General Discussion Thread of DOOM

  • Thread starter Thread starter TorontoReign
  • Start date Start date
BigGuyCIA said:
I certainly don't want another Hunter's Point or Tenderloin district in SF. Sure, you've eliminated the cartels out of the equation, now you have to deal with the repercussion vagrancy, and people turning the neighborhood into a shithole that nobody wants to walk around in.

It's not my business what somebody does with his/her body - it is my business when your decisions start to impact the areas that I'm in.
Click to expand...

You are mixing issues here. You think vagrancy and crime and lowering of the quality of life are a result of drug consumption when it's the other way around.
 
zegh8578 said:
I don't see how this is so difficult to understand, this isn't something like... "they shoot each others because they like shooting each others because they enjoy shooting each others - "

These things *have a cause*

Of course, its easyer and more comfortable to just brush causes aside, who gives a shit, let's just bomb them to fuck - but then don't argue about what's best for people, because waging war simultaneously with showing concern is not really compatible.

Decriminalization is the way to go IF you truly show concern, because decriminalization will have the end result of less death, less misery, less imprisonment - OVERALL.
Click to expand...

It is - and I'm not arguing that people should go to prison for hard drugs.

Walpknut said:
You think vagrancy and crime and lowering of the quality of life are a result of drug consumption when it's the other way around.
Click to expand...

It's how things start, typically. It's the same end result on both sides of the spectrum
 
Not really. People who resort to substance abuse, more often than not do it because of their life situation. It's an escape. Criminalization then forces people who just want an escape from their problems into engaging in criminal activities for something that isn't intrisecaly criminal. Criminalization makes smuggling super profitable thus it attracts people in low economic situations into trying it because they have no better way to make money than from criminal activity, that's why drug use is common among low quality of life neighborhoods and cities. It's a bigger problem, drugs abuse is just a minor symptom and the biggest escapegoat.
 
Walpknut said:
Not really. People who resort to substance abuse, more often than not do it because of their life situation. It's an escape. Criminalization then forces people who just want an escape from their problems into engaging in criminal activities for something that isn't intrisecaly criminal. Criminalization makes smuggling super profitable thus it attracts people in low economic situations into trying it because they have no better way to make money than from criminal activity, that's why drug use is common among low quality of life neighborhoods and cities. It's a bigger problem, drugs abuse is just a minor symptom and the biggest escapegoat.
Click to expand...

I'm in favor of decriminalization and pro-rehabilitation programs. You're pushing an open door with me.

I simply don't want drugs like H or meth to be distributed in the manner that weed is pushed through dispensaries.

If you're a user - fine. Seller? Get out.
 
BigGuyCIA said:
I'm in favor of decriminalization and pro-rehabilitation programs. You're pushing an open door with me.

I simply don't want drugs like H or meth to be distributed in the manner that weed is pushed through dispensaries.

If you're a user - fine. Seller? Get out.
Click to expand...

The point is that we eliminate sellers by decriminalizing, and we make things much easier in terms of "coming out" as an abuser, since legalization would remove stigma as well as legal reprecussion.

I understand the whole on-the-fence-ness about harder drugs, but truth is that while weed-industry creates violence and unecesary prison, it really is only a drop compared to the hard drugs.

Weed legality is, quite frankly, more a matter of freedom of choice, it is, as many have argued, not that dangerous, and if we're allowed to have a beer, we should be allowed to smoke a blunt

But - legalization of the hard stuff, cocaine, crack, heroin, the true "bad guys" is not about "freedom of choice", but damage-control! If we make cocaine available in pharmacies, we have dealt a crushing - irreversible blow to the Mexican cocaine mafias. Can you imagine what would happen to THEIR business - if American states begun to independently grow government controlled coca, right there in the US?

Can you imagine what would happen to the terrorist-funding heroin plantations in Afghanistan, if western poppy growers (who make, for example seeds for pastries, or opiates for medicinal morphine, codeine etc.) were to also produce government controlled heroin for abusers who would otherwise buy super-expensive drugs imported all the way from Afghanistan?

It's about a small move, that would do a tremendous ammount of damage to firmly established drug cartels in the world.
 
Decriminalization doesn't mean it will just be sold To anybody, just like with liquor there should be a level of control of it's purchase and distribution.

On meth, well meth only exists because some people need a cheap fix, and the other shit istoo expensive.
 
Yeah, speed, meth, extacy will probably still be problematic in themselves, but a step at the time.

While they are still illegal, they keep causing havoc. It doesn't mean we should not try to damage-control where we can. Cocaine and heroin industry are the two major behemoths of destruction.
 
zegh8578 said:
The point is that we eliminate sellers by decriminalizing, and we make things much easier in terms of "coming out" as an abuser, since legalization would remove stigma as well as legal reprecussion.

I understand the whole on-the-fence-ness about harder drugs, but truth is that while weed-industry creates violence and unecesary prison, it really is only a drop compared to the hard drugs.

Weed legality is, quite frankly, more a matter of freedom of choice, it is, as many have argued, not that dangerous, and if we're allowed to have a beer, we should be allowed to smoke a blunt

But - legalization of the hard stuff, cocaine, crack, heroin, the true "bad guys" is not about "freedom of choice", but damage-control! If we make cocaine available in pharmacies, we have dealt a crushing - irreversible blow to the Mexican cocaine mafias. Can you imagine what would happen to THEIR business - if American states begun to independently grow government controlled coca, right there in the US?

Can you imagine what would happen to the terrorist-funding heroin plantations in Afghanistan, if western poppy growers (who make, for example seeds for pastries, or opiates for medicinal morphine, codeine etc.) were to also produce government controlled heroin for abusers who would otherwise buy super-expensive drugs imported all the way from Afghanistan?

It's about a small move, that would do a tremendous ammount of damage to firmly established drug cartels in the world.
Click to expand...

I understand. The apprehensiveness comes from the nature of mary-j and it's effects on the individual and those around i.e. people are way more cool with weed. It's a largely harmless substance compared to other substances like alcohol (less potent than alcohol). A guy on PCP is going to behave differently than a guy on weed, for example.
 
MutantScalper said:
Actual proof for this, plz?
Click to expand...

Depends what criteria you put on "proof", really...
The internet is brimming with statistics of Portuguese drug use plummeting, numbers talking about 60% drop, and the drug-use being the lowest in Europe.

If you want government level access type of documentation, I'm afraid I can't help you there :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal <---widely available data
Observations include more people welcome rehabilitation, fewer youngsters start with drugs, and fewer overdose deaths. Win, win, winnily-win.
Also, once again, this isn't about some drug-haven free-for-all philosophy.
Police in Portugal can seize someone's drug posession. They just won't throw them in jail.

Portugal has not legalized drugs, the government is not producing drugs. Smuggling is still illegal. I still see full legalization as ideal, because it would eliminate all needs for smuggling.
Why would people want to import impure over-expensive drugs from armed criminals, when they can buy it locally, under government scrutiny? And when I say "they" I mean pharmacies, licenced establishments, nobody's imagining some big "farmers market" with packs of white powder.

It's about taking control of the situation, instead of leaving it to the mobsters, while imprisoning the victims.
 
Walpknut said:
There have been studies.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/debrab...uana-doesnt-increase-teen-usage/#25e53456247f
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, not a Forbes subscriber, can't read it. Looks like it's a study that claims that legal weed doesn't increase teen usage. Yea, I wonder. Steve Forbes is a libertarian, I think? That would make him one of those rich folks who think he doesn't have to pay taxes to fund schools, roads, or anything. He's a billionaire who doesn't care about poor folks, whether they use drugs or are rehabilitated or whatever. I'm sure his newspaper/online site favours legal weed so he could invest in that and make even more money.

Libertarians are like rich anarchists. Billionaire anarchists. Do you want anarchy in Colombia?
 
Apparently clicking on "continue to article" is too hard to do.
Also completely irrelevant what Steve Forbes does and doesn't do in the face of a Study that analyzes one of the few states where Marihuana is legal in regards to your inquiry.

You just want to stand on your soapbox even on the face of being wrong huh? I guess when Big CIa called you the most ignorant person he has ever seen he wasn't exagerating.
 
Walpknut said:
Apparently clicking on "continue to article" is too hard to do.
Also completely irrelevant what Steve Forbes does and doesn't do in the face of a Study that analyzes one of the few states where Marihuana is legal in regards to your inquiry.

You just want to stand on your soapbox even on the face of being wrong huh? I guess when Big CIa called you the most ignorant person he has ever seen he wasn't exagerating.
Click to expand...

It doesn't work because I have adblock on.

Sorry I can't really comment on it since I can't read the article. One article that obviously is enough for you to proclaim the issue solved, which is really not very common in the academic world, usually more data is needed.
 
So apparently disabling adblock for a single page is also too hard. Do you wear a helmet while on the PC? You probably should.
 
zegh8578 said:
Depends what criteria you put on "proof", really...
The internet is brimming with statistics of Portuguese drug use plummeting, numbers talking about 60% drop, and the drug-use being the lowest in Europe.

If you want government level access type of documentation, I'm afraid I can't help you there :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal <---widely available data
Observations include more people welcome rehabilitation, fewer youngsters start with drugs, and fewer overdose deaths. Win, win, winnily-win.
Also, once again, this isn't about some drug-haven free-for-all philosophy.
Police in Portugal can seize someone's drug posession. They just won't throw them in jail.

Portugal has not legalized drugs, the government is not producing drugs. Smuggling is still illegal. I still see full legalization as ideal, because it would eliminate all needs for smuggling.
Why would people want to import impure over-expensive drugs from armed criminals, when they can buy it locally, under government scrutiny? And when I say "they" I mean pharmacies, licenced establishments, nobody's imagining some big "farmers market" with packs of white powder.

It's about taking control of the situation, instead of leaving it to the mobsters, while imprisoning the victims.
Click to expand...

Yes, Portugal. Like I wrote earlier they have heroin-addicts in the parks laying next to the alchies. Is that a good thing, in your view? Is cocaine also legal in Portugal? Would you like coke/meth/heroin addicts high on their drug(s) of choice running around where kids are playing? I don't.

In Finland the use of alcohol was a lot lower during prohibition. When ever they lower the price of alcohol, the harms related to alcohol go up. I've heard that the most dangerous place in the world is the line in front of a fast food place on a Friday or Saturday night around 3:30 - 4:30 in Finland. Ever been to Finland for a night out? I think Norway is calmer. I don't want to add any more legal substances to the mix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top