A recent facination with hard drugs

[GarethSE]

i love drug threads so very very much

 

[JBroll]

There are so many drug threads already that I have to wonder...

"What are you, people? On dope?"

Jeff

 

[Harry Hughes]

I was actually going to come in just to say that I love booze.

Jeff

 

[ParsonsMatt]

In the subforum's description, all you can see is:

A recent facination with hard...

 

[GarethSE]

In the subforum's description, all you can see is:

hhahaha
this is true

 

[roy22341]

In the subforum's description, all you can see is:

Only reason I came in this thread. My two cents, not that anyone wanted it is that drugs are bad mmmkay. No I'm not some straight edge scenester that is anti-drug because its the hip new thing. Nor am I doing drugs just to rebel against society and free myself from the confines of the restrictive social structure that life has placed on me or whatever the catch phrase of the day for that happens to be.

The reason I am anti-drugs is because of the number of people very close to me that it has taken. A few pages back on this thread I saw a post where someone described users who aren't "typical junkies." None of the drug users I've know that have killed themselves, overdosed, ended up in jail, halfway houses, and slums have been "typical junkies." There is no typical junkie, there are only people who abuse hard drugs and let those drugs change them and succumb to addiction. I'm not against weed and booze, I couldn't care less (and I drink).

(Side note: I am a firm believer that the last thing the ganja smoking population of this country wants is the legalization of marijuana use.)

Hard drugs though (crack and heroin) are a drain on society and destroyer of lives. The main reason 'drugs' aren't widely considered bad is because heroine and crack are in the same general classification as "weed." That's where a lot of the problem lies. /end rant

In summary:

Fuck that shit.

 

[Erkan]

You'll notice that (with the possible exception of 'know nobody who has read books', which is far more likely in my country than yours if I'm not mistaken) your argument carried over verbatim to something entirely different. This does not indicate a particularly good argument.

Jeff

My argument may have not been very good but are you seriously saying that I need a good argument to be against drugs?

I know the way you approach drugs, and I've seen lots and lots of other "cool free thinking" people approach it the same way; that anything is dangerous when used in excess. Sure, water can kill you if you drink too much, it's no surprise... but how the fuck does that make it okay to use drugs? This type of argument is only stupid and retarded since if you think anything is dangerous, you're suggesting what... that everything should be legal and that people should make their own decisions about wether they wanna use drugs or not? Have you ever thought about the fact that people affect people? You are not only responsible for yourself, you also have an impact on the people around you and you are responsible for that as well.

I'm sure I can bet on the fact that in the last few decades, people have died more from over consuming water than from nuclear bombs. Oh shit, this is an argument for nuclear bombs, we should legalize them and let everybody own one in their backyard!

Now if heavy drugs were legal and let for people to decide if they wanted to use them... I'm not imagining good numbers here. People don't work that way, people need to be controlled because too many are too stupid.

Sorry for my half assed reply but I have to get going to work now, I'm so stressed :O

 

[StefTD]

I drink booze some times, liked a weed alot a few years ago and tried some mushrooms, but nowadays it's ok for me that some guys I know smoke weed and stuff, but I really dislike the effect of many drugs on people.
And what I really hate are guys who think they're cool and know what they do, if they take drugs-yeah, you know what?
A good friend of mine just died last friday due to a guy like that who thought he was able to drive a car while being high, crashed into the front of my friend's car, he died there and his brother will never be able to walk again.
And I don't wanna mention all those fucked up stories from guys being high on meth and killing people and eating parts of them or shit like that.

 

[Line666]

My argument may have not been very good but are you seriously saying that I need a good argument to be against drugs?

I know the way you approach drugs, and I've seen lots and lots of other "cool free thinking" people approach it the same way; that anything is dangerous when used in excess. Sure, water can kill you if you drink too much, it's no surprise... but how the fuck does that make it okay to use drugs? This type of argument is only stupid and retarded since if you think anything is dangerous, you're suggesting what... that everything should be legal and that people should make their own decisions about wether they wanna use drugs or not? Have you ever thought about the fact that people affect people? You are not only responsible for yourself, you also have an impact on the people around you and you are responsible for that as well.

I'm sure I can bet on the fact that in the last few decades, people have died more from over consuming water than from nuclear bombs. Oh shit, this is an argument for nuclear bombs, we should legalize them and let everybody own one in their backyard!

Now if heavy drugs were legal and let for people to decide if they wanted to use them... I'm not imagining good numbers here. People don't work that way, people need to be controlled because too many are too stupid.

Sorry for my half assed reply but I have to get going to work now, I'm so stressed :O

I think you need a good argument to be against anything.

Sure most drugs primary use is usually to be abused/or medication, the real problem about having drugs illegal is that people will use them illegal or not, and when you buy illegal drugs you sure as hell don't know what the fuck is in them, you can go from snorting 50% brickdust one night to grade A coke the next. Thats what kills most drug users - one day they actually get a good supply and since their body is used to snorting mostly brickdust or shit like that - they OD on the pure stuff.

At least in a system were drugs are handed out by government, the drugs cost less, so less people getting their houses robbed and the quality of the drug remains at some sort of standard so you have less junkies killing themselves by ODing, As long as the drugs are in government hands you can get them taxed to fuckery as well, benefit the public purse as opposed to straining it with thousands of counter drug police raids, hell the amount of raids around here where people are only selling a bit of weed is stupid, why spend time and money on people that want to get a bit high.

Also drug smugglers are cut out the market if drugs are legalised, so that does away with a good section of criminal enterprise - these nast characters are out of business for good.

Thats what I think anyway, but you can disagree with the badly thought out argument of "FUCK THAT SHIT", just because you dont do hard drugs, doesnt mean that banning everything to the hilt is going to work for people who make it their priority to get high - dangers or not.

 

[Metaltastic]

The main reason 'drugs' aren't widely considered bad is because heroine and crack are in the same general classification as "weed."

Uhh...what? Same general classification as made by whom, exactly?

 

[SocialNumb]

Uhh...what? Same general classification as made by whom, exactly?

 

[Erkan]

I think you need a good argument to be against anything.

Sure most drugs primary use is usually to be abused/or medication, the real problem about having drugs illegal is that people will use them illegal or not, and when you buy illegal drugs you sure as hell don't know what the fuck is in them, you can go from snorting 50% brickdust one night to grade A coke the next. Thats what kills most drug users - one day they actually get a good supply and since their body is used to snorting mostly brickdust or shit like that - they OD on the pure stuff.

At least in a system were drugs are handed out by government, the drugs cost less, so less people getting their houses robbed and the quality of the drug remains at some sort of standard so you have less junkies killing themselves by ODing, As long as the drugs are in government hands you can get them taxed to fuckery as well, benefit the public purse as opposed to straining it with thousands of counter drug police raids, hell the amount of raids around here where people are only selling a bit of weed is stupid, why spend time and money on people that want to get a bit high.

Also drug smugglers are cut out the market if drugs are legalised, so that does away with a good section of criminal enterprise - these nast characters are out of business for good.

Thats what I think anyway, but you can disagree with the badly thought out argument of "FUCK THAT SHIT", just because you dont do hard drugs, doesnt mean that banning everything to the hilt is going to work for people who make it their priority to get high - dangers or not.

Good point, but I don't agree to 100% and clearly the majority doesn't either or else the drugs would be legal, right? That is... if democracy is working as expected.

This is like saying we should just legalize piracy because it costs so much to fight it and it's just unstoppable anyway, people still do it, yada yada. Once we start going that road... we're fucked.

 

[JBroll]

My argument may have not been very good but are you seriously saying that I need a good argument to be against drugs?

Absofuckinglutely. If it's so obvious to you that drugs are bad, you should have no trouble at all finding a good argument. The point was that the argument you gave was in no way attached to drugs.

You've conveniently left out that I don't use drugs or particularly care to associate with those that do. I'm all against criminalization of these substances on the grounds that it doesn't work.

I know that people influence others, but it's entirely possible to use drugs without trampling over others' rights. Since that is possible - and in fact many do just that - I think it's absurd blaming *all* of our problems on drugs and not on irresponsible users.

Not *irresponsible use*, *irresponsible users* - obnoxious fuckheads can make anything look bad, but that's no reason to deprive everyone of something that they've happened to abuse.

As for "people need to be controlled because too many are too stupid"... bullshit. That's quite the amazing mix of arrogance and Orwellian villainy, but doesn't pass as an argument... first, it has been fairly clearly shown that such things *just don't work* in the States and many other places; second, by keeping these hypothetical 'stupid people who need to be controlled' alive, you're attempting (with guaranteed failure) to stop them from taking themselves out of the gene pool. Abolish the fucking war on drugs, burn the fucking warning labels, and let the bastards wipe themselves out - I'm not going to be held responsible for someone too dim to know that the hot coffee they just ordered might be hot or that shoving foreign substances from untrusted sources straight into their veins might be a bad idea.

That is... if democracy is working as expected.

... and what part of the last 30 years of American politics haven't you missed?

As for legalizing 'piracy'... that's such a stretch that you just made the entire U.S. Olympic Gymnastics team shudder. The victims of 'piracy' are not the 'pirates', and the legal right to property (which 'piracy' violates) is guaranteed by just about all modern governments. In no government's founding document, at least to my knowledge, is the phrase "People can download music and shit, yo!"; similarly absent is the phrase "People don't know what they can put into their bodies, so we're going to tell them!" as far as I know.

Jeff

 

[Line666]

Good point, but I don't agree to 100% and clearly the majority doesn't either or else the drugs would be legal, right? That is... if democracy is working as expected.

This is like saying we should just legalize piracy because it costs so much to fight it and it's just unstoppable anyway, people still do it, yada yada. Once we start going that road... we're fucked.

Your analogy is flawed in that piracy is more direct in cause and effect, now I dont want to get into a piracy argument here but it does have a direct effect on the music industry. Some people will argue that its more indirect yadayada, but what I'm getting at is that its not comparible to hard drugs enough to make an analogy out of it, its a different set of circumstances relating to copyright theft as opposed to drug consumption ie one is stealing the other is ingesting/injecting

The only person drugs have an direct effect on is the person that takes them, sure you can spout off about indirect effect - the effect on family, but I've seen families torn apart, kids loose their dads early because of alcohol. Nobodies petitioning for banning booze, I'm not petitioning for the banning of booze, if some fuckwit can't control what he (or she) is putting in and out of their system then, I'm sorry, but its their own problem, there isnt a law banning bleach because it could destroy the fuck out your innards if you were to drink it.

At the end of the day I think what you put into your own body is first and foremost your own personal responsibility, not the responsibility of government unless it is directly having an effect on other people.

As for the whole majority argument, well in a group of people only a few will ever make decisions so ultimately majority decision is influenced by only a select few people anyway, and thats when we come to the question of who benefits from drugs staying illegal, anyway that in itself does not make an argument right or wrong, but arguing purely on the basis that something is in favour at that particular time isnt a legitimate grounds for backing anything - and it certainly doesnt make it right. Many celebrated decisions have went against the status quo and will continue to do so.

 

[JBroll]

The indirect effects of drug *legislation* can be far stronger than the indirect effects of drugs.

Jeff

 

[Erkan]

I know that people influence others, but it's entirely possible to use drugs without trampling over others' rights. Since that is possible - and in fact many do just that - I think it's absurd blaming *all* of our problems on drugs and not on irresponsible users.

At the end of the day I think what you put into your own body is first and foremost your own personal responsibility, not the responsibility of government unless it is directly having an effect on other people.

Fair enough, my "analogy" with the piracy thing wasn't the best but you guys are still claiming that piracy hurts others while not hurting the pirates themselves, and that drugs only hurt the abusers. You are right, piracy hurts others and it doesn't hurt the pirates really, so you are right about that, and therefore the analogy wasn't really applicable but you still seem to think that drugs are OK as long as the person keeps it to himself.

I can never agree with you guys on that point. Drugs have the power to alter your whole fucking personality. How can you claim that drugs can be used responsibly? The only way I see drugs being used responsibly is if you lock yourself in a room and swallow the key, inject yourself with whatever fucking substance you want to, feel like you've accomplished something in life for a few hours until the world comes crashing down on you again, shit the key out, open the door and get out when you're sober. That's responsible drug use since you can't affect anyone else physically. Socially and emotionally, sure, you can still affect others so no matter how you turn it... I can't agree that someone can use drugs without affect the people around them.

 

[Line666]

Fair enough, my "analogy" with the piracy thing wasn't the best but you guys are still claiming that piracy hurts others while not hurting the pirates themselves, and that drugs only hurt the abusers. You are right, piracy hurts others and it doesn't hurt the pirates really, so you are right about that, and therefore the analogy wasn't really applicable but you still seem to think that drugs are OK as long as the person keeps it to himself.

I can never agree with you guys on that point. Drugs have the power to alter your whole fucking personality. How can you claim that drugs can be used responsibly? The only way I see drugs being used responsibly is if you lock yourself in a room and swallow the key, inject yourself with whatever fucking substance you want to, feel like you've accomplished something in life for a few hours until the world comes crashing down on you again, shit the key out, open the door and get out when you're sober. That's responsible drug use since you can't affect anyone else physically. Socially and emotionally, sure, you can still affect others so no matter how you turn it... I can't agree that someone can use drugs without affect the people around them.

Booze alters your personality, it makes a lot of people totally hyper aggressive, you never seen two drunken blokes take swings at each other? We're not telling them to lock themselves in a room. When are you giving up alcohol? It makes people want to fight each other!

Cigarettes alter your personality, people get grumpy and aggressive when they don't get a nicotine fix.

Yet these drugs are still legalised for "responsible use" and we're not for abolishing it any time soon either.

 

[Erkan]

Cigarettes don't make you want to randomly kill someone, and alcohol "probably" only does that to severely mentally disordered people who should be at a clinic anyway. Well, to be honest, I don't know much about drugs and what type of reaction they bring out of people but I'm pretty sure it's more severe than cigarettes and alcohol... hence why those two things are still legal while drugs aren't.

No point in discussing this any further, it's just gotten ridiculous. I still dismiss this whole thing with a "fuck that shit", I don't need a fucking argument for it. Making it legal might have its positive effects such as less money spent on hunting the fuckers down, but I believe the consequences would be pretty severe too.


... still can't believe what's so fucking positive about shooting heroin guys, it's nothing but a temporary wellness followed by a deep dark downward spiral, and it's addictive. It doesn't take an argument to say no to drugs goddamnit, this is stupid.

 

[abyssofdreams]

Requiem For A Dream

 

[JBroll]

Fair enough, my "analogy" with the piracy thing wasn't the best but you guys are still claiming that piracy hurts others while not hurting the pirates themselves, and that drugs only hurt the abusers. You are right, piracy hurts others and it doesn't hurt the pirates really, so you are right about that, and therefore the analogy wasn't really applicable but you still seem to think that drugs are OK as long as the person keeps it to himself.

I can never agree with you guys on that point. Drugs have the power to alter your whole fucking personality. How can you claim that drugs can be used responsibly? The only way I see drugs being used responsibly is if you lock yourself in a room and swallow the key, inject yourself with whatever fucking substance you want to, feel like you've accomplished something in life for a few hours until the world comes crashing down on you again, shit the key out, open the door and get out when you're sober. That's responsible drug use since you can't affect anyone else physically. Socially and emotionally, sure, you can still affect others so no matter how you turn it... I can't agree that someone can use drugs without affect the people around them.

You're leaving out quite a bit of 'It works both ways' with human relationships. If someone is abusive, needy, or generally useless and demands too much of you, you cut them off. If someone completely changes for the worse and you can't stand being around them anymore, you cut them off. Drugs or no drugs, you hold the power to determine who is part of your life and who isn't.

As for my claim that drugs can be used responsibly... see the posts above (specifically the ones mentioning advances in science and mathematics that were helped by drugs - in the words of the users themselves, no less) and note that none of them killed people. You have the burden of proof here, whether you like it or not - unless you can demonstrate that something inherent to a drug results in death and destruction all the time, you're not standing on solid ground.

Once you've admitted that you don't know much about drugs, and that you somehow don't need a good argument against drugs. this is pretty much hopeless - not that I'm going to personally go over and shoot PCP into your eyeballs but *because I fucking hate bad arguments for anything, regardless of the side I'm on*. Life is just too short to be deceived by illogical nonsense.

Jeff