Amsterdam? you smoking crack again? Amsterdam may have a low crime rate but it has nothing to do with legalizing pot. Since you mentioned stats, why don't you produce some and show us the crime rate pre and post legalization. I would for you but the burden of proof is on you. Sorry.
p.s. burdeon of proof? heheheee, oh yeah, you wait here... want some coffee too? how 'bout a nice danish? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>If I could make all illicit drugs disappear from the face of this Earth with the snap of my fingers, I wouldn't even second guess it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Illicit by whose standards? Americas? Amsterdams? My personal standards? Who has the authority to decide what should disappear from the face of the earth?
If you ever get that finger snapping ability though, could you just snap them into my backyard?
Ahh, and for your entertainment, my favorite quote from the government's anti-drug website, freevibe.com:
[quote]IIf you smoke a lot, you could start to lose interest in how you look...<hr></blockquote>
It could make me stop caring about how I look? Jesus no! This isn't government propaganda, targeted at teenagers insecurities, is it? <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: poor taylor ]</p>
I'll drop them into your backyard if you live on a deserted island alone so you could destroy your mind in private.
When I speak of illicit drugs I mean crack, cocaine, heroin, lsd, e and drugs like that.
There's no excuse to do drugs of that sort. To all of you who might think I'm a prude and can't see things from the other side, you're wrong. I did drugs and I regret it. Those brain cells won't come back. Too bad so many people continue to destroy their own
The right to arms is not a right in the UK. Murder and overall gun related violence is a lot less in the UK. So it will be very interesting to see what legalizing pot does over there.
When I speak of illicit drugs I mean crack, cocaine, heroin, lsd, e and drugs like that.
There's no excuse to do drugs of that sort. To all of you who might think I'm a prude and can't see things from the other side, you're wrong. I did drugs and I regret it. Those brain cells won't come back. Too bad so many people continue to destroy their own </strong><hr></blockquote>
Willoughby, just so we're clear here, The Blue Meanie is no way advocating obviously harmful hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, etc. I just think the evidence supports a belief that legalisation of such substances would drastically cut the crime, premature death, black market profits and overall human misery associated with drug prohibition. But there is a difference between legalisation and advocation. We're not talking about downtown crack parlours here. Removing the criminal penalties associated with hard drugs would not mean that governments would be advocating their consumption. Does the fact that cigarettes are legal mean the government advocates cigarette smoking? I thought there was a health warning on every packet?
[ 04-06-2002: Message edited by: The Blue Meanie ]</p>
Our society would certainly be better suited to rehabilitate perpetual drug abusers if we didn't have to concern ourselves with arresting them, going through trials, appeals, and eventually paying for them to rot in a cell. Obviously the threat of prison has not exactly succeeded as a deterrent to this sort of crime.
<strong>Our society would certainly be better suited to rehabilitate perpetual drug abusers if we didn't have to concern ourselves with arresting them, going through trials, appeals, and eventually paying for them to rot in a cell. Obviously the threat of prison has not exactly succeeded as a deterrent to this sort of crime.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You might be onto something there, poor taylor.
BTW - what is this "city with the porn star name"?
Personally i believe that if you legalize drugs you'll eliminate some problems in how society treats drug abusers while opening up other problems. You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.
Saying that "Hard drugs" (defined as phsyically addictive, toxic, damaging tissue etc.) should be legalised for medical uses is ridiculous.
If a drug could be used safely as a medical aid, it should not be called a hardcore drug.
Legalising soft drugs, Marijuana and the rest of the hallucinogens is one thing but allowing the public to poisen themselves with lethal chemicals is most certainly another.... although thanks to current drug policy it happens anyway.
<strong>Saying that "Hard drugs" (defined as phsyically addictive, toxic, damaging tissue etc.) should be legalised for medical uses is ridiculous.
If a drug could be used safely as a medical aid, it should not be called a hardcore drug.
Legalising soft drugs, Marijuana and the rest of the hallucinogens is one thing but allowing the public to poisen themselves with lethal chemicals is most certainly another.... although thanks to current drug policy it happens anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who said hard drugs should be legalised for "medical uses", digitalmonkeyboy? Certainly not The Blue Meanie...
[quote]Who said hard drugs should be legalised for "medical uses", digitalmonkeyboy? Certainly not The Blue Meanie...<hr></blockquote>
There's thousands of 'hard drugs' legalized for medical use! One example: barbiturates and their substitutes (ativan etc) are doled out like candy by physicians all over the nation (under pressure by the manufacturers), and perhaps 10s of millions of Americans are addicted. The withdrawal symptoms from these (over)prescribed substances make heroin/morphine withdrawal seem like a walk in the park. But the pharmaceutical industry's profits keep rolling in from this captive market of addicts and the FDA ignores the problems. Business as usual; some pushers are OK, whilst others go to jail.
SamJoOll, your penchant for hyperbole often makes a perfectly reasonable claim seem ridiculous. If you'd tone down the rhetoric a tiny bit you'd be a hell of a lot more convincing.
[quote]SamJoOll, your penchant for hyperbole often makes a perfectly reasonable claim seem ridiculous. If you'd tone down the rhetoric a tiny bit you'd be a hell of a lot more convincing.<hr></blockquote>
Perhaps I am as skeptical of the the integrity of the powers-that-be as you are trusting.
Comments
but yer the curious one...
sorry,
cuss
p.s. burdeon of proof? heheheee, oh yeah, you wait here... want some coffee too? how 'bout a nice danish? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
p.p.p.s. and uh, what am i proving again? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>If I could make all illicit drugs disappear from the face of this Earth with the snap of my fingers, I wouldn't even second guess it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Illicit by whose standards? Americas? Amsterdams? My personal standards? Who has the authority to decide what should disappear from the face of the earth?
If you ever get that finger snapping ability though, could you just snap them into my backyard?
Ahh, and for your entertainment, my favorite quote from the government's anti-drug website, freevibe.com:
[quote]IIf you smoke a lot, you could start to lose interest in how you look...<hr></blockquote>
It could make me stop caring about how I look? Jesus no! This isn't government propaganda, targeted at teenagers insecurities, is it? <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: poor taylor ]</p>
When I speak of illicit drugs I mean crack, cocaine, heroin, lsd, e and drugs like that.
There's no excuse to do drugs of that sort. To all of you who might think I'm a prude and can't see things from the other side, you're wrong. I did drugs and I regret it. Those brain cells won't come back. Too bad so many people continue to destroy their own
Where do you draw the line? I'm genuinely curious; i don't mean to come across as just argumentative.
<strong>
The right to arms is not a right in the UK. Murder and overall gun related violence is a lot less in the UK. So it will be very interesting to see what legalizing pot does over there.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly!
<strong>
When I speak of illicit drugs I mean crack, cocaine, heroin, lsd, e and drugs like that.
There's no excuse to do drugs of that sort. To all of you who might think I'm a prude and can't see things from the other side, you're wrong. I did drugs and I regret it. Those brain cells won't come back. Too bad so many people continue to destroy their own
Willoughby, just so we're clear here, The Blue Meanie is no way advocating obviously harmful hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, etc. I just think the evidence supports a belief that legalisation of such substances would drastically cut the crime, premature death, black market profits and overall human misery associated with drug prohibition. But there is a difference between legalisation and advocation. We're not talking about downtown crack parlours here. Removing the criminal penalties associated with hard drugs would not mean that governments would be advocating their consumption. Does the fact that cigarettes are legal mean the government advocates cigarette smoking? I thought there was a health warning on every packet?
[ 04-06-2002: Message edited by: The Blue Meanie ]</p>
<strong>Our society would certainly be better suited to rehabilitate perpetual drug abusers if we didn't have to concern ourselves with arresting them, going through trials, appeals, and eventually paying for them to rot in a cell. Obviously the threat of prison has not exactly succeeded as a deterrent to this sort of crime.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You might be onto something there, poor taylor.
BTW - what is this "city with the porn star name"?
Personally i believe that if you legalize drugs you'll eliminate some problems in how society treats drug abusers while opening up other problems. You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.
If a drug could be used safely as a medical aid, it should not be called a hardcore drug.
Legalising soft drugs, Marijuana and the rest of the hallucinogens is one thing but allowing the public to poisen themselves with lethal chemicals is most certainly another.... although thanks to current drug policy it happens anyway.
<strong>Saying that "Hard drugs" (defined as phsyically addictive, toxic, damaging tissue etc.) should be legalised for medical uses is ridiculous.
If a drug could be used safely as a medical aid, it should not be called a hardcore drug.
Legalising soft drugs, Marijuana and the rest of the hallucinogens is one thing but allowing the public to poisen themselves with lethal chemicals is most certainly another.... although thanks to current drug policy it happens anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who said hard drugs should be legalised for "medical uses", digitalmonkeyboy? Certainly not The Blue Meanie...
<strong>Outsider always wondered why the Blue Meanie speaks of himself in the 3rd person... It's mighty odd.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gets the name out.
There's thousands of 'hard drugs' legalized for medical use! One example: barbiturates and their substitutes (ativan etc) are doled out like candy by physicians all over the nation (under pressure by the manufacturers), and perhaps 10s of millions of Americans are addicted. The withdrawal symptoms from these (over)prescribed substances make heroin/morphine withdrawal seem like a walk in the park. But the pharmaceutical industry's profits keep rolling in from this captive market of addicts and the FDA ignores the problems. Business as usual; some pushers are OK, whilst others go to jail.
Ketracel
Perhaps I am as skeptical of the the integrity of the powers-that-be as you are trusting.
Rats! Then I'm against legalisation.
SJO: Groverat's saying that you post has merit, but is worded so over the top, it becomes dismissable BS.