Printable View
Wait a second... when you posted this, you specifically mentioned
What you failed to mention wasQuote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
You left out all the good stuff! :furious3: Now I know I have to move to Mexico!Quote:
The legal changes will also decriminalize the possession of limited quantities of other drugs, including LSD, hallucinogenic mushrooms,... and peyote
Policy for an entire country can not be governed by a thin line of small towns.
Many problems they may have are going to be related to the USA's unrealistic intolerance to drugs. If both had the same sensible laws there would be no need to gravitate towards the border.
~:smoking:
I saw this on the news the other day and considering the situation in the US and the timing of this, all I can think is what a bunch of idiots.
Holy crap... :laugh4:
Bunch of idiots. :laugh4:
Some more news on the subject
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060501/...4yBHNlYwNmYw--
Quote:
Originally Posted by article
I understand that most people here are young and childless (I’m the latter, not the former) but think about it this way: Would you really want your kids walking down to the local *drug* store and shooting up heroine? If you don’t think it’s bad enough with alcohol just legalize all drugs.
And what if it doesn’t work? What if the worst (or bad enough) does happen? Are you going to criminalize them again? Just imagine how difficult that would be to implement and the harm it would do. You think “big oil” is bad enough now, how would “big drug” be?
It’s amazing how corporations can be evil when selling cigarettes but “really cool” when selling hard drugs. I really hope a lot of people are just having fun with this (and are young enough that they don’t vote for it).
As alcohol, with drugs, a legal age for consumption should be stablished upon descriminalization. If that is enforced properly or not, that's another question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
What do you mean with "doesn't work"? You mean children taking it more often? That will go beyond the purpose of descriminalization. It's purpose is only to finish with unreasobable persecutions, and concentretate time in real crimes, like the big dealers, not the conssumers. The limit that should be established, and must probably will be, will say to you, that if there's more children in drugs then there's someone in violation of laws, but the providers could do so legally, and that relaxes the charge of the state a lot.Quote:
And what if it doesn’t work? What if the worst (or bad enough) does happen? Are you going to criminalize them again? Just imagine how difficult that would be to implement and the harm it would do. You think “big oil” is bad enough now, how would “big drug” be?
Corporations already have to respect a lot of legislation on their backs to sell products that the people want to buy... I wonder where's the problem in satisfying the demand? I'm not young enough, and there's a lot of people here, including lawyers, judges, jurists and politicians that agree in part with me (in regards to marihuana, cocaine, etc), the same situation exists in other countries around the globe, they understand how a republic should function, and what should be the limitations of the state.Quote:
It’s amazing how corporations can be evil when selling cigarettes but “really cool” when selling hard drugs. I really hope a lot of people are just having fun with this (and are young enough that they don’t vote for it).
The rather mawkish argument of "please! Think of the Children!!!" is one I rarely hear out of the Simpsons.
Merely if something is legal doesn't make it socially acceptable. Resonsible parents can still ensure their kids don't get the drugs (now in stated measures, and not basically "guess what you're abuot to pump into your veins")
Prior ot the 1950's drugs were far more widely used. What has making them ilgal done? Well, in places like Hong Kong it made the Triads extremely rich.
I am extremely unstreetwise, yet I imagine I could get drugs in an evening if I wanted to do so. The reality is that drugs are that prevelant.
~:smoking:
Oh please, don't try to associate me with some "I like clean air" or "think of the children" type. The statement was think of *your* children. You know the harm alcohol can cause to the young and dumb, and you want to increase their exposure to even more dangerous and highly addictive drugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Reasonable parents? You certainly have a rather colonial (timeframe) view of people. You may have noticed that reason is not currently in vogue and trusting strangers to use reason and logic isn’t…well, reasonable.
What drugs of the 50’s are you talking about? I really hope you’re not comparing opium and minor hallucinogens to crack, heroine, and ecstasy. Your line of reasoning would lead to everything being legal just so criminals don’t get rich (because after all, if you don’t have laws, you don’t have criminals).
Drugs are everywhere, and if you want to risk getting shot, robbed or get sent to jail you can find them. That’s quite different from advertising them on late night TV.
Or Sunday morning cartoons. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
No they've already done that. Don't you remember Rocky from Rocky and Bullwinkle? I know that squirrel was high on something.Quote:
Originally Posted by yesdachi
lol Right. Have you ever tried to buy drugs, Vlad?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
Rory, going out to score something might be harder if you're not a young adult just because everyone will think you're a narc.
Do you really think some drug pusher cares about how old some kid is trying to buy drugs? Most problems in the system come from the illegal dealer, so they should simply be removed from the system.
In one day's time I could, almost certainly, have my hands on any drug I wanted. Obviously, the system does not work, and I do not understand the fetish that some people have with running another adult's life. It's the simple truth that I have had far more problems with video game addiction than I ever have with heroin, which I've never even had the urge to do again. Even if someone gets addicted to heroin it only becomes a problem when: they run out of money (surprise, cigarettes do this to and the demon liquid), if they do not know how to inject properly (if they keep using the same needle and the actual method), or if they have no idea what the real strength of the stuff is. All of these problems come from it being criminalized. But watch out! All drug users will eat your children and do anything at all for the next hit!:dizzy2:
You blindly accept the social stigma that is given to them. I decide what I want to do with my own body. I don't ban you from doing the things you like to do by and with yourself.
my friend's 18 year old brother's immediate statement on drugs was "drug addicts mug grannies for their money". Looks like the brainwashing works then...
I'd hope that my children would do as I say and do as I do. If they want to experiment I'd be against it, but I'd not push the away. I'd explain to them the differences between substances and how some (like cigarettes and crack) can really mess your life up.
Opium isn't that different from herion. Quicker high yes, but thats about it.
Leglising drugs would only be from certain registered retailers. Smuggling is still illegal. All that would change would be the margins would be far lower, and probably uneconomic. Advertising would be more restrictive than for cigarettes. In the UK, that means TV, billboards, sporting events and many others are not allowed.
I don't feel the need to fun other people's lives for them. If people wanted to take drugs they should be allowed to as long as others are not going to get hurt. There can be laws that certain substances are not allowed in the body of professionals in certain fields (as is currently the case for example doctors and opiates).
~:smoking:
I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanamori
So are you confessing to being a drug dealer? :inquisitive: :dizzy2: :oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoreBag
Hmm - I wonder if the FBI is tracking this site to run down your IP address? :sweatdrop:
Someone needs some :help:
I don thave an answer to the decrim-legalize-criminalize problem, but the way to STOP people from doing drugs is not to send them to prison, break up families and ruin lives and spend billions of dollars a year doing it. It just isn't. I hope this works out for Mexico, someone had to do it first.
Fox's spokesman stated today that President Fox will be signing the bill soon.
Any bets to a last minute deal between the United States and Mexico.
Mexico to veto the bill
United States to grant ammensity to all current illegal immigrants.
There is a massive difference between drug users and drug addicts.
The former use drugs. They have jobs and are, except for a tox screen result, normal people.
The second lot are completely dominated by the drug of choice. Be it alcohol, herion or whatever. Their lives collapse into a mess both physically and mentally.
The worst cases (in my admittedly limited experience) are the alcoholics. Dangerous, crazed people who are prone to life threatening fits. :thumbsup:
The first lot don't really need to give up drugs anymore than people need to give up alcohol or tobacco.
The second lot range from those that need help in a clinic to those that are in essence uncurable, and will only stop their habit when they die. And I've met people like this.
~:smoking:
I'm going to chalk this one up to your infamous inability to understand and properly utilize the English language.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
:laugh4: Someone doesn't recongize sarcasm... :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoreBag
Tag your it............
Ah, but heroin is known to be extremely addictive and even when not addictive quite dangerous. Oops. You "experiment." You tried once. Cigarettes? Fine, you get out of it. It's apparently not that hard. Alcohol? It has too many social "defences" on it to possibly even think of removing, even though it is dangerous. Oh well, the President survived. Anyone can.
But how many heroin addicts have you seen that managed to get out of their addiction without sacrificing something extremely monumental?
I'm aware of the failure and the propaganda of the War on Drugs; but really, a dangerous substance like heroin? If you can't sell but you can possess a small amount...the question is: where in the freakin' hell did you get it from?
Oops, illegals. Of the real deal.
By the way, ecstasy is apparently not truly dangerous in and of itself but its side effect manages to kill a great amount of dumb teenagers because they drink a little too much water. So the drug's legalization is quite justifiable if it would require an extreme amount of precautions.
It might as well be just what Redleg said, a political blackmail on the United States. A bargain tool...
How many random people have you asked "have you ever taken heroin?"
You've no idea what number of people can dabble with heroin with no adverse addects - neither do I. They aren't newsworthy.
I've seen alcoholics who have extreme difficulty giving up, ditto cigarettes.
~:smoking:
I have two primary concerns with this issue. I am open to reconsider if a good argument proves logical and persuasive.
First, consider the message being sent by a government that legalizes consumption. Alcohol, Marijuana, Tobacco, Cocaine, Meth, and other consumables will be lumped together. Being legal for consumption implies not only legal permission, but moral permission as well. Few here would argue that alcohol use is evil, but some would argue that abuse is, including *gasp* myself. I am an advocate of Marijuana legalization because I think the evils of its use and abuse are less than the evils created by its prohibition. The greatest evil of marijuana prohibition, in my opinion, is that it creates a false impression of harder drugs. An individual who has used marijuana will be so unimpressed with the great government hype surrounding it that they may be inclined to believe that harder drugs also are overhyped. The harder drugs deserve their stigma. Hard drugs have been proven to rapidly destroy cognitive functioning, are physically debilitating, and in some cases can cause life-altering addiction almost instantaneously. Conumption legalization counters this stigma.
This brings me to my second point: availability. All agree that demand exists for a recreational drug market. The decline in family values and religious social influence in the United States has created a culture of permissiveness, experimentation, and rebellion. This American laissez-faire attitude towards individual liberty is directly related to drug use. Legalization will attract the market for consumption to Mexico, and a growth in demand is almost certain to occur. But instead of only drinking or smoking pot, youth will find themselves ever closer to dangerous substances that were traditionally taboo.
The equation of permissiveness + availability + message of tolerance equals massive recreational use. Youth have always followed fringe rebels. Those are the "cool" kids. When I was a teenager, the baggy clothes trend and skateboards were still fringe, as were tatoos. Now every damn kid wears their pants around their ankles, rides a skateboard, and has a half-dozen tats. Rap was still black, but now black is cool, so all these suburban kids roll around blasting 50 Cent and Snoop Dogg. My point is that fringe leaders will be the first to make heroine and cocaine "cool". And when that happens, the secular progressive half of American youth will be lost to addiction and death under the drug revolution. Granted, we will learn our lesson once kids start dying in massive numbers, but I don't want to see us get to that point.
I understand that the advertised message will still be drugs are bad, though the legalization shows a public policy contradiction. If drugs are bad, then they should remain illegal. If enforcement costs are the issue as Mexico states, than enforcement should simply be reduced.
That is about it, and this is a bad idea. Now marihuana isn't as harmless as some like to believe, but it is still not as bad as the more hardcore substances like cocaine and heroine (and alcohol), calling it the same is just silly. It's ok to guide what you can't fully control but legalising all is nothing more then a surrender.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
There have been studies on the addictive nature of various substances, iirc heroin isn't that bad, in the same range as nicotine and alcohol.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII
The president was a coke head, what kind of message does that send out to the public ? It's okay to do drugs if you're rich, you can still be president ?Quote:
Oh well, the President survived. Anyone can.
One, that's all the people that have used heroin that I know.Quote:
But how many heroin addicts have you seen that managed to get out of their addiction without sacrificing something extremely monumental?
You do realize that alcohol is right up there with coke and heroin in terms of addictiveness and shear damage it can do right ?Quote:
I'm aware of the failure and the propaganda of the War on Drugs; but really, a dangerous substance like heroin?
The point is not to allow drug use and trade, the point is not to waste resources going after the users and putting them in jail rahter tahn go after the dealers and drug lords. It's common sense, kill the suplly line and you stop the users.Quote:
If you can't sell but you can possess a small amount...the question is: where in the freakin' hell did you get it from?
XTC is virtually harmless in itself. I know quite a few people who've used it (and speed) without any problems. A few minor addicts maybe, but nothing serious. The problem is the crap they put in the pills along with the MDMA. Mixing with alcohol is also a bad idea, I think because both can cause dehydration.Quote:
By the way, ecstasy is apparently not truly dangerous
I assume you mean too little water ? Drink lots of fluids (non-alcoholic) and you should be fine. Soft drinks are probably better than water though, since they contain sugar which is good for all the energy you're using up.Quote:
in and of itself but its side effect manages to kill a great amount of dumb teenagers because they drink a little too much water.
I think the dangers of drugs are vastly overrated, in any case, the current system doesn't work either.Quote:
So the drug's legalization is quite justifiable if it would require an extreme amount of precautions.
Possibly.Quote:
It might as well be just what Redleg said, a political blackmail on the United States. A bargain tool...
No they are harmfull, I don't know anyone who does heroin but I do notice a lot of difference with some friends that like the white powder a little bit too much. Alcohol is just as bad, but a lot slower, cocaine can just about ruin someone in a month if they have little character or a natural taste for self-destruction. If you take a little bit of coke it begs you to take more once it wears off, there is no denying of that. You can sleep it off, or take more. Marihuane or alcohol don't have that effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by doc_bean
Doc Bean, your comments show inexperience, immaturity, or a lack of knowledge about the harmful effects of hard drugs.
There is no discussion on whether hard drugs are harmful. I have seen folks strung out, totally addicted to meth. I have known one person who became almost mentally incapable of social functioning due to persistent paranoid hallucinations caused by LCD.
This is no joke. Hard drugs can and will destroy a user or cause permanent disability.
I think that crystal meth deserves a special category by itself. It is so destructive it should be in a special category of its own.
LSD I agree can be used in excess. But then overdosing anything can kill or cause damage.
Legalising the substance: the government has made prostitution legal in many countries. It's not viewed as moral or a good choice of career. I doubt many people think that the government has enough moral gravitas to sway many. Who cares what the bunch of corrupt politicians think?
More stigma can be given by accurate information as to side effects. Alcohol is toxic to every cell in the body, yet has no warning.
Availability would increase. As would rehabilitation, clean preparation of narcotics, lack of social stigma / isolation / fear, lowered risk of infection. Hell, even info as to how to take the stuff. I'e seen addicts die from ulcers / abscesses from injection sites. Unclean needles and poor technique are responsible.
There is already massive use of cocaine amongst the style concious. Bieng ilegal has not helped. OK, occasionally one gets to go to rehab, but that's it.
I imagine use will increase. But since it is not taboo anymore, it will not be "cool" to have done / are doing it. if you like it great. If not don't take it - it's your call. The purity will radically reduce side effects, as will awareness and openness. More money in rehab and a more permissive society will enable those that fall to recover and not become part of an uncared for underclass.
~:smoking:
Why don't we ban food and alcohol and other such insane vices that lead to destruction. Gimme a freaken brake. If drugs were given in the proper places and doses they are pretty much all harmless(with exceptions like meth).
LSD used to be harmless but it is not made the way it used to be because the government shut down the production and destroyed the [proper] formula.Quote:
Originally Posted by DA
Is it possible that is because they are made illigally with little quality control?Quote:
Originally Posted by DA
It's a vicious cycle.
I think we should just ban anything a small moral minority doesn't like. Yeah.