JaKiri Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 fafalone said in post # :He's refferring to the inevitable riots and massive loss of revenue for the government if cigarettes were made illegal. I don't see how you got riots out of that, given it's all talking about government income.
JaKiri Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 fafalone said in post # :There would still be riots. I doubt there would. Immense amount of lobbying by the tobacco companies, maybe. [edit] Of course, we're talking about the UK, and you're talking about the US.
fafalone Posted January 16, 2004 Author Posted January 16, 2004 Yeah, a riot breaks over everything the government does here.
JaKiri Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 fafalone said in post # :Yeah, a riot breaks over everything the government does here. Poor police
iglak Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 umm... i'm way behind... since this post is reffering to something 2 pages ago, but that's okay. i agree that most people would not want to learn the little intricacies of every drug. and that for the time being, keeping drugs illegal is the correct choice. what i was saying is that spouting a list of symptoms does absolutely nothing to help the problem, who the heck wants to memorize a long, boring, useless list. and classes designed to make people afraid of drugs only furthers the problem. we need classes that provide an outline on what the drugs actually do to you, a dumbed down version of the specifics. and untill that time, there will be only more and more drug users, abusers, and deaths. of course, it can never be stopped completely, but it will be better than it is now. oh, and yeah, riots would probably break out in the US if nicotine was made illegal... and alcohol...
fafalone Posted January 19, 2004 Author Posted January 19, 2004 as far as education goes, people who want to try them are going to try them... we need education to focus on harm reducation, not scare-tactics based on the worse-case scenario that virtually never happens.
Sayonara Posted January 19, 2004 Posted January 19, 2004 I agree that better education would help matters significantly, but not that it should replace all other strategies.
fafalone Posted January 19, 2004 Author Posted January 19, 2004 it should definately replace prohibition, since we all know it'll never work. the 20s taught us that.
Meerschaum Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 Drug use is virtually timeless and linked to many religions, its part of humanity it should not be a crime... the DEA creates the very problem it combats, it stomps on drugs so prices go up so addicts are forced to commit crime to afford the habit, they take non-violent drug offenders and put them in prison where they are beaten, raped, and sometimes contract disease (HIV) ... then they call them 'corrected' and let them loose (never to vote again, not able to get ANY state job really, and not able to get any job worth a sh*t in the private sector) all for having comsumed a drug..now what do you logical people think a person so tortured and ruined is going to be like when they get out or prison? do you think they are going to just 'get the act together' and move onto better things? ... they become serious criminals and go and commit worse crimes ... this IS proven by statistics I dont like the idea very much at all of someone bieng treated like the lowest scum on earth for having decided to par-take in the timeless sacraments our ancestors did. If someone wants to smoke opium, eat mushrooms, eat cactus, smoke some pot...why on earth is it my business?... it BECOMES my business when he's turned into a criminal and comes to rob me, but when this peaceful person is bothering nobody why is he my problem?... why do my tax dollars pay to keep him locked up and tortured by fellow prisoners? ... I dont think any logical, rational person can argue a straight argument in 'favor' of this 'war on drugs' its been proven to have failed, it reduces drug flow wich actually increases crime, it creates crime, it raises taxes, it does no good! drug use today isnt 'down' ... sure... 'certin' drugs are down but not overall. 3% of americans live behind bars in prison and for what? come on.... think about it The drug problem isnt just a problem of drug users and the familys of drug users, its a problem 'everyone' is part of and mainly because of tight enforcement, its like in the prohabition era, the fallout is crime and ghettos from the criminal enterprises going on, its not the 'drugs' causing this, its the high-profiet involved in trafficking them and an underclass of people bieng formed who are disenfranchised from the rest of us. now my rant is over... and no I'm not a drug addict or a satan worshipping homosexual or some other form of socially unacceptable deviant. I'm simply an observer with poor grammer and an opinon!
blike Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 The sun is running an interesting article... http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004031295,00.html A MAN aged 36 is thought to have become the first in Britain to die directly from cannabis poisoning.
YT2095 Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 too much of ANYTHING is bad for you though really, everything in moderation is usualy the best policy with anything. Aspirin has killed more people directly than cannabis also. he died of greed/stupidity
fafalone Posted January 20, 2004 Author Posted January 20, 2004 Please refrain from posting fake news
YT2095 Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 lol, "The Sun" is certainly one of our least reputable tabloids in the UK, followed only by "The Daily Sport" (a virtual porn rag) with headlines such as "Wife kidnapped by Giant Tomatoes from Mars" and yes that was actualy printed once in the 1980`s
wolfson Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 fafalone, when saying that smoking, accounts for the most deaths/desease, you must say that is due to the large quantity of peope who use tobacco, and your stats seem to be biased aswell, some of the website(s) you mentioned sound to me like they are just, over performing jumped up liberal hippies, i am far from a conservative, but when and if gathering statistical data I use both areas so i can be counted as un-biased. Oh yes and don't forget that when injecting Heroin there is a chance of been infected by AIDS/HIV, this is a result of useing "used" syringes, don't get me wrong im not "bashing" your statment, i may well agree, but further information is needed.
atinymonkey Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 Tobacco is far from a super happy fun thing to smoke. It may not cause overdoses, but don't be fooled. Tobacco goes for the long protracted death.
fafalone Posted January 20, 2004 Author Posted January 20, 2004 if 300,000 per year die from smoking, that accounts for 1 in 5 deaths overall. quite a high percentage, considering not all of the 5 smoke. "In addition to cigarette smoking as a cause of cancer in smokers, environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) (also called involuntary or passive smoking) is now recognized as a significant cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers (National Research Council, 1986; DHS, 1987; EPA, 1993)" from http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/risks67.html That statistic is even more troubling. Smokers kill a large number of people who don't even smoke. ...and as far as injecting heroin and contracting HIV, it's just stupidity. clean needles are cheap and legal in most places. getting HIV from injecting is really not different from getting it through unprotected sex, in fact its quite obvious even to moron addicts, that the risk is higher.
Cheetah Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 Got an interesting article from forskning.no ("research.no"). Unfortunatly it is in norwegian, but in the hope that someone else than me understands it, I'll post the link so you can check my sources. http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2004/januar/1074159798.5 The articles headline is "Drugs gives bad memory". It's British researchers who had collected data from a a survey on the internet. 800 people participated. To sum up, the fact that hash cause problems for short-term memory is well known. But that ecstasy cause problems for the long-term memory is new. Combined they might give the (ab)user poor/no memory at all. ... Oh great! After writing this, I discover some other links on the bottom of the page! Here are the original, british report, and here is the survey.
atinymonkey Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 Oh. Langtidshukommelsen = Psychopharmacology, like I'd pick that one up with my childlike norwegian. It's not as if my 'Learn Norwegian' application even attempted to cover that.
Sayonara Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 You only bought it so you could swear at work, stop complaining. Oh yeah - and to crush that little girl too.
fafalone Posted January 21, 2004 Author Posted January 21, 2004 Of course abuse will cause problems. Remember to differentiate between use and abuse. Using a substance more than once every 2 weeks on a regular basis is a rough estimate of what should be considered abuse. One of the points of this thread is should someone who has an arbitrary amount of a recreational chemical be thrown in prison with violent criminals, murderers, and rapists.. sodomized, and infected with HIV as punishment? The DEA says yes.
Sayonara Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 The DEA aren't responsible for the running of the prison service.
JaKiri Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 fafalone said in post # :Of course abuse will cause problems. Remember to differentiate between use and abuse. Using a substance more than once every 2 weeks on a regular basis is a rough estimate of what should be considered abuse. One of the points of this thread is should someone who has an arbitrary amount of a recreational chemical be thrown in prison with violent criminals, murderers, and rapists.. sodomized, and infected with HIV as punishment? The DEA says yes. You should work for the daily mail duder. Your unbacked-up, emotive arguments would fit in well.
fafalone Posted January 21, 2004 Author Posted January 21, 2004 Unbacked up? Lets see... sentencing patterns, mandatory minumum, prison rape statistics, HIV infection rates among prisons as a result of rape... Which one of those can't be backed up?
Sayonara Posted January 21, 2004 Posted January 21, 2004 Who cares if they can be backed up or not? It isn't in the DEA's remit to worry about those things, much less control them.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now