NationStates Jolt Archive

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=528058) thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.

Are you being sacarstic?

the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted.

Are you stupid? Do you honestly believe this paranoid crap you're spewing?

The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs

People don't have a "need to sell drugs." There's a market, there's demand. Entrepreneurialism is not an addiction.

either by making it easier to get rich off other means

That won't work.

or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs

That won't work. Again your assumptions are all wrong.

. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs?

First you need to ditch this incredibly stupid assumption you're working on.

We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted.

IQ infusion needed.

They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.

Grow the fuck up. Why dont you go advocate eugenics programs again, nazi boy.

People are always going to want drugs. :p Some people even function and prosper while on drugs, and make decent employees. The extremes of addiction are the problem, and convincing people not to start using to begin with.

That said, some cities are demolishing housing projects, mixing up the demographics, breaking gangs, issuing gang injunctions, etc. There are ways to help.

Legalize and then regulate them?

the only way to make drugs less profitable is to legalise them. anything on the blakmarket necessarily ha a grossly higher markup tat legal goods.

It's nice to see that sarcasm is alive and well.

Legalize and then regulate them?

How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.

Up in smoke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_In_Smoke) that's where my money goes, in my lungs and sometimes up my nose.:p

It's nice to see that sarcasm is alive and well.

if only

How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.

So do a good job of educating your kids and keeping them off the dope. Most people who know what a drug will do to them in the long run won't use.

Are you stupid? Do you honestly believe this paranoid crap you're spewing?



People don't have a "need to sell drugs." There's a market, there's demand. Entrepreneurialism is not an addiction.



That won't work.



That won't work. Again your assumptions are all wrong.



First you need to ditch this incredibly stupid assumption you're working on.



IQ infusion needed.



Grow the fuck up. Why dont you go advocate eugenics programs again, nazi boy.

1) What makes you think they won't if they're willing to make candy and drinks out of the stuff to target youngsters?

2) Entrepreneurialism is an excuse sociopaths use to ruin humanity and get rich off it.

7) I simply acknowledge with my knowledge on biology that some traits are unwanted or slow the others down and in nature they are removed.

How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.

Let's look at the Prohibition.

During prohibition, underground pubs flourished. Everyone who could drank unsafe mixes of alcohol and filler substances (paint thinner, possibly?)

After it was legalized and regulated, only those over 21 could drink non-toxic (to the extent that alcohol can be) alcohol in a safe environment. All the underground shit vanished.

Try substituting marijuana in there. See how it works for ya.

1) What makes you think they won't if they're willing to make candy and drinks out of the stuff to target youngsters?

Poisoning the water supply is an act of terrorism and that's more punishable than making a candy with drugs in it.

2) Entrepreneurialism is an excuse sociopaths use to ruin humanity and get rich off it.

So, you hate America.

7) I simply acknowledge with my knowledge on biology that some traits are unwanted or slow the others down and in nature they are removed.

You're a racist, fascist, nazi pig. People like you are the fucking scourge of humanity. You can't reason worth a damn, you spit out horrible, murderous, genocidal policies of discrimination, and people listen to you. I wish you'd get the fuck out of my country, seeing how much you hate it.

Dude. Are you on drugs posting right now? Or do you always post like this?

How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.
This assumption that people are trying to get you addicted without you knowing it, is rather silly really.
Let's go back a few steps. No confirmation of flavoured 'candy drugs', probably the claim arises from the association of colour with flavour. Even if the drugs were palatably flavoured (which is highly unlikely given their composition) rather than simply coloured (possibly by error in the manufacturing process, use of alternate ingrediants and processes for reasons of shortage of the usual ingrediants, a marketing ploy to appeal to 'raver' customers, or any other number of things), there's no reason to assume this was aimed at children.
There's no evidence here that anyone is trying to addict you personally, less still without your knowing. No evidence that anyone is after the children or trying to subvert your or their free will (although the same claim isnt really true of you).
I would question the point of 'trying to addict children without their knowing'. If the drug were intentionally not only coloured but flavoured, you'd want to get no less for it than the more easily manufactured drugs you already have no problem getting rid in large volumes at very high prices. I expect the simplest most sensible solution is to not let your kids have access to the large amount of money needed to fund meth addiction.

Poisoning the water supply is an act of terrorism and that's more punishable than making a candy with drugs in it.



So, you hate America.



You're a racist, fascist, nazi pig. People like you are the fucking scourge of humanity. You can't reason worth a damn, you spit out horrible, murderous, genocidal policies of discrimination, and people listen to you. I wish you'd get the fuck out of my country, seeing how much you hate it.

1) And poisoning food and selling it to the masses isn't.

2) Never said that, just look around you, greedy bastards are always profiting off hurting others. They never seem to profit off doing good, it always seems to be off hurting others.

3) I'm not a nazi, I don't hate Jews.

Did you know that the overall percentage of addicts hasn't significantly changed even before drug prohibition? Watch the film (http://www.leap.cc/Multimedia/LEAPpromo.php)

How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.

Actually, the Opium Wars were instigated largely by the British in an attempt to further control the Chinese economy. It had nothing to do with drugs, other than the fact that the British controlled the supply and were attempting to create a greater demand in order to line their own pockets.

It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted.
And any attempt to halt their scheme will be met with a quick death at the end of one of their great laser-satellites.
Or maybe that is just my inner Bond villain talking.

Let's look at the Prohibition.

During prohibition, underground pubs flourished. Everyone who could drank unsafe mixes of alcohol and filler substances (paint thinner, possibly?)

After it was legalized and regulated, only those over 21 could drink non-toxic (to the extent that alcohol can be) alcohol in a safe environment. All the underground shit vanished.

Try substituting marijuana in there. See how it works for ya.

Yeah the underground world disappeard because they gave people premision to get drunk act like morons and on many occasions ruin the lives of others. That is simply what will happen if you legalize drugs.

Yeah the underground world disappeard because they gave people premision to get drunk act like morons and on many occasions ruin the lives of others. That is simply what will happen if you legalize drugs.

So, you're saying people weren't getting drunk, acting like morons and on many occasions ruining the lives of others during prohibition? Are you also saying that people aren't currently getting stoned, acting like morons and on many occasions ruining the lives of others despite the fact that such drugs are illegal?

There's a market for drugs. A heavy handed approach is not killing that demand. Really, the solution is to legalize and monitor the demand for softer drugs, whilst using the liberated resources to tackle harder drugs - not only by the dealers, but the demand side as well. In addition, combat poverty that has a tendency to lead to increased drug use and drug-related crime.

Originally Posted by South Lizasauria
How will that help, drugs will still be a threat to society. Whether legal or not the drug dealers will still try to get customers, legalization will not stop them from selling "candy" or using some other means to get us addicted without knowing it. Remember the opium wars, that was legal but it caused so many problems in China's society that there was a war over it.

Actually, the Opium Wars were instigated largely by the British in an attempt to further control the Chinese economy. It had nothing to do with drugs, other than the fact that the British controlled the supply and were attempting to create a greater demand in order to line their own pockets.

Some fuzzy history here.

The first Opium War was started because the Qing government went down and burnt a whole bunch of opium because it was illegal. The British retaliated.

The British certainly didn't control the Chinese economy at all - they simply found that the only thing they could sell to Chinese was opium, a whiny and abhorrent means of compensating for the enormous amount of goods they were importing from China. They controlled the supply because they started it in the first place.

Anyhoo...

*Steps in from the shadows*

I thought we went over this all ready. Exterminating anything by brute force is:

1) Impossible
2) Cruel
3) Myopic

The only true method of eliminating a threat is to integrate it into your society, or find a positive purpose for it. The United States has been at war with drugs since prohibition, and our consumption of the illegal substances has increased since. However, our problems with Alcohol and Cigerettes under strict regulation have been decreasing steadily as we control and recognize their dangers. Legalizing less harmful drugs slowly will help establish secure enterprise, which always starves its criminal counterpart into near extinction. (Moonshiners). Simply banning anything never works if there is a demand supporting it. So legalize it to eliminate the criminal element, and develop social programs with the money previously spent on enforcement.

While this thread like so many others by this poster is so nonsensical as to be rendered effectively illegible, undernearth the nonsense there is somewhat of a viable premise.

Drug dealing is often an act engaged in by those in poverty as a way of escaping poverty. While the risks are there, when you have little money, the cost/benefit analysis makes it viable. By increases the successfulness of those at the bottom rung of society, drug dealing will become a less viable choice, as the risk becomes not worth the reward.

Fellow citezens,

Citezens? What are citezens?

after reading the "Strawberry Quick" thread

If you're going to reference other threads, please post the so we know what the heck you're on about.

I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come.

Again, let people know what you're on about. Silly rants are bad enough. Without a topic, you just look foolish.

It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted.

LOL That's what you're upset about? That silly idea's been around for ages. (at least 50 years - that was one of the big paranoias of the 50s - "OH NOEZ the hippies are gonna put LSD in the water supplies!!!!.) Hasn't happened yet.

The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs.

Nope. The only way to get people to stop selling drugs is to totally eliminate the demand. There's no way to do that.

Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs?

This assumes facts not yet demonstrated. Poor people don't seel drugs because they "need to". In fact, the people behind most drug operations are quite rich.

We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats.

Again, you assume it's necessary for people to sell drugs. It isn't.

It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted.

More "OH NOEZ! TEH HIPPIES!" Such alarmism is just silly.

They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions.

Even assuming free will exists, this is just more alarmism.

Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.

Nope, drugs don't need to be eliminated at all. The original purpose for drug prohibition was racism, pure and simple. It still is today. Think about it, and reconsider your position.

The United States has been at war with drugs since prohibition, and our consumption of the illegal substances has increased since.

Longer, actually.
The first drug prhibition law in the US was the anti-opium den law in San Francisco in 1871 (might have been 1872). Cocaine was also prhohibbited earlier - 1910s, IIRC.

The opium laws were targeted at the Chinese. The cocaine laws were targeted at blacks. The later cannabis laws were targeted at Mexicans.


While this thread like so many others by this poster is so nonsensical as to be rendered effectively illegible, undernearth the nonsense there is somewhat of a viable premise.

Drug dealing is often an act engaged in by those in poverty as a way of escaping poverty. While the risks are there, when you have little money, the cost/benefit analysis makes it viable. By increases the successfulness of those at the bottom rung of society, drug dealing will become a less viable choice, as the risk becomes not worth the reward.

Problematic analysis, but I have to leave for work now. If somebody doesn't cover this, I will get back to it later

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.


Give them away for free so that there's no incentive to sell them. :D

Problematic analysis, but I have to leave for work now. If somebody doesn't cover this, I will get back to it later

Not necessarily. All criminal activity is a risk assessment, what do I gain versus the risk of incarceration. If I have more money i'm less willing to commit criminal activities. If you want to reduce the amount of drugs being dealt (while still keeping htem illegal) then improving the living conditions of the poor so that dealing drugs becomes less attractive is not a bad way to do it.

Citezens? What are citezens?


Citizens, I think. I could be wrong, though.

1) And poisoning food and selling it to the masses isn't.

Nope.


2) Never said that, just look around you, greedy bastards are always profiting off hurting others. They never seem to profit off doing good, it always seems to be off hurting others.

The business of America is business. Don't like the idea of profit? By all means, quit your job (if you're old enough to have one.) Move to someplace that is more anticapitalist, anti-entrepreneurial for your tastes. North Korea perhaps.

3) I'm not a nazi, I don't hate Jews.

LoL.

You advocate eugenics, are right-wing, fascist, authoritarian, and go on about doing "purges." You're a nazi.

"I'm not a nazi, I don't hate Jews." That's fucking hilarious, mind if I quote you? It's like, "I'm not a racist, my friend is black." Only you mean it seriously.

Are you stupid? Do you honestly believe this paranoid crap you're spewing?

I heartily reiterate this question.


LoL.

You advocate eugenics, are right-wing, fascist, authoritarian, and go on about doing "purges." You're a nazi.

"I'm not a nazi, I don't hate Jews." That's fucking hilarious, mind if I quote you? It's like, "I'm not a racist, my friend is black." Only you mean it seriously.

He's admitted himself before that he's a fascist, so he's lying.

Not necessarily. All criminal activity is a risk assessment, what do I gain versus the risk of incarceration. If I have more money i'm less willing to commit criminal activities. If you want to reduce the amount of drugs being dealt (while still keeping htem illegal) then improving the living conditions of the poor so that dealing drugs becomes less attractive is not a bad way to do it.

Gosh, why haven't governments thought of this?

I'm not sure it's risk assessment - people sell drugs, rich or poor because it makes them money. People don't drive on a risk-assessment basis, we tend to live our lives on the assumption that we'll be okay no matter what we do. It's fairly rare that we stop and consider something in terms of risks and that tends to be when we're doing something we've never done before.

The first question to ask is: are drugs in and of themselves a real problem? The whole drugs are teh evil concept breaks down a bit when family/peers/celebrities are doing them and seem utterly fine, given a few extraordinary cases.

The problem lies in the abuse of drugs, where taking them becomes detrimental to your overall quality of life - and in many cases, the casual use of drugs can actually enhance your quality of life.

It's abuse of drugs, as it is abuse of drinks, abuse of driving and abuse of anything that is the problem. IF we have systems that step in for those who, for a wide variety of reasons, feel compelled to abuse drugs - and in reality they're abusing themselves - then we should have a far better world for it as we're at least being honest about where the problem is.

Citezens? What are citezens?



If you're going to reference other threads, please post the so we know what the heck you're on about.



Again, let people know what you're on about. Silly rants are bad enough. Without a topic, you just look foolish.



LOL That's what you're upset about? That silly idea's been around for ages. (at least 50 years - that was one of the big paranoias of the 50s - "OH NOEZ the hippies are gonna put LSD in the water supplies!!!!.) Hasn't happened yet.



Nope. The only way to get people to stop selling drugs is to totally eliminate the demand. There's no way to do that.



This assumes facts not yet demonstrated. Poor people don't seel drugs because they "need to". In fact, the people behind most drug operations are quite rich.



Again, you assume it's necessary for people to sell drugs. It isn't.



More "OH NOEZ! TEH HIPPIES!" Such alarmism is just silly.



Even assuming free will exists, this is just more alarmism.



Nope, drugs don't need to be eliminated at all. The original purpose for drug prohibition was racism, pure and simple. It still is today. Think about it, and reconsider your position.

1) I'll edit

4) eliminating the demand is easy, well maybe cruel and undemocratic but easy if you know what I mean. I was wondering if there was an alternative though.

5) when I said they need to I meant it by "I'm poor and I need a good way to make money, hey its easy to start selling drugs and hopefully if I get many addicted and sell to them at a price that slowly rises I'll not be poor anymore" The rich who do it are sociopathic bastards, they have alot of money already, why don't they earn it in a good way that doesn't scar society for decades to come. Why do THEY need to sell drugs, they have alot of money in excess.

6) Free will does exist or else we'd be like animals basing all our actions on stimuli and instinct.

7) How is it racism? I see just as many white junkies than colored ones, hell there are probably more white ones.

5) when I said they need to I meant it by "I'm poor and I need a good way to make money, hey its easy to start selling drugs and hopefully if I get many addicted and sell to them at a price that slowly rises I'll not be poor anymore" The rich who do it are sociopathic bastards, they have alot of money already, why don't they earn it in a good way that doesn't scar society for decades to come. Why do THEY need to sell drugs, they have alot of money in excess.


Most people I know who sell or have sold drugs do it mostly so they can supply themselves with drugs and not have it impact on payments for bills or other necessities. Many of them wish that it was legal, because even though they would loose all their business to legit sources, they would then be able to afford them without having to resort to illegal activities. It's the fact they are illegal that drives the current prices up so high that people sell them. Legalization would move the market from the unregulated and untaxed blackmarket to more legal enterprises, where their activities could be regulated and taxed like the alcohol and tobacco industries are.

edit: I think something the "drug are evil" people are forgetting that the most widely available and abused drugs are prescription and over the counter drugs, and that ones generally considered evil like meth, cocaine and even PCP are schedule 2 drugs that have medical uses that are still used today.

Nope.



The business of America is business. Don't like the idea of profit? By all means, quit your job (if you're old enough to have one.) Move to someplace that is more anticapitalist, anti-entrepreneurial for your tastes. North Korea perhaps.



LoL.

You advocate eugenics, are right-wing, fascist, authoritarian, and go on about doing "purges." You're a nazi.

"I'm not a nazi, I don't hate Jews." That's fucking hilarious, mind if I quote you? It's like, "I'm not a racist, my friend is black." Only you mean it seriously.

1) Thats as idiotic as saying that trying to stab someone isn't an act of attempted murder.

2) As a fascsist I oppose communism and how they think everyone's the same in value. By their logic a crazed phychopath is equal to a good citezen.

3) Nazi's hate Jews, and base their eugenics on the wrong criteria, it should be based on whether or not they are actually a threat or harmful to the populace not on petty useless physical appearance like eye color and hair color.

3) Nazi's hate Jews, and base their eugenics on the wrong criteria, it should be based on whether or not they are actually a threat or harmful to the populace not on petty useless physical appearance like eye color and hair color.

Given their eye and hair colour was not blue and blond respectively, they were a threat to the populace as they'd degrade the genetic make-up of the Germans.

What form of fascism do you subscribe to? The 'trains on time' part?

Bizarre child :(

Given their eye and hair colour was not blue and blond respectively, they were a threat to the populace as they'd degrade the genetic make-up of the Germans.

What form of fascism do you subscribe to? The 'trains on time' part?

Well why didn't they deport them? They didn't need to mass exterminate them.

It's not like the Jews were running around trying to poison people for profit.

Well why didn't they deport them? They didn't need to mass exterminate them.

It's not like the Jews were running around trying to poison people for profit.

The Nazis thought they were.

The Nazis thought they were.

They thought they were literally poisoning 'candy' and the water supply to the German people?

Rubbish, the only thing that the Jews did to tick them off was to side with the Soviets, become liberal, and put high prices on their goods [not drugs] so that they had a better living standard than the Germans native to the land. They didn't go around being 'gangsta' killing, double crossing and poisoning the Germans with drugs for money.

They thought they were literally poisoning 'candy' and the water supply to the German people?

Rubbish, the only thing that the Jews did to tick them off was to side with the Soviets, become liberal, and put high prices on their goods [not drugs] so that they had a better living standard than the Germans native to the land. They didn't go around being 'gangsta' killing, double crossing and poisoning the Germans with drugs for money.

The reason Hitler hated the Jews was that he thought they'd financed the Allies in the 1st World War, thus causing Germany's defeat.

That's aside from the centuries, if not millenia, of built-up anti-Judaism in Europe as a whole - they were accused of far worse than simply poisoning water. The Nazi's hatred of Jews was not an isolated incident as witnessed by the complicity of the Vichy French, East European countries and many many more.

7) How is it racism? I see just as many white junkies than colored ones, hell there are probably more white ones.

do you know anything about the disparity in the federal sentencing guidelines for posession/sale of cocain and the posession/sale of crack?

They thought they were literally poisoning 'candy' and the water supply to the German people?

Rubbish, the only thing that the Jews did to tick them off was to side with the Soviets, become liberal, and put high prices on their goods [not drugs] so that they had a better living standard than the Germans native to the land.

Do you know ANYTHING about history? The prussian/austrian/german nationalities ha a long history of anti-semitism going back since before the Martin Luther, who was quite an anti semite himself. Hitler merely tapped into institutionalized anti-semitism that had been going on for centuries, and used it to enflame suspicion that the jews had funded the allies in world war I, thus leading to german defeat.

do you know anything about the disparity in the federal sentencing guidelines for posession/sale of cocain and the posession/sale of crack?

Do tell.

Do you know ANYTHING about history? The prussian/austrian/german nationalities ha a long history of anti-semitism going back since before the Martin Luther, who was quite an anti semite himself. Hitler merely tapped into institutionalized anti-semitism that had been going on for centuries, and used it to enflame suspicion that the jews had funded the allies in world war I, thus leading to german defeat.

We're getting off topic. I maybe fascist but I'm not a nazi.

Do tell.

Here (http://www.thealliancect.org/pdf/fact_sheet_crack_powder.pdf). Do your own research.

Let it suffice to say that someone found with crack is liekly to be sentenced for several years longer than someone found with an equal amount of cocain.

edit: here (http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/230/sentencingcommission.shtml) is info on federal guidelines, which has a 100:1 ratio, higher than even CT

Here (http://www.thealliancect.org/pdf/fact_sheet_crack_powder.pdf). Do your own research.

Let it suffice to say that someone found with crack is liekly to be sentenced for several years longer than someone found with an equal amount of cocain.

What did that have to do with me seeing more white junkies than colored ones?

We're getting off topic. I maybe fascist but I'm not a nazi.

considering you defined yourself as "not a nazi" by merely stating you don't hate jews, I'm unsure if you have a firm grasp on the political theory behind either nazisim or fascism. And in fact, since one of the defining differences between the two is that Nazis advocated various eugenics programs and the fascists did not. Considering you were advocating a form of eugenics earlier today, it looks to me that you are in fact more a nazi than a fascist....

considering you defined yourself as "not a nazi" by merely stating you don't hate jews, I'm unsure if you have a firm grasp on the political theory behind either nazisim or fascism

Nazism is a form of fascism, Mussilini didn't go around killing Jews and nor did Japan.

What did that have to do with me seeing more white junkies than colored ones?

because the mere fact that your anectodal evidence says that you have seen more white junkies than black ones in...where is it you live again, rural washington state, does not address in any way whether thse laws are racists.

Moreover, even if it were true that you have seen more white junkies than black ones, AND your anectodal evidence is indicative of a national trend (and I note you ignore the fact that white outnumber blacks about 5:1 in this country), this totally ignores the fact that on average white junkies will spend considerably less time time in jail than black junkies, since crack is predominantly used by blacks.

Are you that dense that you just can't make these connections?

Nazism is a form of fascism, Mussilini didn't go around killing Jews and nor did Japan.

Actually several political scientists, myself included, view nazism as a seperate but similar political ideology. Regardless of whether nazism is a form of fascism, or a similar but distinc ideology, the main seperation point between nazism and fascism (or nazi fascism and non nazi fascism as you would) is that nazis were proponents of eugenics.

You are a proponent of eugenics.

ergo you = nazi. Or at best, you're a hybrid between the two, eugenics for the benefit of the state, which certainly, if not full on nazism, has some serious nazi leanings.

because the mere fact that your anectodal evidence says that you have seen more white junkies than black ones in...where is it you live again, rural washington state, does not address in any way whether thse laws are racists.

Moreover, even if it were true that you have seen more white junkies than black ones, AND your anectodal evidence is indicative of a national trend (and I note you ignore the fact that white outnumber blacks about 5:1 in this country), this totally ignores the fact that on average white junkies will spend considerably less time time in jail than black junkies, since crack is predominantly used by blacks.

Are you that dense that you just can't make these connections?

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences.

a 100:1 ratio is not, by any means, "minute". And since you willingly admit your own ignorance, may I suggest in the future that before you start trying to argue something, you do your damned research first?

Your ignorance is your fault, you should be ashamed of yourself for so willingly admitting to it and doing nothing to correct it. Seriously, what person tries to argue something while ADMITTING he doesn't know what he's arguing about.

What would compell you to do such a silly thing? Do you try to randomly fix electronics without knowing how they work too?

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=528058) thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.

How about this: the Goverment can mass-produce it, and drive out competition. Not only would it destroy immoral ways to market drugs, it would save taxes because the profits could fund things.

all nations are more than welcome to ship all their confiscated drugs to the proud nation of da reefer, where we, the people of da reefer will destroy them by rolling them in little paper leaves and setting fire to them...

2) As a fascsist I oppose communism and how they think everyone's the same in value. By their logic a crazed phychopath is equal to a good citezen.


Yes, hardline communist countries are noted for their unduly liberal approach to convicted criminals.


I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.


Somebody who doesn't see a difference between crack and marijuana is somebody who shouldn't be taking part in any debate about drugs.

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.

If you don't know what you're talking about your opinions are worthless. Do you consider alcohol and tobacco to be the same? It's ignorant to act as though there's a moral difference between government sanctioned and prohibited drugs.

Your first post makes it seem like you just finished listening to Earth Crisis and now you want to go and beat up some stoners.

The drug related homicide of a nation as society is plagued by mass addiction.
The numbers culled eliminates competition.
Pulling others in as the caskets lower down.
Caustic chemicals open early graves.

"Rawrr! St00pid drugs!!! Must kill!!!"

:rolleyes:

Rather than argue with you South Lizasauria, I'm going to give you some bed reading because it's better if you do some reading before you engage in debate. It's good to be informed about the true nature of drugs. They can be good, but they are also dangerous, but hell, so is everything if given over to a pessimist.

The first site is an archive with information about the different types of "drugs". It has basic information about the different substances out there. You'd be surprise about that there is here. They list plants you'd never consider a drug, and it has quite the plethora of drug statistics without resorting to the scare tactics used by the US in its War on Drugs.

Erowid (http://www.erowid.org/splash.php)

On top of having excellent information which is not very bias either way, it also has a good section of "experience" stories in which people have submitted their personal experiences involving certain drugs, whether it is good or bad or just their first time.

Some drugs have given people a chance to see something that they couldn't have otherwise. Many tribal shaman in history would use drugs to have "visions" to try and learn something greater beyond the realm of man's limited mind and view of the world.

Or maybe you like Wiki, since it's a good launch point to take you to other sights. I have a couple of good start points for you.

Recreational Drug Use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use)
Arguments For an Against Drug Probation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguments_for_and_against_drug_prohibition)

You also seem unable to distinguish between the two base classes of hard and soft drugs. This is leading to your ignorance. You should learn a little about the differences and why the two base classes are viewed differently by those who use drugs.

Hard & Soft Drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_drugs)

Outside of recreational use, marijuana has practical uses as a plant. Before the English introduced their own laws in Ireland, the Irish were using hemp to make their clothing and a variety of goods. The plant has over thousands upon thousands of commercial uses that stem beyond recreational drug use.

Hemp Fact Sheet (http://www.shee-eire.com/Herbs,Trees&Fungi/Herbs/Hemp/hempfactsheet.htm)

Once you have educated yourself about drugs and you're not spouting bullshit from the war on drugs propaganda feeding trough then you're ready to debate for real.

I will not deny that I am a recreational marijuana user. Nor will I deny that I have tried a few different drugs. This is the position that I take and I have no need to change it. I educated myself and I know what to expect. There are many drugs I would never do because I know what they can do to me. That's the beauty of informing myself about the nature of drugs.

Nazism is a form of fascism, Mussilini didn't go around killing Jews and nor did Japan.

No. Mussolini killed Africans and Japan killed Manchurians.

Apart from what we perceive as "hardcore" drugs like Heroin, Speed, LSD, crystal meth, Marijuana (ok, so the last one isn't really all that hardcore), not many drugs are completely illegal.

Take the family of Opiates as an example. At the top of the scale we have Heroin (Schedule 1 - completely illegal), then there's morphine (Schedule 2 - legal for hospital use and by triplicate prescription). Lower on the scale are drugs like Vicodin or Tylenol 3's (Schedule 3, limited quantities available on prescription). Then comes Darvon or Wygesic (Schedule 4, prescription only). There is a schedule 5, but it's rarely used any more.

After that we have OTC (Over The Counter) remedies. Just about the only opiod available OTC in the USA is Imodium AD (yes, this is classed as an opiod).

The only real effect of Scheduling is to restrict the movement of drugs from manufacturers to consumers. That is their purpose.

There is much the same story for other sorts of drugs, like stimulants (only caffeine is completely unregulated) and tranquilisers (only Soma is available without prescription).

The history of scheduling shows that the more heavily a drug is restricted (the higher the schedule it is placed in), the more available it becomes on the black market.

Hence Heroin (the most highly restricted of the opiods) or cocaine (the most highly restricted stimulant) are readily available on the black market.

Intermediates like Valium (a triplicate prescription only drug) are occasionally found on the black market.

However you are unlikely to find a street dealer selling Tylenol 3's.

Therefore legalisation without deregulation is not an answer. I'm not in favour of legalising the "hardcore" drugs either, largely because that's politically impossible to do.

A realistic answer is to deregulate access to intermediate drugs which are already manufactured by legitimate industries and have hence been tested thoroughly for safety and effectiveness. This will reduce (although not eliminate) demand for "hardcore" drugs, by giving people an alternative. The manufacturing industries will also benefit from higher sales - and likewise the government will benefit from increased tax revenue.

No. Mussolini killed Africans and Japan killed Manchurians.

Technically they weren't Nazis, as Nazi was originally the shorthand name for the Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei. However, modern usage is different than its original usage, so you are correct in that respect.

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.

In other words, you freely admit your ignorance and believe it justifies your opinion.

Apart from what we perceive as "hardcore" drugs like Heroin, Speed, LSD, crystal meth ...

Speed and Meth are both schedule 2 drugs meaning they are legal to be used under medical guidelines, I have personally been prescribed dextro-amphetamine which is the same thing street speed is, and methamphetamine can be prescribed under a generic name of deoyxephedrine and is used to treat the same disorders that other amphetamines are used to treat. These drugs aren't just horrible evil chemicals, they too have legitimate AND SAFE medical uses.

Speed and Meth are both schedule 2 drugs meaning they are legal to be used under medical guidelines, I have personally been prescribed dextro-amphetamine which is the same thing street speed is, and methamphetamine can be prescribed under a generic name of deoyxephedrine and is used to treat the same disorders that other amphetamines are used to treat. These drugs aren't just horrible evil chemicals, they too have legitimate AND SAFE medical uses.

Exactly. For example, a key ingredient for Meth can be extracted from legal over the counter cold medicines like Sudafed.

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=528058) thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.
All I can hear is "I don't know the first fucking thing about the human race, not its history and culture, nor its biological features, hence I honestly believe that drugs can be wiped out".

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.
That's because you're an uninformed cretin with no experience of such things.

Crack and heroin are certainly massive risks to society, as is crystal meth, because of rate of the addiction, the cost (which leads people to steal to feed their habit) and some of the side-affects, which are certainly difficult to deal with for society as a whole.

LSD and mushrooms don't have any particularly bad side affects other than for the people that take them, people don't generally get violent from taking these drugs, and all in all, they are of a very low risk.

Cannabis, Ecstacy etc. are basically harmless - it's big news if anyone in the UK dies from taking it, and estimated figures show that around 2 million people take it every weekend. Cannabis doesn't get people violent, what happens is you sit around on your sofa talking complete crap for an hour or so, and then you go and eat a box of cereal.

Other than Crack, Coke, Heroin and Crystal Meth, there are basically no drugs as dangerous as alcohol and smoking are, and indeed driving causes a great many more deaths than most drugs on a yearly basis.

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=528058) thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.

Wait--aren't you the same guy that posted that thread about executing the dumb? Are you some sort of joke account?

I hate drugs to the point where I don't study these minute differences. Crack, LSD, mariijuna or whatever its all the same to me, mind destroying, heart corrupting, mind numbing, crime inducing health hazards.

Definitely a joke account. Now, I know you may not understand this, but there is more to drugs than you learned in your fifth grade DARE program.

Wait--aren't you the same guy that posted that thread about executing the dumb? Are you some sort of joke account?
It would be a pretty cruel joke.

Whatever the hell you're smoking, Lizasauria, I DON'T want it.

-snip paranoia-

You may want to take this quiz. (http://www.cedocore.com/)

. (http://www.cedocore.com/rswtb/)

You may want to take this quiz. (http://www.cedocore.com/)

. (http://www.cedocore.com/rswtb/)

What the hell is that?

What the hell is that?

http://www.ninwiki.com/Year_Zero_Research

Drug dealing is often an act engaged in by those in poverty as a way of escaping poverty. While the risks are there, when you have little money, the cost/benefit analysis makes it viable. By increases the successfulness of those at the bottom rung of society, drug dealing will become a less viable choice, as the risk becomes not worth the reward.

Problematic analysis, but I have to leave for work now. If somebody doesn't cover this, I will get back to it later

Not necessarily. All criminal activity is a risk assessment, what do I gain versus the risk of incarceration. If I have more money i'm less willing to commit criminal activities. If you want to reduce the amount of drugs being dealt (while still keeping htem illegal) then improving the living conditions of the poor so that dealing drugs becomes less attractive is not a bad way to do it.

Seems I may have misundestood your post.

Citizens, I think. I could be wrong, though.

Then it should have been "citizens", not "citezens".

1) I'll edit

Good boy.

4) eliminating the demand is easy, well maybe cruel and undemocratic but easy if you know what I mean. I was wondering if there was an alternative though.

Nope, eliminating the demand is not easy. Unless you consider the mass extinction of H. Sapiens sapiens easy...

5) when I said they need to I meant it by "I'm poor and I need a good way to make money,

So you assume choice, not necessity.

hey its easy to start selling drugs and hopefully if I get many addicted and sell to them at a price that slowly rises I'll not be poor anymore"

Again, with the paranoid alarism.

The rich who do it are sociopathic bastards, they have alot of money already, why don't they earn it in a good way that doesn't scar society for decades to come. Why do THEY need to sell drugs, they have alot of money in excess.

It's a business like any other. No different from, say the Busch family's fortune built on alcohol.

6) Free will does exist or else we'd be like animals basing all our actions on stimuli and instinct.

Proof that we aren't?

7) How is it racism? I see just as many white junkies than colored ones, hell there are probably more white ones.

As I pointed out above, the original prohibition laws were grounded in pure and simple racism.

(I'd ask everyone who might be offended to please excuse the following blunt examples as they are termed in the vernacular of the day for emphatic purposes.)

Opium was officially outlawed because the devil Chinaman wanted to seduce good and pure white women.

Cocaine was officialy outlawed because coke head niggers went crazy and the cops coudn't kill them 'cause they were hopped up.

Cannabis was outlawed under the smear of it's Mexican name marijuana because the dirty greasers were slipping it to good white kids.

These racist ideas still underlie the laws and perceptions that lead to misconceptions such as yours.

You've bought into over 100 years of anti-"drug" propaganda that is rooted in racism. Buying into it makes you just as much of a racist as the yellow journalists who wrote the newspaper editorials that set forth the above abominable ideas. Deal with it.

Exactly. For example, a key ingredient for Meth can be extracted from legal over the counter cold medicines like Sudafed.

Pseudoephedrine is not an ingredient in the final product. Making methamphetamine is a chemical reaction that replaces structures of the pseudoephedrine molecule with ones on the methamphetamine molecule. The end result is methamphetamine molecules.

Seems I may have misundestood your post.

To clarify, now that I'm more awake, my point is thus. If you have enough money to be comfortable, drug dealing becomes a far less attractive option. It's when you're dirt poor and have no other source of income does it seem like a good reward for the risk. When you are living alright, not so much. So if you can improve the situation for the poor, drug dealing will drop.

To clarify, now that I’m more awake, my point is thus. If you have enough money to be comfortable, drug dealing becomes a far less attractive option. It’s when you’re dirt poor and have no other source of income does it seem like a good reward for the risk. When you are living alright, not so much. So if you can improve the situation for the poor, drug dealing will drop.
That’s assuming people only deal drugs because they are poor, and only buy drugs because they’re in a similar situation.

The reduction of poverty would have no effect on the demand for illicit substances, especially cannabis, cocaine and amphetamines.

Think of the poor students and clubbers!

Let's look at the Prohibition.

During prohibition, underground pubs flourished. Everyone who could drank unsafe mixes of alcohol and filler substances (paint thinner, possibly?)

After it was legalized and regulated, only those over 21 could drink non-toxic (to the extent that alcohol can be) alcohol in a safe environment. All the underground shit vanished.

Try substituting marijuana in there. See how it works for ya.

the problem with Prohibition was that
1) even the officers were drinking alcohol... hard to stop something when your law enforcement officials were doing it also.
2) it was already ingrained into 'normal' society. just like smoking cigs. thus stopping it cold turkey was next to impossible.

and I agree, after it was legalized and regulated, you don't have anyone driving drunk, underage drinking, no home made brews, inebriation to the point of poisioning, not tresspassing and passing out in dangerous locations, being combative while drunk, no one sold alcohol without a licence and especially to minors...

thank god that all stopped when Alcohol was legalized and tightly regulated. :p

the problem with Prohibition was that
1) even the officers were drinking alcohol... hard to stop something when your law enforcement officials were doing it also.
2) it was already ingrained into 'normal' society. just like smoking cigs. thus stopping it cold turkey was next to impossible.


The problem with prohibition of drugs today:
1) Police officers and other law enforcement do drugs, I've seen a cop take a joint from someone and smoke it himself.

2) They are a part of modern society, wether you like them or not, drugs are here and they are impossible to eliminate, there will always be a demand for them, and as long as there is a demand, someone is going to supply them to profit off them.

The idea behind legalization is to make drug misuse a health concern and not a criminal problem. Crimes that are commited under the influence are still crimes and operating heavy machinery or drive under the influence or other such behavior that is harmful to other people would still be illegal. The sale of drugs could even be taxed so that funds would be able to go to rehab clinics, the more people have a problem, the more they'll be sold and so more money would be made to go to programs to help people with drug problems. And in turn the money currently spend to arrest users, most of who will never commit any other crime, could be spend on crimes that actually hurt people, and keeping murderers and rapists behind bars instead of letting them out after a couple years to make room for some pothead.

1) Thats as idiotic as saying that trying to stab someone isn't an act of attempted murder.


...uh, no it isn't.

The business of America *is* business.


2) As a fascsist I oppose communism and how they think everyone's the same in value. By their logic a crazed phychopath is equal to a good citezen.

As a fascist you deserve nothing but contempt. And more, but I probably would get in trouble if I said that.

3) Nazi's hate Jews, and base their eugenics on the wrong criteria, it should be based on whether or not they are actually a threat or harmful to the populace not on petty useless physical appearance like eye color and hair color.

It doesn't matter whom you hate. It doesn't matter for what reasons you argue your fascist eugenics programs. You're a nazi. Deal with it.

Dude. Are you on drugs posting right now? Or do you always post like this?

He always does.

drugs should definetly be legal as this gets rid of all the law problems that go with them

Cannabis doesn't get people violent, what happens is you sit around on your sofa talking complete crap for an hour or so, and then you go and eat a box of cereal.


Speak for yourself. I smoke cannabis, and then get on with stuff. It goes very well with little manual tasks like tinkering with bits of motorbike, giving my car a quick service, playing the guitar. On the one occasion I've had to do complicated maths lately, it even seemed to help with that. Lest anyone think I'm kidding myself, there are other tasks (like writing, or moderately complicated cooking) which I find cannabis makes much harder.

For those who are saying I am too ignorant for this debate please consider...

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on? It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society. Thats a more blatantly obvious fact than WBC being a church of emotionally sadistic bastards.

For those who are saying I am too ignorant for this debate please consider...

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on? It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society. Thats a more blatantly obvious fact than WBC being a church of emotionally sadistic bastards.

I'll bite...
So should we ban penicillin, vaccinations, alcohol swabs, etc. and go back to amputations?

I'll bite...
So should we ban penicillin, vaccinations, alcohol swabs, etc. and go back to amputations?

I meant the illegal addictive ones.

I meant the illegal addictive ones.

Hmm... the "ALL DRUGS" part must have thrown me off.

So the legal addictive ones are ok?
As are the illegal ones that aren't addictive?

For those who are saying I am too ignorant for this debate please consider...

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on? It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society. Thats a more blatantly obvious fact than WBC being a church of emotionally sadistic bastards.

So prescription drugs should be gone to? Because the most abused drugs around are prescription drugs, and some of those have much worse side effects then the ones we have been talking about here. And also like I've kept stating there are drugs that are considered a bane of society when they are in the black market, but when they are used to treat medical disorders they can be highly effective and safe. Most of the damaged caused by drugs is caused by the misuse of them, just like the misuse of almost anything will cause unwanted effects and problems. Our current culture of "drugs are bad" and the demonizing of them leads to a lack of education on the effects and responsible use, so that when they are encountered, people don't know how to handle them. People are told that things like cannabis and cocaine are equally bad for you, but when they find out the cannabis is relatively safe, (safer then even legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco) they are more likely to try other things as well because they don't know how much they were lied to. If people were educated on the actually effects instead of horror stories, people could make their own educated choices.

So prescription drugs should be gone to? Because the most abused drugs around are prescription drugs, and some of those have much worse side effects then the ones we have been talking about here. And also like I've kept stating there are drugs that are considered a bane of society when they are in the black market, but when they are used to treat medical disorders they can be highly effective and safe. Most of the damaged caused by drugs is caused by the misuse of them, just like the misuse of almost anything will cause unwanted effects and problems. Our current culture of "drugs are bad" and the demonizing of them leads to a lack of education on the effects and responsible use, so that when they are encountered, people don't know how to handle them. People are told that things like cannabis and cocaine are equally bad for you, but when they find out the cannabis is relatively safe, (safer then even legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco) they are more likely to try other things as well because they don't know how much they were lied to. If people were educated on the actually effects instead of horror stories, people could make their own educated choices.

Look two posts above.

Look two posts above.


Yes, that was posted when I was typing, but that still doesn't address the fact that the most widely abused drugs are ones that can be obtained legally, and many of those have much worse side effects and are more addictive then ones that are currently illegal.

edit: you also avoided the points I made about the harm poor education and misinformation about drugs causes.

I meant the illegal addictive ones.

and what is the difference between illegal addictive ones and legal addictive ones such as codine, alchohol, caffeine, sleeping pills and many others, except for the fact that the illegal ones are illegal?

No, wait, let me guess, you haven't bothered to do the research, right?

For those who are saying I am too ignorant for this debate please consider...

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on?

Because you can not debate the effects of drugs until you...know the effects of drugs. Trying to otherwise is simply stupidity


It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society.

It only leads to crime in the sense that the drugs, themselves, are illegal. I've known numerous drug addicts who have never committed a single crime, other than to buy the drugs in the first place. Were those drugs to be legal, they would have comitted no crimes.

Continuing the illegality of drugs based on the justification that drug use leads to crime because those drugs are illegal is, frankly, stupid. To say it will result to crime is ascinine, stupid, and totally without factual basis.

See, this is what happens when you talk out of your ass.

Because you can not debate the effects of drugs until you...know the effects of drugs. Trying to otherwise is simply stupidity




It only leads to crime in the sense that the drugs, themselves, are illegal. I've known numerous drug addicts who have never committed a single crime, other than to buy the drugs in the first place. Were those drugs to be legal, they would have comitted no crimes.

Continuing the illegality of drugs based on the justification that drug use leads to crime because those drugs are illegal is, frankly, stupid. To say it will result to crime is ascinine, stupid, and totally without factual basis.

See, this is what happens when you talk out of your ass.

1) How about seeing what it does to other people?

2) Drugs ruin the way people think and it turns them into criminals. As Kanami stated earlier its legality won't stop the fact that drugs ruin lives of the consumer and those close to the consumer.

3) [sarcasm] Oh no I disagree! ZOMG! That means I'm automatically dumb, nazistic on drugs and talk out my ass! They have no proof to back up these claims but the majority says it so it must be true. :O OMG OMG! [sarcasm/]

Seriously, whats up with the mob mentallity? And if you'd look over posts that are on the same smegging page you wouldn't bne putting words in my mouth, or are you people doing that on purpose to satisfy your mastubatory desire to take the minorty and put them all in jester outfits. JESTER AS IN FOOL, SOMEONE NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, THE PENGUIN IF YOU WILL FOR THOSE WHO KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY THAT.

1) How about seeing what it does to other people?

You are a teenager from rural washington state, what do you know of other people?

2) Drugs ruin the way people think and it turns them into criminals. As Kanami stated earlier its legality won't stop the fact that drugs ruin lives of the consumer and those close to the consumer.

I am a recovering drug addict. I consumed a highly dangerous, and extremely addictive drugs many times a day, over the course of many years. It took multiple tries, and a lot of effort to break my habit. To this day, even in the presence of other people who use this drug, I still feel cravings. I fight, every day, to not give in. Sometimes, I think of a situation in which I used, when I was tired, or stressed, or angry, or social, and I think how much better it would be if I used, just once. I remember what it was like to be using, and wish I could do it only now and then

But I know I can't.

I was, and continue to be, an addict.

I am very successful in my profession, and I comitted no crimes in pursuit of money to feed my habit, and committed no crimes by being under the influence of my drug of choice.

What of me?

What of me?

You clearly don't exist.

You are a teenager from rural washington state, what do you know of other people?



I am a recovering drug addict. I consumed a highly dangerous, and extremely addictive drugs many times a day, over the course of many years. It took multiple tries, and a lot of effort to break my habit. To this day, even in the presence of other people who use this drug, I still feel cravings. I fight, every day, to not give in. Sometimes, I think of a situation in which I used, when I was tired, or stressed, or angry, or social, and I think how much better it would be if I used, just once. I remember what it was like to be using, and wish I could do it only now and then

But I know I can't.

I was, and continue to be, an addict.

I am very successful in my profession, and I comitted no crimes in pursuit of money to feed my habit, and committed no crimes by being under the influence of my drug of choice.

What of me?

I'm going to take a leap of faith here on what it was and congratulate you for quitting smoking.

You clearly don't exist.

funny, it feels like I exist....

I'm going to take a leap of faith here on what it was and congratulate you for quitting smoking.

bingo

edit: in reading back my description, I realize that while I was refering to smoking, it could in fact apply to me in two ways. I also recently stopped drinking coffee

funny, it feels like I exist....

Surely it couldn't be that SL is wrong.......

Surely it couldn't be that SL is wrong.......

perish the thought.

funny, it feels like I exist....

Your not the majority you know.

Your not the majority you know.

Nor are your opinions indicative of what the majority is.

Your not the majority you know.

1) once you start using terms line "will" result in crime, you have eliminated the existance of minorities. If you speak in absolutes then ANY exception, any minority, disproves your claim. You have just admitted your claim is debunked

2) do you have statistics to back that particular fact up? No? No sources? What a shock...

So you have now changed your argument, having been debunked, and make another argument for which you likewise have no support.

Quit while you're still only a bit behind.

Your not the majority you know.

Actually, a vast majority of people I know who do or have done drugs, haven't committed any other crimes other then drug use, and haven't become addicted, or had their soul leeched out of them etc. These are everyday ordinary people, who just happen to enjoy a psychoactive substance while they relax. Not everyone who does drugs becomes an addict, in fact, only a small percentage do. And if you believe that it is a reason to make them illegal then alcohol, tobacco, gambling or any other addictive behavior should be illegal as well.

For those who are saying I am too ignorant for this debate please consider...

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on? It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society. Thats a more blatantly obvious fact than WBC being a church of emotionally sadistic bastards.

I see you have failed to inform yourself about the nature of drugs in general. So, until then, please crawl back under your rock and cover your self in your shroud of deafening ignorance until you are ready to understand that not all drugs are bad simply because they are illegal.

Legal prescription drugs can be just as and even more addictive than their illegal cousins. They are just as prone to abuse as their illegal cousins, if not more so. They also have negative side effects.

Let's take Prednisone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prednisone) for example. It's a legal prescription drug. I'm using it to fight a condition of mine right now.

MAJOR
depression, mania, or other psychiatric symptoms
unusual fatigue or weakness
blurred vision
abdominal pain
peptic ulcer
infections
painful hips or shoulders
osteoporosis
acne breakouts
insomnia
reduced libido

MINOR
weight gain
Stretch marks
facial swelling
nervousness
acne
rash
increased appetite
hyperactivity

Those are some damn nasty side effects aren't there?

I also smoke Marijuana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana)... let's see what it does to me...

A feeling of euphoria
Intense relaxation
Most experience pleasure, but one out of five users experience a great deal of anxiety.
Decrease in nausea (used medicinally for this)
Laughter, giggle fits
Sensory enhancement (colours, taste, sensation)
Increased appreciation of music

Other common short-term effects include

Forgetfulness
Laziness
Distorted perception
Trouble with concentration
Paranoia
Increased heart rate
Dry mouth and throat
Increased appetite

Both taken from Wiki.

Gee, I don't know about you, but Marijuana looks a lot nicer than my VERY legal prescription drug. And frankly, I have never had a bad trip on Marijuana, though I did sleep funny once; I felt like I was out of my body while I slept. Strangely, it was a damn good sleep.

what is wrong with using drugs?you know the macedonians used drugs,the people with the hanging gardens,the folks that became babel then babylonia,babylon,and is now iraq,anyway

I think we're all making a terrible mistake by using "logic" and "facts" as opposed to emotionally charged language and ALL_CAPS.
He'll never respond to arguments based in reason.

I think we're all making a terrible mistake by using "logic" and "facts" as opposed to emotionally charged language and ALL_CAPS.
He'll never respond to arguments based in reason.

But then that makes us as ignorant as him.

I think we're all making a terrible mistake by using "logic" and "facts" as opposed to emotionally charged language and ALL_CAPS.
He'll never respond to arguments based in reason.

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason. Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics rather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason. Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias. And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason. Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics rather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason. Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias. And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

I like to argue using reason and facts, you're the one who's not here, I have absolutely no history with you and I don't care what your viewpoints on things are. I'm here to present my side of the issue at hand and back it up with reason, logic and evidence to support my claims.

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason. Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics rather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason. Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias. And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

Um, no.
I can assure you that everyone would still attack such flawed arguments regardless of who posted them.

Um, no.
I can assure you that everyone would still attack such flawed arguments regardless of who posted them.

Yes they'd attack but in a less malicious sense.

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason. Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics rather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason. Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias. And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

If the Pope made an account and posted this exact thread, almost every catholic who saw the thread would join the rest of us in pointing out the massive flaws in his idea, just as we have with you. We're not disagreeing with you because it's you, we're disagreeing with you because you're wrong.

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason.

on the contrary, many of the arguments here are perfectly reasonable. The fact that you are unwilling or incapable of listening to reason does not in any way invalidate our arguments

Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics

what does the organization of projects or operations have to do with making arguments? Do you perhaps mean logic? Since you don't know what it's called this well explains your complete failure to utilize it.

ather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason.

I dare you to make less sense.

Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals

How does quoting you word for word putting words in your mouth?

will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias.

you wouldn't know reason and impartiality if it smacked you in the face.

And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

Here's a bit of rationality and "logistics" for you. We have left wingers, right wingers, communists, capitalists, christians jews muslims and atheists. We have gays, straights, bisexuals, transexuals and asexuals. We have whites blacks asians latinos, americans canadians british, japanese and australian. We are a tremendously diverse group here on NSG.

And if throughout this tremendously diverse group, with a multitude and myraid of positions, arguments and preferences, if EVERYBODY seems to be biased against you.....maybe it's you?

We're not disagreeing with you because it's you, we're disagreeing with you because you're wrong.

read that. Many times. Let it sink in.

Yes they'd attack but in a less malicious sense.

Have you considered the "attack" is occurring because people have posted legitimate arguments and you have failed to respond to ones that give you information?

Would you care to respond to this post? Clicky (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12706236&postcount=104), or would responding to it mean you have to face the fact that there are legal prescription drugs that have worse side effects on the human body than some of the soft, illegal drugs? I honestly want you to look at this and read the information.

Yes they'd attack

So you admit people would argue this point even if it wasn't YOU who made it?

but in a less malicious sense.

again, if everyone you encounter seems to treat you with scorn derision and hostility, maybe it's you.

Face it, barely any arguments on NSG are based on reason. Not until everyone forgets their agendas for a while and base their opinions on all the knowledge they've acquired and logistics rather than what the left or right as whole beleive will it be based on reason. Not until you all stop putting words in my mouth and accusing me falsly just because you all hate me for being angry with Baptists and liberals will it be based on reason. Why? Because debates are impartial and lack bias. And EVERYONE here seems to have the "Its South Lizasauria treat him differently" bias!

Wrong.

We aren't criticizing you because of "bias". We're criticizing you because that's what debate is about. It's about people challenging each other's worldview to mutually improve their own understanding of the world. This is only possible if one is willing to be held accountable for and is prepared to defend the claims they make. Otherwise, no dialectic is possible.

Fellow citezens, after reading the "Strawberry Quick" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=528058) thread I was outraged and somewhat terrified at the thought of how it would negatively effect humanity for decades to come. It occurred to me that the whole drug problem of society will only escalate before they start pouring the stuff in water plants and in the rivers so just by drinking we get addicted. The only way to stop it is to eliminate the need for these people to sell drugs either by making it easier to get rich off other means or by giving poor people a break so they don't need to sell drugs. Does anyone else have any ideas on how to eliminate the need for poor people to sell drugs? We must brainstorm ideas to make drug dealing no longer necessary before things get worse and they start literally shoving it down our throats. It's no longer a matter of choosing whether or not to do it, they are going to come up with underhanded ways to get us addicted. They are threatening free will which is the most valuable and important part of the human being by giving us drugs that'll consume our minds and souls and replace them by addictions. Drugs must be eliminated completely and the need to sell them[illegal drugs] must be eliminated as well if we wish to prevent society from falling down to hell.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Spelling.jpg

*Considers joining in to add the full weight of the freak power movement against the OP, decides against, and fades back into oblivion*
EDIT: Oh, and:
That's because you're an uninformed cretin with no experience of such things.
*applaudes*
Seriously, though, I really think if the OP smoked one joint, even if he never smoked again, he would see how ridiculous his arguments are. Barring that, no rational argument will convince him.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Spelling.jpg

You win.

You may want to take this quiz. (http://www.cedocore.com/)

. (http://www.cedocore.com/rswtb/)

http://www.ninwiki.com/Year_Zero_Research

What am I looking at here? the second link especially intrigues me, but I need more background to understand it.

ALL DRUGS DO HARM AND DAMAGE TO SOME DEGREE, what does it matter that they have different effects and so on? It still results in an addiction that eventually leads to crime and corruption in society.

I'm drinking coffee right now. Perhaps you think that will lead to crime and corruption in society?

Well... it is a really big cup. Clearly, the caffeine will destroy my soul and render me unfit for normal society. I'm going to accept the inevitable and pop into work now and tell them I quit. Wouldn't want to expose innocent people to my evil corrupt ways.

I'm drinking coffee right now. Perhaps you think that will lead to crime and corruption in society?

Well... it is a really big cup. Clearly, the caffeine will destroy my soul and render me unfit for normal society. I'm going to accept the inevitable and pop into work now and tell them I quit. Wouldn't want to expose innocent people to my evil corrupt ways.

Caffeine has turned you into a monster! We must lock you up! The children... think of the children who will see you doing such evil... I mean.... drinking coffee, you're... well, you're just a gosh darn awful person now. :p

Caffeine has turned you into a monster! We must lock you up! The children... think of the children who will see you doing such evil... I mean.... drinking coffee, you're... well, you're just a gosh darn awful person now. :p

It gets worse! I went into work this morning to tell them my conscience could no longer bear the burden of working for a respectable company whilst being a drug user. Well, you'll never guess... I found people in there who were drinking tea and coffee! Unbelievable.

I couldn't quite believe what I was seeing, so I went downstairs into the work kitchen and found the tell-tale signs of regular drug use. There was a tap and a kettle and (tucked away inside a cupboard) a jar of coffee and a box of tea bags. Scandal! There was even a bag of sugar, which suggests to me that people had been combining two drugs. Truly, the moral decay of modern society knows no bounds.

I reported my shocking findings to one of my superiors, but he seemed to find the whole thing amusing! When I persisted, he asked me: "Have you finished being stupid?"
I replied: "No, I got more," and carried on, up until he told me I should: "Shut up and do some work."

I despair. I tried to follow SL's moral guidance, and the only responses I got were laughter and annoyance.

It gets worse! I went into work this morning to tell them my conscience could no longer bear the burden of working for a respectable company whilst being a drug user. Well, you'll never guess... I found people in there who were drinking tea and coffee! Unbelievable.

I couldn't quite believe what I was seeing, so I went downstairs into the work kitchen and found the tell-tale signs of regular drug use. There was a tap and a kettle and (tucked away inside a cupboard) a jar of coffee and a box of tea bags. Scandal! There was even a bag of sugar, which suggests to me that people had been combining two drugs. Truly, the moral decay of modern society knows no bounds.

I reported my shocking findings to one of my superiors, but he seemed to find the whole thing amusing! When I persisted, he asked me: "Have you finished being stupid?"
I replied: "No, I got more," and carried on, up until he told me I should: "Shut up and do some work."

I despair. I tried to follow SL's moral guidance, and the only responses I got were laughter and annoyance.
http://weaselhut.net/cheezweas.gif

At least for making me laugh so hard! :)

Hooray for me!