What point are you trying to make?If drugs were sold by the government I imagine there would still have to be a black market but to a much lesser extent.
The government would have pretty tight regulations on the sale including age limits, quantity and quality.
So you would still have kids who want access to drugs.
You would still have users who want to try the latest high i.e new drugs not yet approved by the government
and you would still have users who wanted more than was allowed.
Should drug dealing be illegal?
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
I was just giving an example of why a black market would still exist even if drugs were legal and sold by the government.
I guess what I'm saying is that the government would never supply drugs in the way a dealer does and so there would still be a black market to cater for the people who want to do the more dangerous stuff not approved by the government.
Why do heroin addicts still by from dealers when they can get methadone from the chemist at a fraction of the cost?
I guess what I'm saying is that the government would never supply drugs in the way a dealer does and so there would still be a black market to cater for the people who want to do the more dangerous stuff not approved by the government.
Why do heroin addicts still by from dealers when they can get methadone from the chemist at a fraction of the cost?
Scott Kirchner
http://www.ausfootbag.org
http://www.ausfootbag.org
-
shredzilla
- Post Master General
- Posts: 3260
- Joined: 14 Oct 2005 06:24
- Location: Paradise Lost
- Contact:
When considering what drugs are legal and what aren't, t's a matter of what stuffy people who make laws find acceptable. Alcohol(drug)-Dealing is legal, and widely accepted. Yes it kills tens of thousands of people per year. Yes it makes people act really stupid and do things they normally would never do. But it's accepted.
Type-A personality people are generally the types that go into these law-making positions. And they're the ones who love their dry martinis and their scotch on the rocks. They're not real big into marijuana, that's only done by slacker Type-B people. Although, I'm thankful that this trend has been seen to change in more western and liberal states. CA and CO for example have pretty much reduced the punishment to that of a traffic ticket.
Other street drugs I personally feel are unacceptable for legalization myself. I don't want people openly being high on crack, heroin, PCP, LSD, or mushrooms.
Doctors have proven one drink a day to be actually healthy for the human body. There are already fairly strict laws in place when it comes to recklessly dealing this drug. If a person goes and causes an accident, and the bartender should have cut that person off, the bartender AND bar owner can be held liable. However, these establishments have licenses to deal alcohol.
Do I think street-level dealing should be legal? If you can come up with a good way to control it, then yes. Otherwise your argument falls under the 'Should we even have a government' category. If we have a government, then we have an ordered society. And in an ordered society, things of this nature have to be accounted for.
Type-A personality people are generally the types that go into these law-making positions. And they're the ones who love their dry martinis and their scotch on the rocks. They're not real big into marijuana, that's only done by slacker Type-B people. Although, I'm thankful that this trend has been seen to change in more western and liberal states. CA and CO for example have pretty much reduced the punishment to that of a traffic ticket.
Other street drugs I personally feel are unacceptable for legalization myself. I don't want people openly being high on crack, heroin, PCP, LSD, or mushrooms.
Doctors have proven one drink a day to be actually healthy for the human body. There are already fairly strict laws in place when it comes to recklessly dealing this drug. If a person goes and causes an accident, and the bartender should have cut that person off, the bartender AND bar owner can be held liable. However, these establishments have licenses to deal alcohol.
Do I think street-level dealing should be legal? If you can come up with a good way to control it, then yes. Otherwise your argument falls under the 'Should we even have a government' category. If we have a government, then we have an ordered society. And in an ordered society, things of this nature have to be accounted for.
J. Chris "Thread-killer" Miller
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
Dude, I don't think you have much of a grasp over this topic. Sure a small black market would still exist even if legalizationo ccured, just like their is still a small black market for alchohol these days, but think of how small a market bootleggers have now. It's almost non-existant, especially compared to the glory days of prohibition.I was just giving an example of why a black market would still exist even if drugs were legal and sold by the government.
I guess what I'm saying is that the government would never supply drugs in the way a dealer does and so there would still be a black market to cater for the people who want to do the more dangerous stuff not approved by the government.
Why do heroin addicts still by from dealers when they can get methadone from the chemist at a fraction of the cost?
And why wouldn't the government supply drugs the same way a dealer does? As far as I can tell with the other drugs the government sells, they could supply drugs much more efficiently and in larger numbers than a street dealer.
Heroin and methadone are two very different drugs, with different effects, different withdrawl symptoms, and different prices. That isn't even the point though, because heroin addicts can't just get methadone from "the chemist" (Whoever the hell this chemist is), like they would other perscription drugs. Plus, the punishments are very different for dealing heroin and methadone. I would know, since I got pulled over with 14 tabs of methadone in my pocket. Needless to say, I probably wouldn't be typing this right ow if it would've been heroin.
I don't want people being drunk in public either, which is why I'm glad their are laws against public intoxication. What drugs people do in their own homes I don't care about, but yeah, being high on the aformentioned drugs wouldn't work in public.Other street drugs I personally feel are unacceptable for legalization myself. I don't want people openly being high on crack, heroin, PCP, LSD, or mushrooms.
Someone on either of these drugs is about 100 times less likely to injure you or themselves than if they were drunk. I know, I've been there. I've hurt myself many times when intoxicated, and its always been doing something stupid while drunk. When on a hallucinogenic drug such as the two listed, most people would rather stay at home, and if they go out, would end up sitting in a park, not causing mayhem in the streets (like drunks).shredzilla wrote: Other street drugs I personally feel are unacceptable for legalization myself. I don't want people openly being high on LSD, or mushrooms.
People also sometimes say that these drugs can make you overdose. Guess what, you can overdose on Tylenol. Controlled intake regulated by the government would make these drugs much safer for the user, first by regulating content, second by protecting users from unnecessary jail time just for having fun.
-
shredzilla
- Post Master General
- Posts: 3260
- Joined: 14 Oct 2005 06:24
- Location: Paradise Lost
- Contact:
Posessing LSD is a charge called 'Conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. Government' which carries (I believe) 10 years in jail as a minimum, but that seems kinda high. When on PCP, LSD, or Psyllicybin, depending on the dosage, one will enter such a halucinatory state, that that person will not percieve reality the way a sober person, or even a drunk person would.
In such a state, this person may go out and run over random pedestrians or kill people for fun. Alcohol will make you black out before you would ever achieve this sense of altered perception. You may 'accidently' kill someone, ie. drunk driving, but unlike the hallucinagens, you won't do it purposefully under a false sense of lucid reality. Point blank, no dose of alcohol will cause you to do that, because you lose your sense of lucidity long before psychosis incurs.
I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal. I personally have feelings that things would be swell if it were illegal. But as a whole, it is much less dangerous than hallucinagens, and these drugs should stay illegal.
In such a state, this person may go out and run over random pedestrians or kill people for fun. Alcohol will make you black out before you would ever achieve this sense of altered perception. You may 'accidently' kill someone, ie. drunk driving, but unlike the hallucinagens, you won't do it purposefully under a false sense of lucid reality. Point blank, no dose of alcohol will cause you to do that, because you lose your sense of lucidity long before psychosis incurs.
I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal. I personally have feelings that things would be swell if it were illegal. But as a whole, it is much less dangerous than hallucinagens, and these drugs should stay illegal.
J. Chris "Thread-killer" Miller
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
Hahahahahaha. Dude. You've obviously never done PCP or LSD. Run over random pedestrians? Where do you get this shit from?Posessing LSD is a charge called 'Conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. Government' which carries (I believe) 10 years in jail as a minimum, but that seems kinda high. When on PCP, LSD, or Psyllicybin, depending on the dosage, one will enter such a halucinatory state, that that person will not percieve reality the way a sober person, or even a drunk person would.
In such a state, this person may go out and run over random pedestrians or kill people for fun. Alcohol will make you black out before you would ever achieve this sense of altered perception. You may 'accidently' kill someone, ie. drunk driving, but unlike the hallucinagens, you won't do it purposefully under a false sense of lucid reality. Point blank, no dose of alcohol will cause you to do that, because you lose your sense of lucidity long before psychosis incurs.
I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal. I personally have feelings that things would be swell if it were illegal. But as a whole, it is much less dangerous than hallucinagens, and these drugs should stay illegal.
So much drug propaganda out there that even people who are generally intelligent by into it.
Sure PCP can cause you to be violent, just like alchohol can cause you to beat your wife. PCP also can make you very calm and passionate.
Don't believe the hype
You wanna know what they thought marijuana did to people who smoked it in the 30's? They thought it made you insanely violent and hack up people who you were friends with 10 minutes ago. Sounds familiar doesn't it?
Reefer Madness: http://youtube.com/watch?v=bM_vLk1I6G4& ... %20madness[/url]
Do your research before you talk about things which are completely out of your experience. I'm not bigging up drugs (especially Pcp) but this entire post is a re-hashing of government propaganda, aimed at increasing sales of THEIR drugs (alcohol, nicotine, pain killers). If you are against some drugs, be against all drugs.shredzilla wrote:Posessing LSD is a charge called 'Conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. Government' which carries (I believe) 10 years in jail as a minimum, but that seems kinda high. When on PCP, LSD, or Psyllicybin, depending on the dosage, one will enter such a halucinatory state, that that person will not percieve reality the way a sober person, or even a drunk person would.
In such a state, this person may go out and run over random pedestrians or kill people for fun. Alcohol will make you black out before you would ever achieve this sense of altered perception. You may 'accidently' kill someone, ie. drunk driving, but unlike the hallucinagens, you won't do it purposefully under a false sense of lucid reality. Point blank, no dose of alcohol will cause you to do that, because you lose your sense of lucidity long before psychosis incurs.
I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal. I personally have feelings that things would be swell if it were illegal. But as a whole, it is much less dangerous than hallucinagens, and these drugs should stay illegal.
Open your mind...get the facts. This site is super unbiased. Check out any drug and it will tell you the negative effects too, not just how high you get.
www.erowid.com
-
shredzilla
- Post Master General
- Posts: 3260
- Joined: 14 Oct 2005 06:24
- Location: Paradise Lost
- Contact:
Why do you assume that these things are completely out of my experience? It's a known fact that hallucinagenics are capable of instating a lucid altered reality in which the subject can exist completely separately from this reality. A sponge could appear to be food to this person for example. You are fooling yourself if you think hallucinagens do not induce these effects. It depends on the dose, but a person on PCP, LSD, Psyllocybin can believe they can fly, and go plummeting to their death. Or they can believe that everyone is out to get them, and begin to kill people around them. If you don't believe me, YOU do the research. There are documented cases of this happening. Of course it doesn't happen all the time, because the variables aren't suited for it. But if LSD were legal, and you had lots of stupid people doing it, there would be a certain percentage that would fall into altered lucid reality and kill themselves or other people on a bad day.Slowsis wrote: Do your research before you talk about things which are completely out of your experience. I'm not bigging up drugs (especially Pcp) but this entire post is a re-hashing of government propaganda, aimed at increasing sales of THEIR drugs (alcohol, nicotine, pain killers). If you are against some drugs, be against all drugs.
Open your mind...get the facts. This site is super unbiased. Check out any drug and it will tell you the negative effects too, not just how high you get.
www.erowid.com
In response to your 'be against all drugs or none' statement, that's completely absurd. I'm against eating poison ivy. Should I be against eating all plants in that case?
J. Chris "Thread-killer" Miller
Daniel,
to clear up the methadone reference, in Australia if you go and see a doctor and tell them you are a heroin addict you can register for a methadone program where you can go to the chemist every day and pay $5 for methadone, which is considerably cheaper than the $100 they would probably have spent buying heroin.
The methadone is supposed to replace the need for heroin but unfortunately it hasn't been successful because most heroin users still want the high that heroin gives.
Why wouldn't the government supply drugs the same way a dealer does?
Because the government would be required to ensure the drugs were safe otherwise they would be flooded with law suites for compensation for every drug overdose. And by making the drugs safe they would alter the effects that users gained from using the drugs so users would most likely still want to buy their drugs from someone who can give them a good high not a safe alternative.
Slowsis,
sure you can overdose on Tylenol but that is completely different to the danger of taking recreational drugs. People taking Tylenol will usually take the prescribed amount, because they want to help their cold, not get high. People taking recreational drugs are not going to follow the government recommended dosage, because they want to get high, and taking more increases the risk of overdose. There is an inherent risk in the use of recreational drugs whether they are supplied by dealers or government.
to clear up the methadone reference, in Australia if you go and see a doctor and tell them you are a heroin addict you can register for a methadone program where you can go to the chemist every day and pay $5 for methadone, which is considerably cheaper than the $100 they would probably have spent buying heroin.
The methadone is supposed to replace the need for heroin but unfortunately it hasn't been successful because most heroin users still want the high that heroin gives.
Why wouldn't the government supply drugs the same way a dealer does?
Because the government would be required to ensure the drugs were safe otherwise they would be flooded with law suites for compensation for every drug overdose. And by making the drugs safe they would alter the effects that users gained from using the drugs so users would most likely still want to buy their drugs from someone who can give them a good high not a safe alternative.
Slowsis,
sure you can overdose on Tylenol but that is completely different to the danger of taking recreational drugs. People taking Tylenol will usually take the prescribed amount, because they want to help their cold, not get high. People taking recreational drugs are not going to follow the government recommended dosage, because they want to get high, and taking more increases the risk of overdose. There is an inherent risk in the use of recreational drugs whether they are supplied by dealers or government.
Scott Kirchner
http://www.ausfootbag.org
http://www.ausfootbag.org
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
In my opinion, methadone is more dangerous than heroin, and trying to get a druggie off one drug by using another, more addictive one is just silly. Heroin isn't even that addictive, but methadone is the kind of shit that makes you start clawing at the floor if you don't have a fix. Methadone turns a better profit as well.to clear up the methadone reference, in Australia if you go and see a doctor and tell them you are a heroin addict you can register for a methadone program where you can go to the chemist every day and pay $5 for methadone, which is considerably cheaper than the $100 they would probably have spent buying heroin.
The methadone is supposed to replace the need for heroin but unfortunately it hasn't been successful because most heroin users still want the high that heroin gives.
Drugs sold by the government would hardly be a "safe alternative". I don't know where you're getting your logic, but government sold alchohol and tobacco are hardly safe by any sense of the word. If drugs were legal, lawsuits wouldn't be pending because, from the get go, no advertisement for drugs would be allowed in the media by law, and thus the companies couldn't be held responsible. If the law allows for loop holes, then their is the potential for frivolous lawsuits, but if it's done right it wouldn't be an issue. Not that that is even an argument against legalization anyways, but whatever.Because the government would be required to ensure the drugs were safe otherwise they would be flooded with law suites for compensation for every drug overdose. And by making the drugs safe they would alter the effects that users gained from using the drugs so users would most likely still want to buy their drugs from someone who can give them a good high not a safe alternative.
About your opinion on "altering the effects" for the user, I don't know what your history with drugs are, but that just isn't really how it works. If anything, drug potency would only get better because cultivation would be mastered by competetive companies who want to turn more of a profit than the next company. Basically, your logic fails because the main safety issue (Outside of the drugs innate side-effects that are bad for the health) with street dealers is that their shit is cut with other drugs, and that the user isn't aware of the shit added to them. This would be eliminated if it was government sanctioned, thus making things better for everyone.
Your argument is a non-argument in the first place because a government seeking to legalize drugs wouldn't be interested in watering them down to make them safer for the user.
The bottom line is, if we trust people enough to take the perscribed amount of tylenol, then we would be hypocritical not to trust them to take the reccomened amount of cocaine or any other drug. Sure their is a higher chance of addiction with cocaine in comparision to tylenol, which could lead to higher overdose rates, but that isn't an issue here because it isn't my concern whether someone OD's on either of the drugs.sure you can overdose on Tylenol but that is completely different to the danger of taking recreational drugs. People taking Tylenol will usually take the prescribed amount, because they want to help their cold, not get high. People taking recreational drugs are not going to follow the government recommended dosage, because they want to get high, and taking more increases the risk of overdose. There is an inherent risk in the use of recreational drugs whether they are supplied by dealers or government.
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
Capable of instating an altered reality? That's the point dude. That's the point of all drugs. Tylenol doesn't actually cure your headache, it just puts you into an altered reality where you feel as if what is causing your headache is gone. PK's don't cure your pain, they just put you into a reality where you don't feel the pain. I don't know what context you're using "lucid" in either.It's a known fact that hallucinagenics are capable of instating a lucid altered reality in which the subject can exist completely separately from this reality.
Reports of accidental deaths attributed to LSD as Psy are way over exagerated.It depends on the dose, but a person on PCP, LSD, Psyllocybin can believe they can fly, and go plummeting to their death.
Who says more people would do it if it were legal? Their is actually evidence counter to this claim.But if LSD were legal, and you had lots of stupid people doing it, there would be a certain percentage that would fall into altered lucid reality and kill themselves or other people on a bad day.
This is a strawman argument. Look it up.In response to your 'be against all drugs or none' statement, that's completely absurd. I'm against eating poison ivy. Should I be against eating all plants in that case?
Here you go Dan......a little research to further tear these arguments a new one.
How many people are stabbed or shot in an average big cities club district because a drunk person is in a state of altered reality? Tons!!!
And would you care to produce some sources citing Lsd as the reason of a murder? I googled "Lsd murder" and "lsd violence" and this is what I found.
---------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309050804/html/404.html
--------------------------------------------------------
"REICH, R and HEPPS, R. B. 1972. Homicide During a Psychosis Induced by LSD. Journal of American Medical Association 219:869-71
From Siegel's Intoxication (p 240): The cases of Jeffery and Harold, who killed people after having taken LSD, are presented.
"Cases like Harold's tend to confuse the issue of intoxication and violence. Violent people are often intoxicated but the violence is usually rooted in the personality, not the drug." "
--------------------------------------------------------
Oh wait.....one source that says Lsd can cause violence!
http://www.frankolsonproject.org/Studen ... ephan.html
....whoops.....it was written by a ten year old
-----------------------------------------------------------
The DEA website has a couple cited cases against murder while on LSD, but upon further research I found no other sources that substantiated these claims.
----------------------------------------------------------
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?sectio ... id=1222750
Here's one......but read the end of the article........his friend had already heard him talking about hurting them.
-----------------------------------------------------------
That's just Lsd...but somehow i feel like it would be the same for many "dangerous" drugs.
Now don't you think with the HUGE bias in the US legal system and media, that all cases of violence on drugs would be hyper-publicized?
That's off topic though!!!
When it comes to the trafficking of drugs, I believe it should be illegal. Just like cooking up your own codeine in your basement is illegal. Or how making potato moonshine in your basement is illegal. Not because the true product is particularily harmful, but because the purity is in question.
How many people are stabbed or shot in an average big cities club district because a drunk person is in a state of altered reality? Tons!!!
And would you care to produce some sources citing Lsd as the reason of a murder? I googled "Lsd murder" and "lsd violence" and this is what I found.
---------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309050804/html/404.html
--------------------------------------------------------
"REICH, R and HEPPS, R. B. 1972. Homicide During a Psychosis Induced by LSD. Journal of American Medical Association 219:869-71
From Siegel's Intoxication (p 240): The cases of Jeffery and Harold, who killed people after having taken LSD, are presented.
"Cases like Harold's tend to confuse the issue of intoxication and violence. Violent people are often intoxicated but the violence is usually rooted in the personality, not the drug." "
--------------------------------------------------------
Oh wait.....one source that says Lsd can cause violence!
http://www.frankolsonproject.org/Studen ... ephan.html
....whoops.....it was written by a ten year old
-----------------------------------------------------------
The DEA website has a couple cited cases against murder while on LSD, but upon further research I found no other sources that substantiated these claims.
----------------------------------------------------------
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?sectio ... id=1222750
Here's one......but read the end of the article........his friend had already heard him talking about hurting them.
-----------------------------------------------------------
That's just Lsd...but somehow i feel like it would be the same for many "dangerous" drugs.
Now don't you think with the HUGE bias in the US legal system and media, that all cases of violence on drugs would be hyper-publicized?
That's off topic though!!!
When it comes to the trafficking of drugs, I believe it should be illegal. Just like cooking up your own codeine in your basement is illegal. Or how making potato moonshine in your basement is illegal. Not because the true product is particularily harmful, but because the purity is in question.
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
Oh wait.....one source that says Lsd can cause violence!
http://www.frankolsonproject.org/Studen ... ephan.html
....whoops.....it was written by a ten year old
I did time in juvy, have 150 hrs of community service, and will be on high risk probation till im 18, and no one can explain to me why. all because i was a fair, honest, capitalistic, business man. fucking socialist pinko government is trying to hold me down.
-
BainbridgeShred
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2352
- Joined: 10 Nov 2004 23:22
Yeah right, like a judge is gonna let me emancipate myself now. Besides, I get three square meals a day at home, plus chips and shit. Those Krinkle cut shits are delish.
I was considering going to sesh, but I'd have to be sure that Justin wasn't there because I wouldn't want him giving me a hard time for dropping shred. Justin intimidates me (No homo).
I was considering going to sesh, but I'd have to be sure that Justin wasn't there because I wouldn't want him giving me a hard time for dropping shred. Justin intimidates me (No homo).
-
Sporatical_Distractions
- registered sacks offender
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: 12 Oct 2004 19:14
- Location: Guy's American Kitchen & Bar
i am a million times more likely to hurt someone when i'm drunk than when i'm trippinngBainbridgeShred wrote: depending on the dosage, one will enter such a halucinatory state, that that person will not percieve reality the way a sober person, or even a drunk person would.
In such a state, this person may go out and run over random pedestrians or kill people for fun. Alcohol will make you black out before you would ever achieve this sense of altered perception.
Welcome to Flavortown
Kevin Crowley
Kevin Crowley
-
Sporatical_Distractions
- registered sacks offender
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: 12 Oct 2004 19:14
- Location: Guy's American Kitchen & Bar
sorry for the double post but...every country that has legalized a specific drug, has also seen decreased use in that drug. e.g: holland (marijuana)BainbridgeShred wrote: Who says more people would do it if it were legal? Their is actually evidence counter to this claim.
Welcome to Flavortown
Kevin Crowley
Kevin Crowley