Dump these turkeys: tougher drug stance

[Dreadful Nonsense]

Tonington...i have used drugs to the hilt...there isn't anything i have not done....it's a head space....you use ..i don't anymore...

I was always honest with myself about my use...it's drugs .. hard drugs soft drugs....all this intellectual crap about it is a jerk off....

hell i drink two cups of JO in the morning and realize if i drank as much as i did in high school it woulkd wreck havoc on my blood pressure ..i know that it's not just a liquid.....i get semi drunk once a year...new years....sort of a lemming thing....i know what alcohol is...

you want to get high get high...don't be a hypocrite about it.....
don't start in on the intelectualizing about getting high....ya dig!

and don't tell me it's good for you....

it's drugs ...you need this to enjoy yer life ..go for it..i ain't saying no..i am saying yer one of those....giggly ha ha ...boo....whats happpening...what was i saying......lol

should you be put in jail for pot..no
selling pot ...no

Selling heroin and coke and hard drugs...yeah ....

 

[unclepercy]

What are you thinking?

You don't honestly believe that smoking a joint and shooting someone to death are the same thing do you? Think again.

Why is it that people who are against rational approach to drugs feel the need to jump to extremism when trying to make a case against decrim policies?

No one suggests selling cocaine in the corner store next to the school.
Just no criminal record if you get busted with a small amount of pot.

Even in countries with the death penalty for importing or exporting drugs people still smuggle drugs. So what makes you think that harsh sentencing works at all? It only wastes money that could be better spent elsewhere.

Harm reduction works. It's proven, deal with it.

Honey, you've lost the train of thought. I was referring to use of one's body which is unconstitutional or illegal. I could care less about drugs, because the subject doesn't even touch my life and never has. Get off the subject of drugs. I was responding to Pangloss' saying that murder was something you do to someone else. You use your body to do it. Therefore, that is prohibited. I never said anything about drugs. Why is it that this whole forum is so pre-occupied with a subject like drugs?
Please don't drag me into the subject of drugs.

Uncle

 

[unclepercy]

Oh, good grief yourself, Uncle. Re-read my posts and you will (if you use that wrinkled forebrain of yours) see that I argue strongly for personal responsibility, and for a clear distinction between activities that effect me, and those that effect others.

If I shoot somebody, I am interfering with that other person, and should be held accountable.

If I shoot drugs into my veins in my own home, I am having an effect only on me. If I leave the house in a stupor and fall off a cliff, I have only myself to blame.

If I drive drunk, I am putting others at risk, and should be penalized.

Is the bulb in your brain bright enough to see the difference?

Pangloss

You - you - are impossible. You make this vastly overgeneralized statement that what you do with your body is nobody else's business. When others point out the limitations of that statement, you start backing down in increments. Then you insult me. I think I found the dim bulb.:roll:

Uncle

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Pangloss is right, banning soft drugs makes as much sense as banning alcohol, another soft drug that resisted enforcement by prudes.

I call it hateful Canadian corruption. And worst of all, it is an inefficient use of resources.

People have a right to abuse their bodies, which is why we love hockey. Doing drugs is another way of showing how you want to keep your body stimulated with widespread social approval.

I won't be voting Tory in the next federal election.

 

[Unforgiven]

heh heh posers are funny!

 

[Unforgiven]

You do understand this thread is about drugs right? :roll:

"Murder is something you do with your body."
Uncle, Honey, come back to Earth, we miss you! :smile:

Honey, you've lost the train of thought. I was referring to use of one's body which is unconstitutional or illegal. I could care less about drugs, because the subject doesn't even touch my life and never has. Get off the subject of drugs. I was responding to Pangloss' saying that murder was something you do to someone else. You use your body to do it. Therefore, that is prohibited. I never said anything about drugs. Why is it that this whole forum is so pre-occupied with a subject like drugs?
Please don't drag me into the subject of drugs.

Uncle

 

[Unforgiven]

There is nothing wrong with reasonable and moderate use of soft drugs like pot. Prohibition fuels the high price which makes it attractive to organized crime. This legislation the Conservatives want to introduce is nothing more than the folly Nixon introduced back in the 70s. A federal method of looking like the government is getting tough on crime. It's a smoke screen to hide the real problems we're facing that are going unaddressed.

Don't be fooled.

Pangloss is right, banning soft drugs makes as much sense as banning alcohol, another soft drug that resisted enforcement by prudes.

I call it hateful Canadian corruption. And worst of all, it is an inefficient use of resources.

People have a right to abuse their bodies, which is why we love hockey. Doing drugs is another way of showing how you want to keep your body stimulated with widespread social approval.

I won't be voting Tory in the next federal election.

 

[darkbeaver]

This legislation will be good for the construction and legal industries. The starving lawyers will welcome the chance to participate in stuffing newly constructed prisons. The New Conservative Government is recycling old Reaganite legislation which has failed to stem the drug tide for thirty years but has been insturmental in the rise of the corporate security complex, it's real reason for existence.

 

[MikeyDB]

The moment a cigarette corporation executive gets arrested fine. The moment a MacDonald's and Tim Horton's franchise owner is put in jail great. When every coffee bean grower pays as much for that bean to be harvested as a person in Canada gets paid for putting the same molding on the same place on the same car on an assembly line, then things will be fair I suppose... Obesity and high blood pressue, dental tooth and mouth disease are exacerbated by many of the foods we get sold by huge corporations...lock em up....

Controlled pharmaceuticals that have created dependency and done real harm to thousands upon thousands of people were legal at the time they were sold so addiction to valium and various other prescribed drugs is perfectly ok I suppose.....

If we're prepared to make criminals out of people whose only crime is growing and smoking a little weed (personal use...no trafficking...) the door is open for more to feel the weight of someone's idea of what should or shouldn't be "allowed" at every step throughout our "free" societies...

Child advertising, autos with more horsepower than is necessary to cruise at the speed limit, more control and more government.....

A super ideal to aim for...

 

[darkbeaver]

What?Should I be imprisoned for selling my turnips to my suburban brothers and sisters who cannot wield an hoe for themselves? Should I engage not in the free market nor barter my goods for the pleasure and sustinance of my fellow man? When there is little or no regulation of my corporate brothers and sisters why must my little green enterprise be so heavily burdened with regulation?:smile:

 

[Tonington]

Tonington...i have used drugs to the hilt...there isn't anything i have not done....it's a head space....you use ..i don't anymore...

I was always honest with myself about my use...it's drugs .. hard drugs soft drugs....all this intellectual crap about it is a jerk off....

hell i drink two cups of JO in the morning and realize if i drank as much as i did in high school it woulkd wreck havoc on my blood pressure ..i know that it's not just a liquid.....i get semi drunk once a year...new years....sort of a lemming thing....i know what alcohol is...

you want to get high get high...don't be a hypocrite about it.....
don't start in on the intelectualizing about getting high....ya dig!

and don't tell me it's good for you....

it's drugs ...you need this to enjoy yer life ..go for it..i ain't saying no..i am saying yer one of those....giggly ha ha ...boo....whats happpening...what was i saying......lol

should you be put in jail for pot..no
selling pot ...no

Selling heroin and coke and hard drugs...yeah ....

I don't consider philosophizing about our social constructs as a jerk off.

I don't need drugs to enjoy my life anymore than I need a good steak to enjoy my life.

Intellectualizing, I'm not really sure what you mean by this. I think. That's what I do when I'm high as well, though granted it's not as compartmentalized as my sober thoughts. Perhaps that's what I enjoy??

 

[Pangloss]

You - you - are impossible. You make this vastly overgeneralized statement that what you do with your body is nobody else's business. When others point out the limitations of that statement, you start backing down in increments. Then you insult me. I think I found the dim bulb.:roll:

Uncle

I am saddened that your lack of comprehension makes you so upset. Let me paraphrase what every liberal philosopher has said on the subject:

"My rights end where your nose begins."

That means a couple of things: first, as soon as my actions interfere with you, I am to be held accountable for that interference, for good or bad.

Second, your rights end where mine begin. I am an autonomous, sovereign individual - I ought to be able to do whatever I want to do with my body. Eat macrobiotic and live to 125, snort coke and die at 30, ride my bicycle around the world, or stay at home and watch TV. Sodomy or polygamy with willing participants, stay home and masturbate all alone - in terms of utilitarian ethics, they are all equivalent. I have personal views as to the appropriateness of some of these actions, but they are only my views and I will not impose them on others.

As long as I do not interfere (unreasonably) with another, then nobody should have any say about what I do.

My position has not changed, nor have I been unclear - you need to read more carefully.

Pangloss

 

[Pangloss]

I disagree with that. Some stuff just has no place in anybody's bloodstream.
Scopolamine for example has no use from what I've seen other than abuse and death. Some people shouldn't take drugs either. They don't know what they are doing, and most often aren't responsible to begin with.

Unf-

I agree with you that some things are downright nasty, harmful and perhaps not even fun - that does not mean that an individual oughtn't be allowed to do what they want with them.

If I want to drink cyanide - who in the world has the right to stop me? And if suicide is a right, then everything short of that must also be a right.

Of course (this is so obvious I feel a fool for writing this) this is all predicated on someone being "in their right mind" when they make the choice.

Pangloss

 

[Pangloss]

Honey, you've lost the train of thought. I was referring to use of one's body which is unconstitutional or illegal. I could care less about drugs, because the subject doesn't even touch my life and never has. Get off the subject of drugs. I was responding to Pangloss' saying that murder was something you do to someone else. You use your body to do it. Therefore, that is prohibited. I never said anything about drugs. Why is it that this whole forum is so pre-occupied with a subject like drugs?
Please don't drag me into the subject of drugs.

Uncle

In case you haven't noticed this thread is about drug laws.

Unfortunate this had to be pointed out to you.

Pangloss

 

[Pangloss]

This is nothin' but a bump.

Pangloss

 

[Unforgiven]

Well this is where I wabble some. I'm for decrim as adding all the problems of an arrest, trial, lawyer and sentencing just compound the problems that a lot of people have that they've turned to drugs to forget about, or that become prevailant once an addiction has turned into a downward spiral.

I'm all for the harm reduction approach.

But for legalization means that someone has to sell it, and it has to be in some way regulated. The only real way it can be regulated is to be handled like alcohol and that would mean that it would have to be regulated by the government. Like the liquor control board of each province does now.

But with that, there has to be a standardized measure of drug quality. I don't think this can happen with organics like weed and mushrooms, peyote and so on. But what's a real problem is turning the hard drugs like heroin, morphine
and so on into something that is far more accessable than it is.

That might sound odd but consider, it's pretty easy for anyone to walk into a liquor store and buy what they want. Not everyone can just walk up to some dude selling junk and buy what they want. The risk of getting robbed, the unknown, scary looking seedy types put more people off. But put that into a nice store, allow for it to be marketed, even tobacco gets to advertise, and the advent of becoming a Mecca for IV drug users sets my mind against any liberalization of hard drugs. They aren't that common as it is on the scale of pot.

So rather than setting up that whole can of worms, I think it best to decrim only and allow for someone who is out of control in public or very obviously in a very self abusive stage to be picked up and held for a short amount of time to allow some intervention to happen. Always with the point being to reduce the amount of harm done. Through needle exchanges, health clinics and secure staffed places to inject and get help should an OD occur.

People need to make their own choices but sometimes they need someone to step in and see that they don't harm themselves by becoming vulnerable to those who would harm them.

Unf-

I agree with you that some things are downright nasty, harmful and perhaps not even fun - that does not mean that an individual oughtn't be allowed to do what they want with them.

If I want to drink cyanide - who in the world has the right to stop me? And if suicide is a right, then everything short of that must also be a right.

Of course (this is so obvious I feel a fool for writing this) this is all predicated on someone being "in their right mind" when they make the choice.

Pangloss

 

[Pangloss]

Unf - I'm gonna ponder your post and I think I can reduce the wobble factor for you. I'll write when I get back from work tonight.

Pangloss