Total Posts:64|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Fight Drug Cartel DECRIMIMALIZE ALL DRUGS.

Face-of-the-deep
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 4:23:27 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

there was a recent thread Drug Wars I think it was, there definitely needs to be some judicial reform for this issue, however decriminalize doesn't equal legal and even guns and their ownership have limitations,, I highly doubt this will ever be addressed any time soon, unless individual states choose to do it themselves, and some have in certain instances.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 4:27:35 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

2 threads exist. One gained traction one didn't get adequate input. Most have already weighed in, overwhelmingly in favor
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 6:49:28 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
What is needed is to be invented is a drug that can get you high like an opiate, but is not addictive, and the side effects are not too bad.
It is the job of the pharmaceutical industry to do this. Considering they are permitted to use price gouging until the patent runs out, and they have made healthcare unaffordable for so many, they certainly owe it to us.
They could sell this drug without a prescription at Walmart, and the cartels would be out of business.
TeaPatriot
Posts: 203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 11:01:09 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

You have to consider the effects of legalixing substances

Amsterdam legalized marijuana and are now having a problem with students shoeing up to school high as well as thr young population getting their hands on it more easily
Chairman of Economic Forum Recovery
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 2:37:59 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 11:01:09 PM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

You have to consider the effects of legalixing substances

Amsterdam legalized marijuana and are now having a problem with students shoeing up to school high as well as thr young population getting their hands on it more easily

Typical ignorant response of somebody who doesn't know diddly squat about drugs. Wake up dude, kids are high all over American school campuses as well. When i was in high school, my friends and i smoked up every day before class. And for You to say it is easier to get your hands on it is flat out stupid, since anybody who wants it can get it any time they want. Especially in school. You obviously haven't thought more than ten seconds on the issue, just regurgitating your conservative talking points without any evidence or logic behind it.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
TeaPatriot
Posts: 203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 11:46:48 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/13/2016 2:37:59 AM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 10/12/2016 11:01:09 PM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

You have to consider the effects of legalixing substances

Amsterdam legalized marijuana and are now having a problem with students shoeing up to school high as well as thr young population getting their hands on it more easily

Typical ignorant response of somebody who doesn't know diddly squat about drugs. Wake up dude, kids are high all over American school campuses as well. When i was in high school, my friends and i smoked up every day before class. And for You to say it is easier to get your hands on it is flat out stupid, since anybody who wants it can get it any time they want. Especially in school. You obviously haven't thought more than ten seconds on the issue, just regurgitating your conservative talking points without any evidence or logic behind it.

And you obviosuly rude and using anecdotal evidence

If you make it legal its easier to get your hands on it. I dont think america should legalize any more substances that causes brain problems and lowering of iq
Chairman of Economic Forum Recovery
yelekam
Posts: 19
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.
yelekam
Posts: 19
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 1:35:58 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 6:49:28 PM, xus00HAY wrote:
What is needed is to be invented is a drug that can get you high like an opiate, but is not addictive, and the side effects are not too bad.
It is the job of the pharmaceutical industry to do this. Considering they are permitted to use price gouging until the patent runs out, and they have made healthcare unaffordable for so many, they certainly owe it to us.
They could sell this drug without a prescription at Walmart, and the cartels would be out of business.

What we need is for people to morally and intellectually progress, so that they are sensible enough to not use intoxicants. The biggest problem with intoxicants is mental distortion, which is inherent to intoxicants. All intoxicant need to be eradicated.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 2:26:34 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/13/2016 11:46:48 AM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/13/2016 2:37:59 AM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 10/12/2016 11:01:09 PM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

You have to consider the effects of legalixing substances

Amsterdam legalized marijuana and are now having a problem with students shoeing up to school high as well as thr young population getting their hands on it more easily

Typical ignorant response of somebody who doesn't know diddly squat about drugs. Wake up dude, kids are high all over American school campuses as well. When i was in high school, my friends and i smoked up every day before class. And for You to say it is easier to get your hands on it is flat out stupid, since anybody who wants it can get it any time they want. Especially in school. You obviously haven't thought more than ten seconds on the issue, just regurgitating your conservative talking points without any evidence or logic behind it.

And you obviosuly rude and using anecdotal evidence

Sorry. This is the one subject I am unable to be calm about. When I hear somebody talk like you are, I feel like I am being attacked personally. I only smoke once in a blue moon these days, but I spent 20 years smoking weed and I dealt with a lot of trouble with police during that time because of a stupid law that pits people like me against police. It sickens me that people would justify the imprisonment, support of the drug cartels, invigorating the counterculture against police, and the wasted money on a phony war against our own citizens.

If you make it legal its easier to get your hands on it.

Is there anybody who wishes to use it now that doesn't because they cant get their hands on it? And even if there were, what right do you have to tell them what they can ingest? Is this the land of the free or an Orwellian culture?

I dont think america should legalize any more substances that causes brain problems and lowering of iq

Ok so what about
-caffeine
-nicotine/cigarettes
-alcohol
-spraypaint(huffing)
-glue
-whippets (nitrous oxide cartridges)
-prescription drugs being mishandled

Should we prohibit all these? What about the chemicals under your sink? The preservatives and additives in your food?
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 2:28:01 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/13/2016 1:35:58 PM, yelekam wrote:
At 10/12/2016 6:49:28 PM, xus00HAY wrote:
What is needed is to be invented is a drug that can get you high like an opiate, but is not addictive, and the side effects are not too bad.
It is the job of the pharmaceutical industry to do this. Considering they are permitted to use price gouging until the patent runs out, and they have made healthcare unaffordable for so many, they certainly owe it to us.
They could sell this drug without a prescription at Walmart, and the cartels would be out of business.

What we need is for people to morally and intellectually progress, so that they are sensible enough to not use intoxicants. The biggest problem with intoxicants is mental distortion, which is inherent to intoxicants. All intoxicant need to be eradicated.

You should also answer the question I just asked teapatriot. Which chemicals should be prohibited?
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 10:48:21 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.

I don't necessarily buy the availability argument. I have heard it, seen studies on it. Tobacco is the most widely available there is. It's use is significantly down. Now I'm trying to say because tobacco use is reduced everything will be. But I am saying that legal availability may/may not translate to increased use.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 10:51:53 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 10:48:21 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.

I don't necessarily buy the availability argument. I have heard it, seen studies on it. Tobacco is the most widely available there is. It's use is significantly down. Now I'm trying to say because tobacco use is reduced everything will be. But I am saying that legal availability may/may not translate to increased use.

Increasing taxes on tobbaco e.g. in Australia, directly correlates with the fall in use.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 11:11:27 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 10:51:53 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:48:21 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.

I don't necessarily buy the availability argument. I have heard it, seen studies on it. Tobacco is the most widely available there is. It's use is significantly down. Now I'm trying to say because tobacco use is reduced everything will be. But I am saying that legal availability may/may not translate to increased use.

Increasing taxes on tobbaco e.g. in Australia, directly correlates with the fall in use.

This isn't Australia. also you just contradicted yourself: increase tax increases price? Previous post said lower prices.

If you don't live in the IS, you don't lng w our drug consumption. A gram of heroin is $20 more than a case of beer
TeaPatriot
Posts: 203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 11:16:11 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 2:26:34 AM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 10/13/2016 11:46:48 AM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/13/2016 2:37:59 AM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 10/12/2016 11:01:09 PM, TeaPatriot wrote:
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want. By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment. At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.
For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted but also the drugs may be contaminated.
What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker.

You have to consider the effects of legalixing substances

Amsterdam legalized marijuana and are now having a problem with students shoeing up to school high as well as thr young population getting their hands on it more easily

Typical ignorant response of somebody who doesn't know diddly squat about drugs. Wake up dude, kids are high all over American school campuses as well. When i was in high school, my friends and i smoked up every day before class. And for You to say it is easier to get your hands on it is flat out stupid, since anybody who wants it can get it any time they want. Especially in school. You obviously haven't thought more than ten seconds on the issue, just regurgitating your conservative talking points without any evidence or logic behind it.

And you obviosuly rude and using anecdotal evidence

Sorry. This is the one subject I am unable to be calm about. When I hear somebody talk like you are, I feel like I am being attacked personally. I only smoke once in a blue moon these days, but I spent 20 years smoking weed and I dealt with a lot of trouble with police during that time because of a stupid law that pits people like me against police. It sickens me that people would justify the imprisonment, support of the drug cartels, invigorating the counterculture against police, and the wasted money on a phony war against our own citizens.

If you make it legal its easier to get your hands on it.

Is there anybody who wishes to use it now that doesn't because they cant get their hands on it? And even if there were, what right do you have to tell them what they can ingest? Is this the land of the free or an Orwellian culture?

I dont think america should legalize any more substances that causes brain problems and lowering of iq

Ok so what about
-caffeine
-nicotine/cigarettes
-alcohol
-spraypaint(huffing)
-glue
-whippets (nitrous oxide cartridges)
-prescription drugs being mishandled

Should we prohibit all these? What about the chemicals under your sink? The preservatives and additives in your food?

I have no intention of banning substances that are already in use and legal today. I however dont want to legalize more brain retardation substances

And no I dont support drug cartels, I support the war on drugs, building a wall and severe sentences for using illegal substances. Thats how you get people to stop using
Chairman of Economic Forum Recovery
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:13:05 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
If you support the war on drugs, you support the drug cartels.
When a drug is made illegal or has a patent the price of it goes way up.
What America is essentially doing is asking the cartels what are the prices on the drugs, and the cartels are saying "how much money do you have".
I'm sorry, but in a world like we have to live in, some people need to get a good buzz on.
What the anti-drug laws do is just prevent the state from charging sales tax.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:19:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
What the war on drugs has done is made it profitable to get those tylenol/codeine pills the dentist prescribes, extract the codeine , turn it into morphine, mix that in with gasoline ,and the red phosphorus from match books and make a drug called crocodile.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:27:38 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
If your IQ was in the 3 digits, you would know that IQ is merely a score on a test divided by a child's age. This is an attempt to measure intelligence in an objective manner. The IQ is just a number which helps a school decide if a child should be put in the smart kid's class, the regular class, the dumbell class, or special ed.
That idea that IQ is a thing is something they teach you in special ed.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:38:03 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 12:19:19 PM, xus00HAY wrote:
What the war on drugs has done is made it profitable to get those tylenol/codeine pills the dentist prescribes, extract the codeine , turn it into morphine, mix that in with gasoline ,and the red phosphorus from match books and make a drug called crocodile.

It's krokodyl.
Emilrose
Posts: 2,479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:54:18 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want.

Well, guns and drugs are two different things.

By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment.

Yeah...a potential problem with that is that *more* people may need treatment as a result of abusing drugs. The wider the accessibility; the more chances of use.

At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified.

Assuming you're talking about recreational drugs, how do you propose that people in these 'sensitive occupations' actually receive more identification? Surely that may cost money as well?

For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted.

That's kind of what happens when something is illegal; which unfortunately a few things need to be.

but also the drugs may be contaminated.

What are your thoughts. Let's hurt the Drug Cartels main money maker
Commentator on a picture with David Cameron and a Cat: 'Amazing what you can achieve with photoshop these days. I'm sure that used to be a pig.'

Commentator on Hillary Clinton: 'If Clinton is now what passes for progressive, maybe this country deserves Trump.'

Commentator on British parliament: 'All that talent in one place, where is Ebola when you need it?'

John Kerry on words: 'These aren't just words, folks.'
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 12:54:39 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 12:51:09 PM, xus00HAY wrote:
oh, sorry

I know you were joking but that really is some nasty shlt. I saw you were accused of trolling.., if anyone disputes you on krokodyl, I'll flame the shlt out of them. It's a real concoction the literally eats away at your body like mrsa.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 5:29:39 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 11:11:27 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:51:53 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:48:21 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.

I don't necessarily buy the availability argument. I have heard it, seen studies on it. Tobacco is the most widely available there is. It's use is significantly down. Now I'm trying to say because tobacco use is reduced everything will be. But I am saying that legal availability may/may not translate to increased use.

Increasing taxes on tobbaco e.g. in Australia, directly correlates with the fall in use.

This isn't Australia. also you just contradicted yourself: increase tax increases price? Previous post said lower prices.

If you don't live in the IS, you don't lng w our drug consumption. A gram of heroin is $20 more than a case of beer

I live in the UK, and use here has gone down too as cigarettes are expensive. I didn't contradict myself, yes, of course increasing tax results in higher prices, the previous post said lower prices would be the result of drug decriminalisation. This would be the case as it would be far cheaper to transport drugs over borders and it would also result in a higher consumption rate.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2016 5:43:30 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 5:29:39 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 11:11:27 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:51:53 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:48:21 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/14/2016 10:41:00 AM, SebUK wrote:
At 10/14/2016 4:05:36 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/13/2016 1:34:11 PM, yelekam wrote:
There were those who made similar arguments against Prohibition, and here like then those arguments were contradictory toward reality. Prohibitive policies significantly reduce intoxicant use.

No they don't. Drug use is up significantly since the 1937 narcotics act and since the war on drugs was started in 1972. The only significant drop is in cocaine, tobacco, and hallucinogens. Meanwhile weed, opiates, methamphetamine, and alcohol are up over the last decade even.

https://www.drugabuse.gov...

Use would increase further following legalization due to 1) higher, wider availability 2) cheaper prices. But I still think the advantages of legalizing would outweigh the disadvantages.

I don't necessarily buy the availability argument. I have heard it, seen studies on it. Tobacco is the most widely available there is. It's use is significantly down. Now I'm trying to say because tobacco use is reduced everything will be. But I am saying that legal availability may/may not translate to increased use.

Increasing taxes on tobbaco e.g. in Australia, directly correlates with the fall in use.

This isn't Australia. also you just contradicted yourself: increase tax increases price? Previous post said lower prices.

If you don't live in the IS, you don't lng w our drug consumption. A gram of heroin is $20 more than a case of beer

I live in the UK, and use here has gone down too as cigarettes are expensive. I didn't contradict myself, yes, of course increasing tax results in higher prices, the previous post said lower prices would be the result of drug decriminalisation. This would be the case as it would be far cheaper to transport drugs over borders and it would also result in a higher consumption rate.

Study after study disagrees. But it's moot: we live in different countries.

Note: you should distinct decriminalize vs legalize (different concepts)
Note: high taxes on still illegal imports (again, diff in decriminalize vs legalize) will make it more expensive than now.

Drugs have a much lower transport cost here vs your country. Luck of proximity. Lol
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2016 2:53:41 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 11:16:11 AM, TeaPatriot wrote:

I dont think america should legalize any more substances that causes brain problems and lowering of iq

Ok so what about
-caffeine
-nicotine/cigarettes
-alcohol
-spraypaint(huffing)
-glue
-whippets (nitrous oxide cartridges)
-prescription drugs being mishandled

Should we prohibit all these? What about the chemicals under your sink? The preservatives and additives in your food?

I have no intention of banning substances that are already in use and legal today. I however dont want to legalize more brain retardation substances

So any new pharmaceuticals and other mind altering chemicals, therefore, should be banned based on your logic.

And no I dont support drug cartels, I support the war on drugs, building a wall and severe sentences for using illegal substances. Thats how you get people to stop using

Yes draconian policy is the way to get people to do what you want. If it doesn't work then hey, you can always increase the punishment right? While we're at it, we can start relaxing speeding tickets with prison time.

And your policies most certainly do support the cartels. Put yourself in their shoes! Do you want American drug money or not? Hmm....
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2016 3:18:12 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/14/2016 12:54:18 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 10/12/2016 4:16:20 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
We need to treat drugs more like like guns and not throw people in jail for exercising their freedom to consume whatever they want.

Well, guns and drugs are two different things.

Yeah guns hurt and kill people while drugs only directly affect the person who chooses to ingest them.

By taxing and controlling drugs while having people sign to get legal drugs, much less will be spent on the criminal side and some of the tax revenue could go for treatment.

Yeah...a potential problem with that is that *more* people may need treatment as a result of abusing drugs. The wider the accessibility; the more chances of use.

BS, anybody who wants to use today can and will use. I doubt you are going to start using drugs if they suddenly become legal, so why assume others will? By the time somebody makes the choice to destroy themselves with drugs, they are way past the point where they are that concerned about a miniscule chance of getting a ticket for possessing them. That's like a mass-murderer being deterred from killing because he doesn't want to hurt his credit score.

For example, I can get almost any drug I want with about 24 to 48 hours notice. The only problem is that it's risky because of getting busted.

That's kind of what happens when something is illegal; which unfortunately a few things need to be.

Bare assertion. And trust me, there is extremely low risk of getting busted for drugs. The risk only begins to gain statistical relevance over the long-term, and it is impossible to realize that risk when one is only thinking short-term. In other words, you don't sit down and make a 5-year plan on how you are going to become addicted to drugs and use them long-term, and then factor in your risk of eventually getting caught. Its always a short term decision. Just this once. I won't make it a habit. Well I guess I'll try it. Then you wake up one day and realize that a bunch of small steps have led you to a very bad place. There's a lot of justification, self-deception, and ignorance at play. You can't understand it just by looking at crime from a distance and trying to put yourself in their shoes.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2016 5:04:24 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
As I remember exctasy ( aka Molly ) was a drug that was not considered to be addictive because the good feeling was often followed by a serotonin shortage that might make you feel so depressed you wanna kill yourself, so when you do exctasy you won't want to do it again, at least not right away.
Now since it was made from the oil from an endangered species of tree, real molly became scarce and the drug pushers started mixing it with other drugs and **** so what you might be buying is just something that looks like MDMA, but is god knows what. Then people were becoming addicted to it.
Perhaps they could invent a legal drug that would have a similar effect and people wouldn't get addicted to it.
n.b. People have died from using real exctasy if they were not careful, I don't recommend it. Some guys have gotten AIDS using sexctasy , a mixture of molly and viagra.
Anyway, when heroin was banned people used methamphetamine as a substitute.. A chemist could buy everything he needed to make meth at walmart, so it did not need to be smuggled. ( since then the cartels have flooded the market with meth they make in their factories ) When people get addicted to meth and use larger doses for a long time the result is psychosis and these speed freaks are paranoid and violent, so not only the users are harmed as a result of methamphetamine use.
There is a cure for heroin addiction, methadone.
Cocaine may also be a substitute for heroin. Taking too high a dose for too long may cause psychosis ( people who are addicted to coke tend to do this )
So, the result of making heroin illegal has created a market for 2 drugs that are worse.
If 99% of the men guarding the border are stopping it from getting thru, the cartels will find the 1% who will take a bribe and bring it thru there.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2016 5:16:01 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
"At the same time people in sensitive occupations (bus drivers, pilots etc.) would be more identified."

A pilot is prohibited by FAA regulations from flying while using a drug that will impair his ability. Many drugs that are legal on the ground are illegal in the air.