Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Drugs ARE NOT bad
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298186 is a reply to message #297772] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 00:39   |
 |
nikki6ixx
Messages: 2545
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Those who do drugs such as Heroin are in need of mental and physical help. I don't support their legalization, but in theory, if they were legalized, the people addicted to them may be more willing to seek treatment because the social stigma of using illicit drugs would be gone.
Renegade:
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 10 January 2014 16:56 |
The only game where everyone competes to be an e-janitor.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298187 is a reply to message #298186] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 00:42 |
Rocko
Messages: 833
Registered: January 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| nikki6ixx wrote on Thu, 22 November 2007 01:39 |
Those who do drugs such as Heroin are in need of mental and physical help. I don't support their legalization, but in theory, if they were legalized, the people addicted to them may be more willing to seek treatment because the social stigma of using illicit drugs would be gone.
|
i'd think it would be the other way around
but watevers clevers holmes
black and proud
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298225 is a reply to message #298163] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 07:52 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Terrorism is a direct attack on the rights of others. Doing drugs itself is NOT impeding on someone else's rights. What don't you understand about that? How can you ban an act because it could potentially lead to something else? Should we ban automobiles because it could potentially lead to manslaughter?
|
You obviously missed the reference. You are saying that because it can not be enforced effectively, it should not be illegal. If you are going to make that claim, then you must also make that claim for EVERY law that can not be enforced effectively.
It is innate in the use of drugs to change the chemical makeup of the brain (no matter how temporary the effects). Marijuana, in particular, (and from what I have seen of "friends" who got high, and have openly admitted to me) makes people ignorant and blissfully unaware of things that are happening. This changed state is what causes the potential to do harm. With automobiles, if the person is in such a state that he is blissfully unaware (not suggesting drug use, just ANY instance of this), then yes... he should not be allowed to drive during that instance.
The potential for danger when doing something with such a change in brain chemistry is far too dangerous. Driving automobiles is innately bad? No. Smoking pot is innately bad? No. Driving while you have an abnormal brain chemistry (I'm being grossly over-general here) bad? Yes. Getting high and causing that abnormal brain chemistry bad? Yes.
| Quote: |
It shouldn't be. I drink in public on most Saturdays (during football season), and I cause absolutely no harm to those around me. In fact, most patrons have open alcohol. Little to no harm done. Hmm... imagine that.
If the bar's owner wants to allow smoking weed in his place of business, he has every right to allow it. If the patron doesn't like it, oh well. The patron can leave. It's not his business to run.
|
Just because it is done, doesn't make it legal, sorry this does nothing to even dent my argument.
Too bad smoking pot is illegal, huh? I guess that business can't do as he pleases, or he would be doing it already.
| Quote: |
Sure, warranto, because saying "good job" sarcastically MUST mean that I think you're stupid. Or it could mean that I disagree with you...
|
As I said, then don't use sarcasm if you don't understand its implications.
| Quote: |
Our police force is a responsive authority. It's not a preventative. Just because something COULD happen doesn't mean it will. Again, shall we ban automobiles because of the potential danger?
|
Not really much to comment on, it doesn't even address my argument.
| Quote: |
Yes, let's put words in my mouth, so you can use those words to make me sound like I'm contradicting myself. Well played... if only I didn't realize what I said.
|
You are right here. I mixed up the link you posted and the link xptek posted. It's him who argued about the police being over-burdened because of the requirement to enforce this law. It's his argument you defeated for me.
| Quote: |
It's called personal responsibility. Don't punish those of us that take responsibility for our actions while sober or intoxicated. I have yet to drive drunk (and I have no plan to). I have yet to steal for drug money (partly because I've never done any illicit drugs).
|
If only things were that simple. People try time and time again to get out of personal responsibility. This is why the court system is back up, this is why people are not caught when a crime occurs, and this is why people are trying to fully legalize abortion. They have no sense of personal responsibility. You may have it, but the majority of the world has shown they lack any sort of semblance of personal responsibilty.
| Quote: |
Terrorism is something ingrained in the hearts of our enemies, and fighting it seems about pointless, but it's an attack on a nation. Drugs are different. It's not worth fighting a losing battle for. It's a recreational activity that shouldn't be criminalized because there's a potential danger outside of just to the user.
|
Oh, I certainly think protecting people from their own stupidity is definately a worthy cause. Even Mill, who pretty much invented the modern view of Liberty thought that stupidity isn't somthing that should be sought.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298233 is a reply to message #297772] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 08:52 |
 |
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
There's nothing more I can say. You've made it clear that you don't give a damn about my liberties. You've made it clear that you can't see the correlation between the War on Drugs and Prohibition.
Just because people like you are too afraid of other people under the influence, doesn't give you the fucking right to take away my liberties, so you feel safer. Do you honestly think that you don't interact with people who are high or drunk, already? You'd be pretty fucking naive to think that everybody who seems "normal" is sober. People can function just fine.
Again, it's a minority of people that wield knives and stab others. It's a minority of people who use their cars to maul down people. It's a minority of people who use guns to kill people. It's a minority of people who commit suicide. It's a minority of people who destroy their lives due to drugs. Should we outlaw knives, cars, guns, and should we throw everybody into padded cells in case we hurt ourselves, too?
Who would you be protecting, then? Certainly not me. You'd only be protecting yourself. Most people know the consequences of their actions, and they take full responsibility for them. Like, for instance, myself and xptek.
Oh, I know you're going to redirect me to your argument of "well, only a minority of people commit murder", but then you'd just be completely ignoring my point. Murder, theft, assault, rape, molestation, etc... are all laws regarding the impediment of another being's rights. As I've stated before, and you've actually agreed, the act of being intoxicated isn't a guarantee that another's rights will be impeded on.
whoa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298235 is a reply to message #298173] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 09:10 |
 |
xptek
Messages: 1410
Registered: August 2004
Location: USSA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Jecht wrote on Wed, 21 November 2007 22:44 |
The problem with legalizing one is: the door is then open to legalize all narcotics. The addiction of some of these drugs is so strong that people steal for it, sell all of their belongings for it, and sponge even further off of government welfare for it. I saw a court case on television where a mother used the $5,000 she received for her daughter completely on crack cocaine. I refuse to pay taxes for people to get high. The system is already broken enough.
|
You already pay taxes for plenty of people to get high. How is keeping the drug illegal going to ensure you don't? If anything, because of inflated prices caused by illegality of the drugs they're spending more of your tax money. 
| Jecht wrote on Wed, 21 November 2007 22:44 |
The world isn't so black and white. If drugs were made legal on a federal standpoint, I would honestly consider relocating to a different country. That's because the effect would transfer to those who don't want drug abuse in one way or another, and probably in a pretty detrimental way.
|
The opposite has been proven time and time again in countries that have taken steps to decriminalize recreational drug use. Lower crime rates, lower drug use rates, etc.
cause = time
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298256 is a reply to message #298233] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 10:12 |
|
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| cheesesoda wrote on Thu, 22 November 2007 08:52 |
There's nothing more I can say. You've made it clear that you don't give a damn about my liberties. You've made it clear that you can't see the correlation between the War on Drugs and Prohibition.
Just because people like you are too afraid of other people under the influence, doesn't give you the fucking right to take away my liberties, so you feel safer. Do you honestly think that you don't interact with people who are high or drunk, already? You'd be pretty fucking naive to think that everybody who seems "normal" is sober. People can function just fine.
Again, it's a minority of people that wield knives and stab others. It's a minority of people who use their cars to maul down people. It's a minority of people who use guns to kill people. It's a minority of people who commit suicide. It's a minority of people who destroy their lives due to drugs. Should we outlaw knives, cars, guns, and should we throw everybody into padded cells in case we hurt ourselves, too?
Who would you be protecting, then? Certainly not me. You'd only be protecting yourself. Most people know the consequences of their actions, and they take full responsibility for them. Like, for instance, myself and xptek.
Oh, I know you're going to redirect me to your argument of "well, only a minority of people commit murder", but then you'd just be completely ignoring my point. Murder, theft, assault, rape, molestation, etc... are all laws regarding the impediment of another being's rights. As I've stated before, and you've actually agreed, the act of being intoxicated isn't a guarantee that another's rights will be impeded on.
|
I care as much about your liberty of being able to smoke pot as you do of my liberty of not having to deal with it. If you can show me why YOUR liberty is better than MY liberty, then we'll talk about how it affects liberty.
Tell you what. You promise to give your child every thing he or she ever asks for, and perhaps I will see your point.
All I see right now is a child crying that it can't get what it wants and does nothing but whine about it. This same child provides no other reasoning for getting that thing other than "I want it!!!". Sorry, but I'm sure that as any parent worth their title as parent, the child should not always get what they want. The "I deserve it because I want it... and you can't stop me!" argument does not fly, regardless of what you are trying to argue for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298313 is a reply to message #298256] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 14:25 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| warranto |
I care as much about your liberty of being able to smoke pot as you do of my liberty of not having to deal with it. If you can show me why YOUR liberty is better than MY liberty, then we'll talk about how it affects liberty.
|
Again, you've even admitted that someone being under the influence doesn't always impede on your rights. More times than not, they don't. I'm not defending those who impede on your rights. Those people should be punished for impeding on other rights. However, my drinking inside of my home should not be (and thankfully is not) illegal. The same, logically, should be for smoking pot.
| warranto |
Tell you what. You promise to give your child every thing he or she ever asks for, and perhaps I will see your point.
|
Heh. It's my job as a parent to teach my child the difference between a want and a need. It's my job as a parent to teach my kids the difference between right and wrong. That's not the job of my government. My government's job is to protect me from external threats, not myself. I don't need nor want my hand held, especially by my government. If you want your hand held, then you can seek that help. Don't force it upon me because you're too fucking selfish to realize that I have the right to do whatever I please in the privacy of my own home or place of business that's willing to let me do as I please.
| warranto |
All I see right now is a child crying that it can't get what it wants and does nothing but whine about it. This same child provides no other reasoning for getting that thing other than "I want it!!!". Sorry, but I'm sure that as any parent worth their title as parent, the child should not always get what they want. The "I deserve it because I want it... and you can't stop me!" argument does not fly, regardless of what you are trying to argue for.
|
What I see is someone so pretentious that they can't understand why people should be responsible for themselves. I'm an adult, and if I'm allowed to die for my country and vote for my elected leaders, I should have the responsibility of determining what goes into my body and how I react because of it.
I have no problem with restricting people from being obnoxious in public. That's public property, and the government has the responsibility to protect you from people being a public nuisance. When it comes to private property, the government should have no say. I don't care if they do. That doesn't make it right.
The "I deserve it because I want it" argument DOES fly because I'm a legal adult deciding my own fate. You choose what food you eat. You choose when you leave the house, take a shower, go to bed, watch TV, access the internet, etc... What makes this any different? Because it *could* lead to something else? Again, our authority SHOULD NOT BE a preventative force. If you really want that, then go submit yourself to a mental hospital, so they can put you in a padded room where you can be protected from yourself and others. I'll take my chances and my liberties, thank you very much.
This is what responsibility is all about. Making the decisions on your own and suffering the consequences of your actions. If my actions affect myself and/or those who allow themselves to be affected, then I should be left alone. If I subject you to something you don't want, and it's not on private property, then I have over-stepped my liberties, and I deserve to be punished for that. Until I do, however, I should not be subjected to control by my government, especially when I'm the one who puts the fucktards in control, in the first place.
whoa.
[Updated on: Thu, 22 November 2007 14:26] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298331 is a reply to message #297772] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 14:53 |
|
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Again, you've even admitted that someone being under the influence doesn't always impede on your rights. More times than not, they don't. I'm not defending those who impede on your rights. Those people should be punished for impeding on other rights. However, my drinking inside of my home should not be (and thankfully is not) illegal. The same, logically, should be for smoking pot.
|
Guess what, you are arguing for the legality of drugs... NOT the legality to use it in your own home. There is a HUGE difference there.
Using drugs in public DOES affect my right to be free from that kind of influence. IT may not impede on my specific rights at any given time, but unless you are suggesting I stay in my house, there is the potential that it will. All I have to do is walk outside, near someone who is smoking it. THEN it affects my right to be free from that influence.
| Quote: |
Heh. It's my job as a parent to teach my child the difference between a want and a need. It's my job as a parent to teach my kids the difference between right and wrong. That's not the job of my government. My government's job is to protect me from external threats, not myself. I don't need nor want my hand held, especially by my government. If you want your hand held, then you can seek that help. Don't force it upon me because you're too fucking selfish to realize that I have the right to do whatever I please in the privacy of my own home or place of business that's willing to let me do as I please.
|
The same is said for the law. The external threat of pot is the altered brain chemistry that may affect someone else. Stop it at its source, and you no longer have to worry about it.
An automobile is controlled by humans, therefore if a human is of the sort that will hurt others by being in the vehicle, stop the human from driving. A drug is of the sort that controls the human by altering the brain chemistry. If the drug is of the sort that will hurt others by being consumed, stop the drug from being consumed.
| Quote: |
What I see is someone so pretentious that they can't understand why people should be responsible for themselves. I'm an adult, and if I'm allowed to die for my country and vote for my elected leaders, I should have the responsibility of determining what goes into my body and how I react because of it.
|
Oh, I understand why people should be responsible for themselves, the problem is that people ARE NOT ACCEPTING that responsibility. I bet, with 100% certainty, that should you ever get into legal trouble for committing an act while high, you will claim that you should not be responsible because you were high at the time and did not know what you were doing. People already do that with Alcohol, what makes you think pot will be any different?
| Quote: |
The "I deserve it because I want it" argument DOES fly because I'm a legal adult deciding my own fate. You choose what food you eat. You choose when you leave the house, take a shower, go to bed, watch TV, access the internet, etc... What makes this any different?
|
If it flies for this, it flies for everything someone would want to do. Are you sure you want to admit that? I'm a legal adult deciding my own fate. I should be allowed to kill as well.
You have yet to provide an argument that can not be extended to allow violent crimes as well.
The difference is that the simple act of eating, leaving the house, showering, going to bed, watching TV, accessing the internet, and yes, even smoking (whatever) does not affect anyone to any extent. Guess what? There are reasons why trans fats are becoming illegal and tobacco smoking is becoming illegal... because they harm to an excessive extent."Eating" does not, by nature, harm to any extent. Eating certain types of food do that regardless of how little is eaten. "smoking" by default, does not harm the body (for argument's sake). Smoking certain things, however, does. Changing your brain chemistry does the same thing during the time you are high. Harm to the extent of a reduction of mental capabilities to that of ignorance during the time the person is high.
| Quote: |
This is what responsibility is all about. Making the decisions on your own and suffering the consequences of your actions.
|
Then accept the responsibility that it is illegal, and stop making excuses as to why you do not like the law.
[Updated on: Thu, 22 November 2007 14:54] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298340 is a reply to message #298331] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 15:08 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| warranto |
Guess what, you are arguing for the legality of drugs... NOT the legality to use it in your own home. There is a HUGE difference there.
|
Pulling arguments out of our ass, are we?
| warranto |
Using drugs in public DOES affect my right to be free from that kind of influence. IT may not impede on my specific rights at any given time, but unless you are suggesting I stay in my house, there is the potential that it will. All I have to do is walk outside, near someone who is smoking it. THEN it affects my right to be free from that influence.
|
Hence why I support that being ILLEGAL. How many times do I have to say it? Apparently I still have to.
| warranto |
The same is said for the law. The external threat of pot is the altered brain chemistry that may affect someone else. Stop it at its source, and you no longer have to worry about it.
|
Again, why are you trying to make authorities into being a preventative force? If my brain isn't fucked up, why assume that it WILL be? Could it be? Sure, but it isn't, so don't punish me for something that hasn't happened.
| warranto |
An automobile is controlled by humans, therefore if a human is of the sort that will hurt others by being in the vehicle, stop the human from driving.
|
How are you going to prevent them from driving? Random stops along the road? Nope, that won't have detrimental effects.
| warranto |
Oh, I understand why people should be responsible for themselves, the problem is that people ARE NOT ACCEPTING that responsibility. I bet, with 100% certainty, that should you ever get into legal trouble for committing an act while high, you will claim that you should not be responsible because you were high at the time and did not know what you were doing. People already do that with Alcohol, what makes you think pot will be any different?
|
Let's make baseless assumptions! I take full responsibility for my actions whether or not I get in trouble for them. I was in legal trouble because I was caught stealing. I wasn't the one who came up with the brilliant (and incredibly fallible) plan, and I was gullible at that time during my life. However, that's not an excuse, and I would never use that as an excuse. I was 17 at the time, so I had the maturity to not be so stupid.
| warranto |
If it flies for this, it flies for everything someone would want to do. Are you sure you want to admit that? I'm a legal adult deciding my own fate. I should be allowed to kill as well.
You have yet to provide an argument that can not be extended to allow violent crimes as well.
|
PLEASE try and read what I say. I've explained SEVERAL times why it should not be extended to violent crimes. I guess I'm going to have to say it again: the simple reason why my reasoning doesn't get extended to that is because those crimes IMPEDE on the rights of others.
| warranto |
The difference is that the simple act of eating, leaving the house, showering, going to bed, watching TV, accessing the internet, and yes, even smoking (whatever) does not affect anyone to any extent. Guess what? There are reasons why trans fats are becoming illegal and tobacco smoking is becoming illegal... because they harm to an excessive extent."Eating" does not, by nature, harm to any extent. Eating certain types of food do that regardless of how little is eaten. "smoking" by default, does not harm the body (for argument's sake). Smoking certain things, however, does. Changing your brain chemistry does the same thing during the time you are high. Harm to the extent of a reduction of mental capabilities to that of ignorance during the time the person is high.
| Quote: |
This is what responsibility is all about. Making the decisions on your own and suffering the consequences of your actions.
|
Then accept the responsibility that it is illegal, and stop making excuses as to why you do not like the law.
|
Again, driving under the influence is and SHOULD REMAIN illegal for those reasons. Alcohol is legal, but drunk driving is illegal, and there's no reason why legalizing drugs would make it legal to drive under the influence.
whoa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298453 is a reply to message #298235] |
Fri, 23 November 2007 04:37 |
 |
Jecht
Messages: 3156
Registered: September 2004
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| xptek wrote on Thu, 22 November 2007 10:10 |
| Jecht wrote on Wed, 21 November 2007 22:44 |
The problem with legalizing one is: the door is then open to legalize all narcotics. The addiction of some of these drugs is so strong that people steal for it, sell all of their belongings for it, and sponge even further off of government welfare for it. I saw a court case on television where a mother used the $5,000 she received for her daughter completely on crack cocaine. I refuse to pay taxes for people to get high. The system is already broken enough.
|
You already pay taxes for plenty of people to get high. How is keeping the drug illegal going to ensure you don't? If anything, because of inflated prices caused by illegality of the drugs they're spending more of your tax money.
| Jecht wrote on Wed, 21 November 2007 22:44 |
The world isn't so black and white. If drugs were made legal on a federal standpoint, I would honestly consider relocating to a different country. That's because the effect would transfer to those who don't want drug abuse in one way or another, and probably in a pretty detrimental way.
|
The opposite has been proven time and time again in countries that have taken steps to decriminalize recreational drug use. Lower crime rates, lower drug use rates, etc.
|
I don't believe that would happen in America. People here are far too stupid with their liberties. Hell, most of us don't even vote. If the legalization of drugs would make for less use rates, then I'm all for it. However, I highly doubt it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drugs ARE NOT bad [message #298719 is a reply to message #298717] |
Sat, 24 November 2007 16:17 |
 |
BlueThen
Messages: 2402
Registered: February 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Call me retarded, but I'm actually smart enough to not use illegal drugs.
I don't fucking need illegal drugs to make myself feel better. If you need illegal drugs to feel better, you honestly need to see a professional.
I don't care what scientific shit you guys have on illegal drugs, there is much proof with deaths and diseased people caused by illegal drugs.
So it's a bit ironic, when you take drugs to feel better, but in the end, they make you worse. It takes common sense to realize that.
I want illegal drugs to stay illegal so I don't have to be extra cautious to the people around me, and so I don't have to trust riding with anyone driving who, if illegal drugs were legalized, potentially is a drug addict, which dis-functions the brain, and endangers me and everyone else putting their lives at hands to that person when riding in a car with him or her.
If you think that illegal drugs are fine, then honestly, YOU are the one that's retarded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Jul 21 01:09:28 MST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01460 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
