NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.freevibe.com/drug_facts/scenarios.html

http://www.freevibe.com/drug_facts/scenarios2.html


what a load of wank. and neither of them actually convince - or educate - you into what the drug does to you. why? because it doesn't do anything to you - its comparatively harmless and less 'bad' than alcohol or tobacco.
now if it was crystal meth or heroin they were talking about, showing you some pictures/videos of addicts would be enough to turn kids away i'm sure - but they can't do that in this case with pot because its hardly bad at all and pictures of "addicts" would just be funny :D
all they can show you is what might happen if you get caught violating their stupid, irrational, propoganda-fuelled law :rolleyes:


and the latter especially one shows just how ridiculous it is to actually arrest people for doing something as relatively harmless as this! (ok they would have been underage even if weed were legal by most people's estimation, but still....)


so, have a look at the scenarios and see what a total joke this anti-drug nonsense is
(it came from the advert on this (http://www.gamespy.com/articles/595/595975p4.html)page, in case you were wondering what i was doing at an anti-drugs site :p )

But they only arrest them and throw them in jail because they care and want them to stop harming themselves.

EDIT- and...lol. Those cops must have a lot of spare time

But they only arrest them and throw them in jail because they care and want them to stop harming themselves.
oh yeah sorry i forgot. nevermind what i said then.


:headbang:


that arguement stacks up with really bad drugs (like, as i mentioned, meth or heroin, crack etc) but for fucks sake not with weed, e, lsd, shrooms, and the like
most people only seem to believe weed should be illegal because of propoganda shoved down their necks, and because of the social stigma created from decades of such wanky propoganda :mad:


sorry, that site really annoyed me. can you tell?:p

bloody stupid, i think that thing made me want to go adn try pot...

oh yeah sorry i forgot. nevermind what i said then.


:headbang:

It's true. Keeping them in jail will keep them away from bad influences like weed.

sorry, that site really annoyed me. can you tell?:p

Are you good with Flash? We could write one of our own. :p

Lol. I love the way that the Brent guy looks so inherently evil. BECAUSE OF POT.

http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/5641/badassbrent2pn.png

Just look at that evil grimace. BWAH HA HA*girly pot induced giggle*

Oh, yes. That definately informed me well enough of the medical effects of smoking weed so that I could make my own conscientious descision. It certainly didn't simply use social stigma and taboo to enforce it's point.

Grow up, propaganda. The most harmful thing in a joint is the tobacco.

*Toke*

In the first one they end up throwing it in the toilet and going to watch a Vin Diesel movie, in the second one the lacrosse player ends up talking to the hand... I don't understand what you're talking about police and stuff :confused:



:D

It's true. Keeping them in jail will keep them away from bad influences like weed.


and they can get useful contacts for when they come out. you know, like all the actual dealers and pushers of real drugs and that...

Are you good with Flash? We could write one of our own. :p
i wish :(
i had flash and was gonna learn it, but i lost the cd:headbang:

i do have an alternative program that would do though :D
we need a scenario plot.... *thinks*

In school, the best anti weed propaganda they could come up with is in one single case where "A boy tried to talk to moving vehicles and nearly got run over"

Whoopdedoo. I'm sure that outweighs the thousands of deaths tobacco and alchohol have caused - good thing it's still illegal!

I submitted alcohol and porn as my antidrug on that other site they link to.

In the first one they end up throwing it in the toilet and going to watch a Vin Diesel movie, in the second one the lacrosse player ends up talking to the hand... I don't understand what you're talking about police and stuff :confused:



:D
guess which options i didn't bother to choose ;)




http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/5641/badassbrent2pn.png
mwuhahahaha smoke pot and i will OWN YOUR SOUL!!!!


:p

i do have an alternative program that would do though :D
we need a scenario plot.... *thinks*
Girl likes guy. Girl goes to guy's house. Girl brings £100 skunk. Everyone gets beefed. But do the guy and girl get laid? YOU DECIDE.

guess which options i didn't bother to choose ;)




http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/5641/badassbrent2pn.png
mwuhahahaha smoke pot and i will OWN YOUR SOUL!!!!


:p
Hey, I already mentioned that. Pfft, just because I didn't know we could use [img] tags now

To my knowledge, no one has ever been hurt more by marijuana than by alchohl. I grew and smoked it for years.

and they can get useful contacts for when they come out. you know, like all the actual dealers and pushers of real drugs and that...

Maybe they can also get a job from it and really straighten their lives out.


i wish :(
i had flash and was gonna learn it, but i lost the cd:headbang:

i do have an alternative program that would do though :D
we need a scenario plot.... *thinks*

Hehehehe. A choice between a joint, a bottle of jack daniels, or sitting there staring at eachother all night.

Hey, I already mentioned that. Pfft, just because I didn't know we could use [img] tags now
yeah i saw - i just stole your idea is all :P

Girl likes guy. Girl goes to guy's house. Girl brings £100 skunk. Everyone gets beefed. But do the guy and girl get laid? YOU DECIDE.
i like it!

Ooooh, here's a scenario.

THE EVIL WARLORD NAZZKORR HAS KIDNAPPED YOUNG RACHEL!

Tom goes to save the day, but is captured by NAZZKORR's servants!!!

While in prison, he is subject to horrific torture...

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAAHAHAHA, I AM EVIL! I SHALL LET RACHEL LIVE IF YOU DO ONE OF THESE THREE THINGS!!!

Tom: *groan* Noes, please....

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! CHOICE A: TOKE FROM MY BONG OF DOOM!!!!

Tom: NOOOOO!!!

NAZZKOR: MWHAHAHAHA! I AM EVIL! CHOICE B: DRINK FROM THIS BOTTLE OF FORTIFIED RUSSIAN HEADACHE WATER!

Tom: No...anything but that...NO!

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHA. CHOICE C: WATCH A VIN DIESEL MOVIE WITH ME, AND MAKE SWEET LOVE ON THE COUCH!

Tom: Dear God, NO! CHOICE A! CHOICE A!

Ooooh, here's a scenario.

THE EVIL WARLORD NAZZKORR HAS KIDNAPPED YOUNG RACHEL!

Tom goes to save the day, but is captured by NAZZKORR's servants!!!

While in prison, he is subject to horrific torture...

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAAHAHAHA, I AM EVIL! I SHALL LET RACHEL LIVE IF YOU DO ONE OF THESE THREE THINGS!!!

Tom: *groan* Noes, please....

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! CHOICE A: TOKE FROM MY BONG OF DOOM!!!!

Tom: NOOOOO!!!

NAZZKOR: MWHAHAHAHA! I AM EVIL! CHOICE B: DRINK FROM THIS BOTTLE OF FORTIFIED RUSSIAN HEADACHE WATER!

Tom: No...anything but that...NO!

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHA. CHOICE C: WATCH A VIN DIESEL MOVIE WITH ME, AND MAKE SWEET LOVE ON THE COUCH!

Tom: Dear God, NO! CHOICE A! CHOICE A!
TBH, for option C I think that watching a vin diesel movie is torture enough.

EDIT: Oh, btw PM, how do I join this wonderful S.P.O.T?

TBH, for option C I think that watching a vin diesel movie is torture enough.

Exactly! But can you imagine having sex with one in the background?

I've been trying to figure out in which country these play. Now while there are many indicators that it's the US (car at 16, baseball, etc) the cars were on the wrong side of the road, as though this took place in some commonwealth country...
I find it interesting how in the 2 cases that the protagonists take pot, they immediatly get busted...

Exactly! But can you imagine having sex with one in the background?
No, because Vin makes me more limp than tagliatelle(sp?).

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/8207/propogandawank2hi.jpg

its a start :D

I've been trying to figure out in which country these play. Now while there are many indicators that it's the US (car at 16, baseball, etc) the cars were on the wrong side of the road, as though this took place in some commonwealth country...
I find it interesting how in the 2 cases that the protagonists take pot, they immediatly get busted...
It's the thought police. Once someone's thoughts become clouded with 'mmm, cookie dough. or pizza, or <insert random foodstuff here>' they go to bust them with a reefer.

I find it interesting how in the 2 cases that the protagonists take pot, they immediatly get busted...

Yeah, because it's the only way you can scare people into not doing it (Remember kids, never question authority). I mean, it'd have substantially less effect if they showed them sitting around watching Jay and Silent Bob, laughing their heads off and eating nacho's.

It's the thought police. Once someone's thoughts become clouded with 'mmm, cookie dough. or pizza, or <insert random foodstuff here>' they go to bust them with a reefer.I prefer the Dutch thought police then... I was with a group of friends in Amsterdam once and they pulled one out. Two cops noticed and while one laughed at the situation, the other politely told us that it was only allowed in coffeeshops and not on the street... :D

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/8207/propogandawank2hi.jpg

its a start :D

omg

That's the funniest ever :D

Yeah, because it's the only way you can scare people into not doing it (Remember kids, never question authority). I mean, it'd have substantially less effect if they showed them sitting around watching Jay and Silent Bob, laughing their heads off and eating nacho's.Well, I found it weird that the parents that had forgotten their suitcases didn't show up in the event that they wanted to watch a movie...:D

Ooooh, here's a scenario.

THE EVIL WARLORD NAZZKORR HAS KIDNAPPED YOUNG RACHEL!

Tom goes to save the day, but is captured by NAZZKORR's servants!!!

While in prison, he is subject to horrific torture...

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAAHAHAHA, I AM EVIL! I SHALL LET RACHEL LIVE IF YOU DO ONE OF THESE THREE THINGS!!!

Tom: *groan* Noes, please....

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! CHOICE A: TOKE FROM MY BONG OF DOOM!!!!

Tom: NOOOOO!!!

NAZZKOR: MWHAHAHAHA! I AM EVIL! CHOICE B: DRINK FROM THIS BOTTLE OF FORTIFIED RUSSIAN HEADACHE WATER!

Tom: No...anything but that...NO!

NAZZKOR: MWAHAHAHAHAHA. CHOICE C: WATCH A VIN DIESEL MOVIE WITH ME, AND MAKE SWEET LOVE ON THE COUCH!

Tom: Dear God, NO! CHOICE A! CHOICE A!
lol :cool:

though i think a change of tack - how about Rachel is kidnapped by the evil wizard (not just warlord now, eh ;)) NAZZKORR, and her boyfriend has to save her before she is forced to watch a Vin Diesel compilation tape. on his way to the evil lord's castle, Jeramiah comes across Ozzy Osbourne who offers him some pot

do you:

A: take the pot

B: scream fuck a lot and bite ozzy's head off

or C: continue anyway cos pot is for loosers, but has some vodka for a laugh


result:

A: Jeramiah saves the day because he manages to keep his cool in the face of terrible danger, by being too stoned to notice whats going on (and being immune to NAZZKORR's evil mind rays or some bullshit :P )

B: fuck knows

C: NAZZKORR hears Jeramiah coming as he shouts drunkenly down the corridor, thinking he's master of the world. Jer gets taken to the prizon and gangfucked by drunken guards, while Rachel's head explodes after watching vin diesel for 8 hours straight.

YOU DECIDE :eek:



EDIT: Oh, btw PM, how do I join this wonderful S.P.O.T?
i dunno, czardas made me a honorary member the other day, talk to him... though i think you need 5,000 posts to join (you better get posting bwoy! :D)

I prefer the Dutch thought police then... I was with a group of friends in Amsterdam once and they pulled one out. Two cops noticed and while one laughed at the situation, the other politely told us that it was only allowed in coffeeshops and not on the street... :D
:p man i love the dutch :fluffle:

YOU DECIDE :eek:

LOL, B! B!

I like how the parents sent their kids to rehab... specialy the one that tried it once lol

:p man i love the dutch :fluffle:They're even fun (well, the normal populace) when we play soccer! :D

I like how the parents sent their kids to rehab... specialy the one that tried it once lolTell me, how unrealistic is that? (seriously now?)

I like how the parents sent their kids to rehab... specialy the one that tried it once lol

Yeah...weed users in rehab? Okay...

Yeah...weed users in rehab? Okay...
Jack Osbourne, meet Kanabia, Kanabia, meet the guy who smoked a half a joint and thought he was addicted so went to rehab.

i dunno, czardas made me a honorary member the other day, talk to him... though i think you need 5,000 posts to join (you better get posting bwoy! :p )Aww, but I have so much uni work to do now...I'm no easy going Arts student, you know:p

Aww, but I have so much uni work to do now...I'm no easy going Arts student, you know:p
bah! who cares about putting BSc at the end of your name when you can have S.P.O.T.!;)

bah! who cares about putting BSc at the end of your name when you can have S.P.O.T.!;)
Ah, but I have to get a first equivalent grade for this year if I ever want to
a)Do my year in industry
b)Be even considered for a Phd after my 3/4 years

:( :( :( :( :(

Jack Osbourne, meet Kanabia, Kanabia, meet the guy who smoked a half a joint and thought he was addicted so went to rehab.

It's okay Jack. I wouldn't be able to resist raiding your daddy's stuff either.

Aww, but I have so much uni work to do now...I'm no easy going Arts student, you know:p

Meh, so do I, and i'm an arts student. 2000 word essay that was due on Monday, and a 2500 word one due tomorrow. Two more due next week, and about 200 pages of reading to prepare for a test next week...then two exams the week after. I really need motivation.

Ah, but I have to get a first equivalent grade for this year if I ever want to
a)Do my year in industry
b)Be even considered for a Phd after my 3/4 years

:( :( :( :( :(
eep...
well what are you studying then? (and good luck with that :D)



Meh, so do I, and i'm an arts student. 2000 word essay that was due on Monday, and a 2500 word one due tomorrow. Two more due next week, and about 200 pages of reading to prepare for a test next week...then two exams the week after. I really need motivation.
man uni kinda blows. the "real world" of business is far more interesting and rewarding imho
then again maybe i was just doing a BS course...

man uni kinda blows. the "real world" of business is far more interesting and rewarding imho
then again maybe i was just doing a BS course...

It friggin' sucks. I'm working part-time too so I never get a chance to go out...I always have either uni or work the next day. It's been like that since March. *sigh*

4-5 months of holidays from uni in a couple of weeks, though.

eep...
well what are you studying then? (and good luck with that :D)
Biochemistry. Since the world of bioscience industry is flooded with BSc Biochem students, I have to do stuff that makes me stand out. YiI is a start, but a Phd would have companies licking my boots. Plus, I really like biochemistry (sad alert! sad alert!)

man uni kinda blows. the "real world" of business is far more interesting and rewarding imho
then again maybe i was just doing a BS course...
I've missed this - did you give up uneh? What are you doing now?

eep...
well what are you studying then? (and good luck with that :D)

man uni kinda blows. the "real world" of business is far more interesting and rewarding imho
then again maybe i was just doing a BS course...

What I find amusing is that most of the people who find this sort of government propaganda stupid and amusing are the same people who want more social engineering by the government to reduce social ills.

You either want the social engineering, or you don't. Personally, I don't want any social engineering - propaganda, taxes, penalties, or "anti-drug education". No thank you.

If you don't like this sort of thing, bring it up and make sure your elected officials know you don't want them intruding into your life.

What I find amusing is that most of the people who find this sort of government propaganda stupid and amusing are the same people who want more social engineering by the government to reduce social ills.

You either want the social engineering, or you don't. Personally, I don't want any social engineering - propaganda, taxes, penalties, or "anti-drug education". No thank you.

If you don't like this sort of thing, bring it up and make sure your elected officials know you don't want them intruding into your life.

Sorry, supporting a welfare state and rejecting baseless anti-drug propaganda are completely distinct political opinions, whether you agree with them or not.

Sorry, supporting a welfare state and rejecting baseless anti-drug propaganda are completely distinct political opinions, whether you agree with them or not.

It's possible to have a welfare state without so much social engineering.

I just don't like the idea of giving the government the right to ram their latest opinions on the proper way to live down my throat.

Give them that power, and it's only a matter of time before they come up with some idiot idea that you definitely don't agree with.

It's possible to have a welfare state without so much social engineering.

I just don't like the idea of giving the government the right to ram their latest opinions on the proper way to live down my throat.

Give them that power, and it's only a matter of time before they come up with some idiot idea that you definitely don't agree with.

I generally agree, but you stated "taxes" as an example.

I generally agree, but you stated "taxes" as an example.
Here in the US, they tax some things with the express idea of social engineering. Or give tax breaks with the idea of social engineering.

So, married couples with children get more deductions from their taxes.

Or, cigarette taxes are raised with the express idea of reducing cigarette smoking. Money raised is a secondary consideration.

Here in the US, they tax some things with the express idea of social engineering. Or give tax breaks with the idea of social engineering.

So, married couples with children get more deductions from their taxes.

Or, cigarette taxes are raised with the express idea of reducing cigarette smoking. Money raised is a secondary consideration.

OK, I getcha. I agree there. (It's the same here)

This was a serious wtf moment:

http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/1416/wtf4gb.jpg

Also, when they are talking about the burnouts at school who talk slow, I hardly think anyone can talk slower than those four and with as little emotion in their voice. Maybe they are Danish :confused: .

This was a serious wtf moment:

http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/1416/wtf4gb.jpg

Also, when they are talking about the burnouts at school who talk slow, I hardly think anyone can talk slower than those four and with as little emotion in their voice. Maybe they are Danish :confused: .

If that was the solution, then most of the adults in the Western world would have been rehab alumni.

Biochemistry. Since the world of bioscience industry is flooded with BSc Biochem students, I have to do stuff that makes me stand out. YiI is a start, but a Phd would have companies licking my boots. Plus, I really like biochemistry (sad alert! sad alert!)

yeah i know a bloke here who does biochem.... there are millions of peeps on his course apparently :eek:


I've missed this - did you give up uneh? What are you doing now?
finally got medically diagnosed with clinical depression and some other things happened. i couldn't really face going back again so i'm on a year's leave of absence, and working as a graphic designer/website moneky in the mean time :)
though i did pass the year (w00t) so i'm not flunking out at least!

kinda learning that the insular academic world or uni and school is a load of toss, to be blunt, though. if you want to learn how to think like an academic, go to uni. if you want to learn how to work in business, go work in business. that is, of course, unless you're doing something vocational at uni, in which case its fair enough...
and also, that said, i'm on a particularly airy-fairy academic-style politics course as it is, so that could be colouring my view on this :p

What I find amusing is that most of the people who find this sort of government propaganda stupid and amusing are the same people who want more social engineering by the government to reduce social ills.

You either want the social engineering, or you don't. Personally, I don't want any social engineering - propaganda, taxes, penalties, or "anti-drug education". No thank you.

If you don't like this sort of thing, bring it up and make sure your elected officials know you don't want them intruding into your life.
actually its not as black-and-white as that.
i don't necissarily support big govt but i do support what you call "social engineering". however, just because this particular facet of such policy is wrong - scientifically, medically and socially - doesn't mean all such social engineering is wrong per se.

i believe that social engineering policies to try and prevent people from using heroin, crack and meth - for example - are warranted. such policies for weed are not.

also its the way such policies are carried out that matters. arresting users isn't going to do much good, instead rehabilitiation and arresting pushers/controlling supply is the key. but thats not needed for weed (or shrooms, lsd or ecstacy), so therefore imho they should be legal.


so its no way near as simple as you make out. i can 'have it both ways' because its not as simple as 'either one way or another' - there's subleties in between:rolleyes:

actually its not as black-and-white as that.
i don't necissarily support big govt but i do support what you call "social engineering". however, just because this particular facet of such policy is wrong - scientifically, medically and socially - doesn't mean all such social engineering is wrong per se.

i believe that social engineering policies to try and prevent people from using heroin, crack and meth - for example - are warranted. such policies for weed are not.

also its the way such policies are carried out that matters. arresting users isn't going to do much good, instead rehabilitiation and arresting pushers/controlling supply is the key. but thats not needed for weed (or shrooms, lsd or ecstacy), so therefore imho they should be legal.

so its no way near as simple as you make out. i can 'have it both ways' because its not as simple as 'either one way or another' - there's subleties in between:rolleyes:

It's a lot simpler to just let people have the personal freedom to do these things.

For one, it eliminates the "war on drugs". In the US at least, it's responsible for the majority of incarcerations, and the majority of street violence. Our murder and crime rates would plummet if all drugs were legal.

Offer people rehab if they want it - but don't force them.

Telling people to not smoke crack isn't any more effective than telling people to not smoke weed. And if you give the government that power, they'll abuse it from time to time - so while you may want them to leave you alone about the weed, some wag in some office there will get the idea into his head that he can tell you how to live.

Wow PM...musta seriously missed some stuff while I was out. Good luck with the web monkey thing - sounds fun;)

Anyway, I had another idea for our version of this:

17 year old twins, Sally and Sarah, are going to their Mother's fifth wedding. Their new step-dad, Mike, is a nice man who definitely does not go into a rage and attack the girls when drunk, nor did he get Sally pregnant a year ago and then force her to abort after a really bad night with Jack D. Not that their mother cares that is, as she is too often making friends with her gin bottles.

The wedding goes smoothly, except for Mike slurring his lines while their mother stumbles slightly in her heels. At the reception, the alcohol is soon flowing. Mike, still sober enough to be coherent and amicable, offers the girls a shot of bourbon each. Neither have drunk anything before (their mother's past actions put them off) and aren't too sure, but Mike almost insists. Do they:
a) Take a drink
b) Politely decline
c) Walk off in disgust

Answers:
a) Due to family peer pressure, Sally and Sarah take the drink. Then another. And another. Soon, they are wasted, enjoying the effects of the alcohol on life and especially their recent experiences with it. Unfortunately, a predisposition to alcoholism in their family means that in twenty years time, Sarah has to watch Sally die of chirrosis of the Liver in a back alley, leaving four children and a drunk for a husband to feed them.

b) Both Sally and Sarah politely decline their drinks. Mike says nothing, but later on beats them for their lack of respect for him. Sally, always the most targeted of the two, takes an especially hard beating, and ends up paraplegic. The two become nuns and live together in chastity for the rest of their lives.

c) The twins give Mike the big F U, then walk off, never to return home. Mike tries to catch them, but only makes an arse of himself. The mother, distraught for the first time about her beautiful daughters, leaves Mike but cannot get the girls to come home. The girls' story continues...

(Post opiton (c) )
The girls, now in University, spend all their time together. They have met many new friends and are going to their next door neighbours house tonight. At the house, there is some drinking (the girls are still tee-totallers, so none for them). In the small common garden out back, there are some friends smoking a joint - very low tobacco content, the finest hash. Tommy, a friend of the girls, offers them a toke. Do they:
a) Take it
b) Politely decline
c) Lecture their friends on the horrors of hash

Answers:
a) The girls smoke some of the reefer. Initially, it makes them cough, but soon the good effects kick in. They enjoy it and continue to smoke it, using little tobacco each time. They never get addicted and do not move on to hard drugs because of it. Since they do not smoke all the time, no signs of Psychosis ever occur. They do not push it on their friends and will not smoke it around people who disagree.

b) The girls never smoke the hash. Their current circle of friends doesn't mind and does not disown them. The girls remain popular and find friendship amongst stoner and non-stoner alike.

c) The girls tell their friends the horror stories of Hash - it's brain-rotting capabilities, the mass psychosis and perma-paranoia you can get from just one puff, the highly addictive qualities, the anti-socialness...their list goes on and on. Their friends then show them that no study has ever shown cannabis to be addictive or brain-rotting, that psychosis only occurs in very rare situations and that it is as antisocial as drinking. The girls refuse to believe and remain pious and ignorant. They eventually join a convent, sickened by the twisted morals of today, and vote Conservative for the rest of their lives.


What? If idiots can push ideas like those in the flash films, why can't I in text form?:D

nor did he get Sally pregnant a year ago and then force her to abort (and give Billy, the baby boy, up for adoption)

They adopted away an aborted fetus? ew.

They adopted away an aborted fetus? ew.
Shit. Uh, he was drunk then, too. True story

EDITED THE OTHER POST NOW. KANABIA MUST HAVE MADE IT UP. THE SICKO. MUST BE ALL THE POT.

Wow PM...musta seriously missed some stuff while I was out. Good luck with the web monkey thing - sounds fun;)

Anyway, I had another idea for our version of this:

-snip-

What? If idiots can push ideas like those in the flash films, why can't I in text form?:D
:p *claps* very good! i like :D

It's a lot simpler to just let people have the personal freedom to do these things.

For one, it eliminates the "war on drugs". In the US at least, it's responsible for the majority of incarcerations, and the majority of street violence. Our murder and crime rates would plummet if all drugs were legal.

Offer people rehab if they want it - but don't force them.

Telling people to not smoke crack isn't any more effective than telling people to not smoke weed. And if you give the government that power, they'll abuse it from time to time - so while you may want them to leave you alone about the weed, some wag in some office there will get the idea into his head that he can tell you how to live.
well thats just where we differ (and obviously have to "agree to disagree", much as i dislike the sound of that phrase...)

it may be simpler and easier to just throw up one's hands and say 'everyone do what they want', but i just believe every person (should) has/have a responsibility to every other. the collective information, knowledge and foresight of society - government - in some cases does know best. when you're an individual living on the street and you're life's a joke, and some pusher offers you crack or heroin (or whatever), you're going to be inclined to take it. but people make mistakes. from a more long-term viewpoint, with collective knowledge, society can see that that's a stupid thing to do - you're far, far, far less likely to get out of the gutter and live a 'normal' life if you are an addict. and hence it is societies' responsibility to pass on this "wizdom" in the form of making drugs like this illegal and police them. however, people make mistakes, and ones like this shouldn't be punished - the addiction and/or life that goes with is punishment enough - which is why rehab is the preferred option for users. controlling supply still effectively allows people to do what they like, if they know what they're doing - so if you're rich and you can afford a crack habbit, then you can still get it illegally and do what you like with no criminal concequences. this system is designed to help those with no choice or who don't see the other choices available to them in their future - or the choices that would be available if they didn't become addicts...

but then there's weed and other "safe" or 'soft' drugs. these, i would say, should be legal. one doesn't do one's self too much damage by smoking a few joints a week or taking some beans when you're out on a friday night. the relative risk is negligable, and the option is there to stop. plus the lifestyle of users of these drugs tends to be very different than that of harder drugs users, meaning seperating the two out isn't too hard (just look at the netherlands: shrooms and weed are legal and we actually couldn't buy weed from dealers on the street, but we were offered other things)

the collective responsibility of socieity, imho, is to prevent those who cannot see or understand what their choice is going to do to them, from making a bad choice that will harm them severely in life.

now, you can say 'its their choice, its their responsibility and their fault', but i just don't see it that way



and a bit on your other points: i wouldn't force people into rehab, but the alternative would be jail as it is at the moment.
and i don't believe government is as corrupt or ineffective as you say it is. maybe it is in the states, but i don't live there ;)

The collective responsibility of socieity, imho, is to prevent those who cannot see or understand what their choice is going to do to them, from making a bad choice that will harm them severely in life.
Whoa there man. Why should society involve itself in the private life of a person instead of just dealing with the public life? Your advocating some pretty severe coercion here. You do realize that by advocating this you are saying that some people should not be given the freedom to do certain actions. I don't think society has a responsibility let alone the right to do acts that deprive people of liberty because we say its "bad" for them to do so.

now, you can say 'its their choice, its their responsibility and their fault', but i just don't see it that way
It is there choice and they are free to make that decision. Your advocating taking away people's freedom here and thats not a good thing.

This was a serious wtf moment:

http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/1416/wtf4gb.jpg

Also, when they are talking about the burnouts at school who talk slow, I hardly think anyone can talk slower than those four and with as little emotion in their voice. Maybe they are Danish :confused: .

Dude, I'm a burnout without the drugs... Living the way I have for the past eight years, you'd see why.

Whoa there man. Why should society involve itself in the private life of a person instead of just dealing with the public life? Your advocating some pretty severe coercion here. You do realize that by advocating this you are saying that some people should not be given the freedom to do certain actions. I don't think society has a responsibility let alone the right to do acts that deprive people of liberty because we say its "bad" for them to do so.

i am not advocating any kind of severe coercion. its your imagination of what such policies could possibly contain, without restraint, that makes it scary.
i am advocating such restraint in nothing more than controlling supply of hard drugs.
if you can afford it, then - under what i propose - you're free to take what you want in your private life, if you can get hold of it.
since getting drugs = public life, i see no problems with controlling supply. control the supply and you can prevent people making bad mistakes.

and yes, we say it is bad because we do know better - it is that simple. you think every crackhead is going to consider the pro's and cons of firing up that pipe the first time he takes a hit? is he going to think about how its going to affect his life, or how it affects the lives of most people?
society - government - can do such research and, yes, make the decision for people in their own best interests. some things, like preventing people fucking themselves and their lives up with addictions, are worth such a curb in "liberty".
if you don't like it, tough. but only some few things warrant such action

It is there choice and they are free to make that decision. Your advocating taking away people's freedom here and thats not a good thing.

so the state should not supply education or healthcare either because it is 'interfering in their lives' or stops them from making the decision to get their own or not, as well?

yes i am taking away their freedom to choose - to an extent - because the wrong choice is too damaging, to most people who make it, to allow the decision to be made by those without sufficient knowledge. i say 'to an extent' because i think soft drugs should be a matter of personal choice. hard drugs should not.

if everybody did their own research and really considered what it would do to them and their lives before taking hard drugs, then i would agree with you. but most - especially those i would be trying to help, those who's lives seem fucked up enough to them to warrant doing such a thing - don't.
of course, some do consider this. and some can afford or are able to keep living an acceptable standard of living - and one that does not negatively influence anyone else more than the drug itself causes - and those people are free to take whatever they like, provided they can get hold of it (which won't be easy but thats just another price in liberty you pay for equal treatment of all)

I've never smoked weed (I like my lungs), but I still think this (http://ninjapirate.com/whynot.html) is amusing. I don't know if I need to put a not for kids disclaimer on this or anything. It's only text, but you never know how sensitive mods are till you get done.

i am not advocating any kind of severe coercion. its your imagination of what such policies could possibly contain, without restraint, that makes it scary.
i am advocating such restraint in nothing more than controlling supply of hard drugs.
if you can afford it, then - under what i propose - you're free to take what you want in your private life, if you can get hold of it.
since getting drugs = public life, i see no problems with controlling supply. control the supply and you can prevent people making bad mistakes.
I have no problem with the government selling drugs even though there is a bit of a capitalist streak in me that says if its legalized then people could be allowed to independently sell it. But also on the point controling the supply does not get rid of the problem. The USA has been trying to control the supply of drugs comming in the country for a long time. The USA even banned alcohol for a time and would not allow people to supply the stuff. But people found a way then to bypass the supply of the government and make lots of money off of it. Saying you have to buy the drugs from us does not prevent people from making bad mistakes. It only changes who the seller is. People will still od from drugs they buy from the government, they can buy the drugs and sell it for a higher sum but make it easier to get. Education is the way to solve the problem and not the shitty highschool smoking pot will make you smoke heroin crap.

and yes, we say it is bad because we do know better - it is that simple. you think every crackhead is going to consider the pro's and cons of firing up that pipe the first time he takes a hit? is he going to think about how its going to affect his life, or how it affects the lives of most people?
But the thing is its their choice. You can't come into my home and tell me how to live my private life so why should the government be able to?

society - government - can do such research and, yes, make the decision for people in their own best interests. some things, like preventing people fucking themselves and their lives up with addictions, are worth such a curb in "liberty".
if you don't like it, tough. but only some few things warrant such action
1. Your not going to stop them from fucking up if all your doing is changing who the seller is.
2. How do you propose we stop people from fucking up? Throw the people who don't listen the what we say is right in jail. Does that stop the problem? From what we've seen from the war on drugs it doesn't.
3. So if your for curbing people's liberty with drugs lets go with curbing people's liberty with other things. Taking away people's liberty because they don't know what is in their own best interests according to someone else is a bullshit policy. Slavery was justified by this and so was the apartheid.


so the state should not supply education or healthcare either because it is 'interfering in their lives' or stops them from making the decision to get their own or not, as well?
No the state should supply them only if the people want them. If the people don't want them they shouldn't have to pay for them and will find another alternative to supply the services offered.

yes i am taking away their freedom to choose - to an extent - because the wrong choice is too damaging, to most people who make it, to allow the decision to be made by those without sufficient knowledge. i say 'to an extent' because i think soft drugs should be a matter of personal choice. hard drugs should not.
Lets start off here with the fact that there is no such thing as a good or bad drug. There are only good or bad uses of the drug. You say hard drugs should not be a matter of personal choice like there is no moderate usage of the drugs. I see no reason why a person should be allowed to drink and smoke pot and not be allowed to smoke crack or shoot up heroin. Its their choice and if they make the mistake its their responsibility to deal with it.

if everybody did their own research and really considered what it would do to them and their lives before taking hard drugs, then i would agree with you. but most - especially those i would be trying to help, those who's lives seem fucked up enough to them to warrant doing such a thing - don't.
of course, some do consider this. and some can afford or are able to keep living an acceptable standard of living - and one that does not negatively influence anyone else more than the drug itself causes - and those people are free to take whatever they like, provided they can get hold of it (which won't be easy but thats just another price in liberty you pay for equal treatment of all)
1. Why do people take drugs? They do so to escape stress, feel good, or any other number of reasons. They just don't say hey look there is some ecstacy I'm going to try it for the hell of it. You recognize the reprecussions of the choice to take the drug if you do it. Sure people don't think the bad things will happen to them but they know that bad things are associated with them. I see no reason why you or I should step in and say no bad person bad person and punish them for a choice they make about their private life.
2. You think your standard will make it harder for people to get drugs? You've got to be kidding me. We've got a "WAR ON DRUGS" going on right now and its not stopping people from doping up.
3. How does a drug negatively influence someone? If you mean addiction well thats a choice so I don't see how thats the drug influencing them.