simple joint or a beer. I'm talking someone taking percocet 30's, when they have absolutely no ailment or pain whatsoever. Most of the time, getting busted with these sorts of problems OFFERS these people a chance to clean themselves up. I know PLENTY of people (even in my family) who have gotten cleaned up simply because they got busted. They are THANKFUL that they got caught and in trouble. Otherwise, they or in some cases, even their children were at a major risk.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Feb 9, 2013 19:05:30 GMT -5
the cold water extraction process would safely remove toxic levels of acetiminophen and any pill fillers, rendering the pill essentially safe for snorting in terms of serious damage/life threatening risk, and actually with less toxicity of your beer.
getting them off drugs is not validation for wrongful persecution and inprisonment of undeserving people. the systems you speak of that aid users can be just as succesful without incriminating them first.
and that's not even talking of the fascist marijuana laws.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 19:09:52 GMT -5
Locking people up for using drugs helps minimal especially since drugs are still available in prison. Sure, some may get clean after being locked up for a while (my aunt for instance) but I'd think that was the exception not the rule.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 19:16:10 GMT -5
the cold water extraction process would safely remove toxic levels of acetiminophen and any pill fillers, rendering the pill essentially safe for snorting in terms of serious damage/life threatening risk, and actually with less toxicity of your beer. getting them off drugs is not validation for wrongful persecution and inprisonment of undeserving people. the systems you speak of that aid users can be just as succesful without incriminating them first. So you're saying give them toned down pills?? Like the fake pot that's legal to buy everywhere? They're still going to prefer the high powered stuff. Find me a drug user who was ever persecuted on their first offense. Most of them get chance after chance after chance before finally being locked away. At least that's the way it is around here. With a high five and a hug they sure aren't going to clean themselves up. And furthermore, most of the people who get busted get busted because they're out doing stupid crap while whacked out of their minds to begin with. So let's just let them go free because they were high and didn't know better? I swear...some of this "going against the grain because it's cool" crap that goes on around here would be borderline laughable if it weren't for the fact that it's damn creepy. Have someone that you are related to overdose while your child is in their care when you had absolutely not clue they had a problem with this and then tell me how you feel folks.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 19:20:27 GMT -5
Have someone that you are related to overdose while your child is in their care when you had absolutely not clue they had a problem with this and then tell me how you feel folks. They should be punished for endangering the life of a child. It should be the same if the person got so drunk they passed out while caring for the child. Being legal does not excuse reckless behavior. If you put someone else's life in danger you should be punished, whether you are high, drunk or sober.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 19:25:16 GMT -5
I deal with enough of the stupid Pillbillies around here that even when you offer them help, they shoot it down or take advantage of those trying to give it to them. It would BE illegal if it wasn't for the fact that they do dumb crap. Call it persecution or whatever more fancy PC word you may have for it. They could lock them all up, swallow the key, crap it out, then melt it down and make a keychain out of it for all I care. I'm good with it. I don't want to see anyone die, but being locked away is the best place for a lot of folks out there.
I suppose we should just make EVERYTHING legal. Close down all the jails etc and just spoon people when they do bad things. Cut out all the consequences. That'll show em.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 19:53:39 GMT -5
I suppose we should just make EVERYTHING legal. Close down all the jails etc and just spoon people when they do bad things. Cut out all the consequences. That'll show em. Not at all. I would only make legal those things that do no harm to anyone but the person who chooses to partake in whatever the activity is. If someone kills or rapes then they should obviously go to prison. They have infringed on the other person's right to have no harm done to them. (That right to have no harm done to them does not extend to hurt feelings but actual harm like their life being taken away or their body violated by an attacker) We can look down on something or disapprove of something without having to ban whatever it is.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Feb 9, 2013 20:10:00 GMT -5
So you're saying give them toned down pills?? Like the fake pot that's legal to buy everywhere? They're still going to prefer the high powered stuff. Find me a drug user who was ever persecuted on their first offense. Most of them get chance after chance after chance before finally being locked away. At least that's the way it is around here. With a high five and a hug they sure aren't going to clean themselves up. And furthermore, most of the people who get busted get busted because they're out doing stupid crap while whacked out of their minds to begin with. So let's just let them go free because they were high and didn't know better? I swear...some of this "going against the grain because it's cool" crap that goes on around here would be borderline laughable if it weren't for the fact that it's damn creepy. not only have you called others' opinions stupid but now creepy and laughable. i'd expect a bit more of a respectful tone from an administrator of the site..considering no one was throwing those terms around during the gun discussion. secondly no, i am not talking about toned down pills, i'm talking about your percocet 30s you mentioned and how to make them as safe as possible for drug administration. completely reducing acetimanophen which causes the majority of damage, and other toxic fillers within 10 minutes. i have numerous friends with drug issues. you're right, pills that were disgustingly administered to the poor condoned by our governments has damaged people badly. but nip the problem at the bud, don't hurt those who are already victims. i don't know if you're unaware but minor drug offences are responsible for thousands of people being inprisoned in america. for as little as a half ounce of marijuana, people's lives are destroyed. then they basically become slaves, but that's another conversation... [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 20:26:31 GMT -5
Locking them up is not "hurting" them. It's putting them in a more controlled environment. You have to have quite a few offenses to be locked up for drugs for any long length of time. They get off time and time again and continue to do it. Rehabilitation is typically given as an option...high dollar rehabilitation free of charge mind you, before any long jail sentences are given. People are going to do it regardless of the law. But no consequence is just a bad way to go. We may as well say "ok...so dude A was extremely pissed at dude B. He killed him but it wasn't his fault because he was in a rage. Let's just take him to rehab and talk him down." As for the whole "You're an admin you should kiss my grits" thing...nah. I have a right to have an opinion on the subject, even if it hurts your feelings or goes against what you believe. If I think it's creepy that people are starting to believe that we should just tickle people's feet with a feather for committing a crime, I will continue to think that it's creepy.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 20:30:54 GMT -5
Locking them up is not "hurting" them. It's putting them in a more controlled environment. You have to have quite a few offenses to be locked up for drugs for any long length of time. They get off time and time again and continue to do it. Rehabilitation is typically given as an option...high dollar rehabilitation free of charge mind you, before any long jail sentences are given. People are going to do it regardless of the law. But no consequence is just a bad way to go. We may as well say "ok...so dude A was extremely pissed at dude B. He killed him but it wasn't his fault because he was in a rage. Let's just take him to rehab and talk him down." As for the whole "You're an admin you should kiss my grits" thing...nah. I have a right to have an opinion on the subject, even if it hurts your feelings or goes against what you believe. You really don't see the difference between harming your own body through drug use and harming someone else by killing them? You cannot compare the two at all. I'll say it again. You should go to prison for killing someone because you have infringed on their right to life. Doing drugs, the sole act of doing drugs, harms no one but the user. That is why I don't believe they should go to jail. However, if the user commits a crime in which someone is harmed then they should be punished for that crime. Simply staying in your basement doing drugs should not warrant punishment.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 20:40:02 GMT -5
Often times, taking these people in is the only thing that saves their lives. I'm not talking about marijuana and that sort of thing. If a dude wants to sit in his basement and smoke a joint and get all goofy, more power to him. I don't do it, and I can't even stand to be around people who do or have, but I can't recall ever reading an article on a dude who OD'd on joints. Prescription painkillers both illegally and legally obtained (totally the fault of a "give it to em to shut em up" healthcare system) officially took over as the leading cause of death in my state (as well as the entire country) last year. That's just pathetic and if locking some of them up will help them, then by all means have at it. The problem is, when they bust these folks, they keep them overnight. They come back, they keep them 2 nights then get probations. Another bust or two they get an option of jail or rehab. Most of the time they choose jail because it's the easier route. The rehab should be a requirement at that point. If they can't hack it after that, lock them up. Simple as that. How many of them do you know that will just sit in their basement? If they are, they probably aren't getting busted in the first place. It's the ones out driving around or passing out on sidewalks, or passing out on their couches while their toddler wanders out into the neighborhood, which had happened at least 4 times in my town in the last 12 months. It's just sickening and I have no sympathy for them if they get tossed in jail. Especially if they turn down rehab time and time again that isn't even coming out of their pocket. io9.com/5919434/prescription-painkillers-now-the-leading-cause-of-accidental-deaths
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 20:45:51 GMT -5
www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/health/kentucky-overdosesYou could leave them to do their thing in their basements if you want, but you're leaving them to potentially murder themselves as well. I had an uncle who 2 years ago, took his pills and went to sleep. He is thought to have woken up much sooner than he realized and took more. And again, woke up before the previous dose had worn off...not aware of the time. This time he didn't wake up at all. I would MUCH rather he had been in jail than I would he be where he is now. Oh well...let's go back to bitching about guns, which is something I don't care a whole lot about either way.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 9, 2013 20:54:37 GMT -5
They should know the risks. If they think they can abuse hard drugs and get away with no harm done to their bodies then they are not the brightest. However if someone wants to do drugs then they should be allowed to.
We don't stop people from drinking themselves to death. We don't stop people from giving themselves cancer through smoking. Why should we stop them from doing drugs? Those first two are more dangerous than the illegal drugs but we don't care if someone does those things.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Feb 9, 2013 20:58:35 GMT -5
Locking them up is not "hurting" them. It's putting them in a more controlled environment. if you consider jail a 'controlled environment' then you need to do a reality check. it's by no means proper rehabilitation, jails throughout your countries have terrible conditions, and as you said yourself those arrested just get arrested again. putting drug users in with actual criminals is definetly hurting people. you proved my point right there. the law by no means dictates the ability to have, sell, or use drugs. it's just a cat and mouse game where they catch poor people and release, catch and release. and until drug prohibition is over, people will be victimized. and it is only first time offenders who are not considered for inprisonment. ...what? do we treat alcohol in this way? NO. kiss my grits? nowhere did i say anything like that lol. what i did say was seeing as everyone else has been able to respectfully debate such a hot issue as guns, it's disappointing to see you change course. add on the fact that you're an admin, it's pretty foolish behaviour. i could say that i think your opinions are stupid, ridiculous, creepy or whatever, but that wouldn't really add to the conversation, would it? one would think you'd already know this. you deterred, i noted it, and from this you'd suggest i'm trying to prevent you from expressing your opinion?...pretty silly. see, now i did it too!
|
|
|
Post by ulyanov on Feb 9, 2013 21:05:16 GMT -5
I love me some guns, Even though I don't own one I do love looking at them and learning about them. My personal stance on guns is that its our 2nd Amendment right to own what ever gun we like no matter what the government says.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 21:12:42 GMT -5
Locking them up is not "hurting" them. It's putting them in a more controlled environment. if you consider jail a 'controlled environment' then you need to do a reality check. it's by no means proper rehabilitation, jails throughout your countries have terrible conditions, and as you said yourself those arrested just get arrested again. putting drug users in with actual criminals is definetly hurting people. you proved my point right there. the law by no means dictates the ability to have, sell, or use drugs. it's just a cat and mouse game where they catch poor people and release, catch and release. and until drug prohibition is over, people will be victimized. and it is only first time offenders who are not considered for inprisonment. ...what? do we treat alcohol in this way? NO. kiss my grits? nowhere did i say anything like that lol. what i did say was seeing as everyone else has been able to respectfully debate such a hot issue as guns, it's disappointing to see you change course. add on the fact that you're an admin, it's pretty foolish behaviour. i could say that i think your opinions are stupid, ridiculous, creepy or whatever, but that wouldn't really add to the conversation, would it? one would think you'd already know this. you deterred, i noted it, and from this you'd suggest i'm trying to prevent you from expressing your opinion?...pretty silly. see, now i did it too! So do you think that if people are going to do it anyway that we should just let the murderers off as well?? It honestly seems that you would feel that way. As for the kiss my grits comment, I never said you said that. I was saying that just because my username is in red on here does not mean that I have to kiss your ass and cater to your feelings on the subject. That mindset is tired old and dull.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Feb 9, 2013 21:13:52 GMT -5
Often times, taking these people in is the only thing that saves their lives. I'm not talking about marijuana and that sort of thing. If a dude wants to sit in his basement and smoke a joint and get all goofy, more power to him. I don't do it, and I can't even stand to be around people who do or have, but I can't recall ever reading an article on a dude who OD'd on joints. you can't stand to be around anyone who has at one point in their life smoked weed? how much more discriminating can you be? deaths from alcohol far succeed deaths from opiates. ans remember that whole safe drug conversation? lack of education on drugs results in unhealthy forms of use. just like anything requiring sanitization. yes, let's inprison the victims of your medical and drug industries taking complete advantage and destroying thousands of lives by making heroin essentially available everywhere. don't blame those who don't use but have organized these drugs outlets, but blame those who on their self destructive path came into contact with a substance they otherwise never would had availability to.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Feb 9, 2013 21:22:50 GMT -5
Often times, taking these people in is the only thing that saves their lives. I'm not talking about marijuana and that sort of thing. If a dude wants to sit in his basement and smoke a joint and get all goofy, more power to him. I don't do it, and I can't even stand to be around people who do or have, but I can't recall ever reading an article on a dude who OD'd on joints. you can't stand to be around anyone who has at one point in their life smoked weed? how much more discriminating can you be? deaths from alcohol far succeed deaths from opiates. ans remember that whole safe drug conversation? lack of education on drugs results in unhealthy forms of use. just like anything requiring sanitization. yes, let's inprison the victims of your medical and drug industries taking complete advantage and destroying thousands of lives by making heroin essentially available everywhere. don't blame those who don't use but have organized these drugs outlets, but blame those who on their self destructive path came into contact with a substance they otherwise never would had availability to. What the hell are you even talking about? Are you just reading my replies trying to nitpick them apart? I never said that I don't want to be around someone who has smoked weed at any given time in their life. When I say "be around someone who "do or have" smoked pot I mean who has smoked it in enough time to where they're still all loopy from it. If it has to be spelled out for someone to understand...as in "smokes it daily or has smoked it within a certain time frame of being in my presence. I have friends that smoke it from time to time. Sue me if I'd rather not be around someone who answers every question with a glossy eyed smile and a "huh?". I opt not to be around them after they've done it. You're clearly just trying to pick it apart for the sake of arguing or you wouldn't have put "have" in bold letters. Show me again where I stated that the suppliers shouldn't have to answer for their crimes. Go for it. I dare ya. Because I didn't. They should be held even more accountable than the users themselves. But if you let the users off time and time again because they're "sick" and continually deny help then there is no consequence for their actions. Therefor they will continue to be a danger to themselves and those around them.
|
|