|
dolander
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text>
Its the same hesitation I have towards drug legalization. While legalization proponents have some very sound arguments the problem is the same. Somebody is going to have to make a business around a product that is killing you and destroying the person who you are. Only a morally corrupt society would allow that. Thats what alcohol is doing today so we already live in a morally corrupt society according to your reasoning..
|
|
Tony
Jacksonville, FL
|
dolander wrote: <quoted text> Thats what alcohol is doing today so we already live in a morally corrupt society according to your reasoning.. EXACTLY!!! dolander you finally got there. We ARE living in a morally corrupt society, which is why social ills cannot not be cured or solved. The people that make up this society don't want to change how they are living.
|
|
“How Do You Avoid Apathy? ”
Joined: Oct 25, 2007
Comments: 485
Mt. Clemens, MI
ISP:
Kirkland, WA
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text> I don't think business/government/science should act no better than society, I just believe they reflect the society in which they exist. I have even a simpler example of societal nonsense since you brought up the crack pipe store. Throughout town there are numerous convenience stores and nobody is limited to just one or two choices. I have two simple rules for doing business with a convenient store. First, they must not allow people to loiter around the store and second they can not sell the glass tubes with roses used for crack pipes. I simply will not give my money to a business that helps sow the seeds of destruction in the neighborhood. To me selling crack pipes should be a no business for most people and yet I see one store that does always have business in the parking lot. Its a simple thing that if the business dried up because the store sells crack pipes and the owner knew it, he or she would hopefully remove them to get business to return. Yet instead they still have a thriving business. Its the same hesitation I have towards drug legalization. While legalization proponents have some very sound arguments the problem is the same. Somebody is going to have to make a business around a product that is killing you and destroying the person who you are. Only a morally corrupt society would allow that. What I find even more amazing is the liberals who go nuts if food isn't properly inspected, hate cigarettes, and demand governmental review of any product that enters the body openly embrace legalization of drugs which are vastly more destructive than anything out there. Buy American was a fad we went through. Its a shame that we can't see the forest for the trees here. Maybe though we will get inspired again and rise up to the challenge. I just don't know what it will take. "While legalization proponents have some very sound arguments the problem is the same. Somebody is going to have to make a business around a product that is killing you and destroying the person who you are." Are there not other things out there that destroy "the person you are"? Should we criminalize everything that has the ability to be addictive? Should the internet, tv, video games, books, alcohol, fantasy football, sugar, soda, caffeine, etc. be banned? Do these not destroy people? Do these not destroy marriages and relationship when they go to far?
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
thamanjimmy wrote: <quoted text> "While legalization proponents have some very sound arguments the problem is the same. Somebody is going to have to make a business around a product that is killing you and destroying the person who you are." Are there not other things out there that destroy "the person you are"? Should we criminalize everything that has the ability to be addictive? Should the internet, tv, video games, books, alcohol, fantasy football, sugar, soda, caffeine, etc. be banned? Do these not destroy people? Do these not destroy marriages and relationship when they go to far? You are comparing apples and oranges Jimmy and being disingenuous. Does a video game, alcohol, etc cause you to steal from family, rob stores, or sell your body among the other things that drug abusers are known to do just to get a hit? There is no available comparison between the damage of legal vices and the damage of illegal narcotics. If you find one then lets pick up the debate from there.
|
|
Julianna
Jacksonville, FL
|
Judged:
1
Curiosity wrote: You know, this is a great debate at my workplace. I mean, who died and made the U.S. God? Right? The majority of my co-workers want to build a barrier around the USA and take care of our own for once. Go ahead, start the bombardment of stones, insults, and crappy analogies.... I can take it :) Well, the U.S. has an interest in promoting peace throughout the world. However, I believe we've gone overboard in some respects, and now a prosperous nation is starting to feel the impact. We need to learn to handle our own business as well. We now live in such a disposal society where we no longer value things the way we should. We seek instant gratification and constant entertainment. Look at kids' games, for example. They're all about entertaining the kid. When I was a child, we relied a lot on our imagination. We also played outside, drank from the spigot and played sports (learned how to play and how to lose). Now it's largely about how to get ahead, get over or get around something. Sad but true.
|
|
dolander
|
Judged:
1
1
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text> What I find even more amazing is the liberals who go nuts if food isn't properly inspected, hate cigarettes, and demand governmental review of any product that enters the body openly embrace legalization of drugs which are vastly more destructive than anything out there. That because it can be regulated. Many people died of alcohol poisoning when alcohol was illegal by moonshine being made out in the woods or in a shed.
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
dolander wrote: <quoted text> That because it can be regulated. Many people died of alcohol poisoning when alcohol was illegal by moonshine being made out in the woods or in a shed. Dolander no regulation of crack, heroin, crystal meth, or prescription pills will make them any less addictive. If they are regulated to a lower dosage it will just fire the black market back up and people will seek the "good" stuff the way they get it now. Also, before somebody starts this nonsense about drugs being illegal because it can't be regulated that's a bunch of garbage. They would regulate it just like they do any other product. Either through stamp taxes like boos and cigarettes or some other method. Its quite simple. There is a lot of money to be made by selling drugs with the government's permission. If you only have to give the government a small pinch to do it legally businesses would be all too glad to do so, much like alcohol and cigarettes. You would rake in more money than you know what to do with and do it legally so do federal agency will come take your earnings.
|
|
dolander
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text> Dolander no regulation of crack, heroin, crystal meth, or prescription pills will make them any less addictive. If they are regulated to a lower dosage it will just fire the black market back up and people will seek the "good" stuff the way they get it now. I don’t believe in kicking my fellow countrymen in the teeth because of a personal drug problem or the black market drug war that has corrupted our justice system. Offer my countrymen help instead of jail with their personal drug problem and only punish them when they commit crimes against people or property. Do that, and this government will win my loyalty.
|
|
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
dolander wrote: <quoted text> I don’t believe in kicking my fellow countrymen in the teeth because of a personal drug problem or the black market drug war that has corrupted our justice system. Offer my countrymen help instead of jail with their personal drug problem and only punish them when they commit crimes against people or property. Do that, and this government will win my loyalty. I can understand somebody becoming an alcoholic or addicted to pills who was legally prescribed them. They were legal to have and use and somebody got drawn in. Its understandable and happens everyday. Crack, crystal meth, and heroin are once again different. They were illegal when you took them. They were illegal when you tried them. Everybody knows by now what these substances will do to you. They will make you rob, steal, sell your body, and worse to get a fix. They never misunderstood the dangers and yet jumped in with both feet. Worse yet they don't want out because services like Gateway and others already exist out there. While I do feel for those addicted they are not from the same cloth as the alcohol or legally prescribed pill addict. Its comparing apples to oranges. I have always been a proponent of treatment for addicts and prison for dealers but it never works that way. So many drug dealers end up in drug court its ridiculous. Drug dealers rarely get prison unless they have been arrested at least a half dozen times. I could go on and on about that. You say the system is corrupt because the government funds itself off the drug war. The government spends vastly more fighting this war than it collects. When you figure the costs from arrest, trial, prison or jail time, to release the government spends millions to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate one prisoner. While a few huge pops make news they are few and far between and don't begin to cover the cost. Once again I say society is the problem. If society is decent then drug dealing and abuse ceases to be a problem. Legalize drugs and the corrupt part of our society will find another black market to make their money. You will never stop the cycle until you reform society so that these actions are not acceptable. Unfortunately for many drug dealing, fighting, stealing, violence, and murder are acceptable. No legalization of drugs will resolve a society that is so deeply broken.
|
|
dolander
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text>
Legalize drugs and the corrupt part of our society will find another black market to make their money. You will never stop the cycle until you reform society How do you reform society if you don’t stop the cycle?
|
|
“How Do You Avoid Apathy? ”
Joined: Oct 25, 2007
Comments: 485
Mt. Clemens, MI
ISP:
Kirkland, WA
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text> You are comparing apples and oranges Jimmy and being disingenuous. Does a video game, alcohol, etc cause you to steal from family, rob stores, or sell your body among the other things that drug abusers are known to do just to get a hit? There is no available comparison between the damage of legal vices and the damage of illegal narcotics. If you find one then lets pick up the debate from there. "While I do feel for those addicted they are not from the same cloth as the alcohol or legally prescribed pill addict. Its comparing apples to oranges." I just don't understand why alcohol or pills, for example, are any different than hard drugs (besides that they are legal). Regardless apples and oranges are both fruit - they both have the ability to tear apart marriages, end relationships, and cause people to lose their jobs, etc. It is crazy about the apples and oranges statement because someone just told me that earlier about the same exact subject. I just don't understand what the difference is (besides the fact that legal "drugs" are considered ok and part of our culture). Would not illegal drugs do the same over time? Remember, there was a time when heroin was legal. The whole illegality of the drug occurred within the past few decades. During the great western expansion, Chinese workers would smoke opium all the time. It was alright until the late 20th century when government decided that they could change the social habits of its people (a Republican idea that was far from "conservative"). Why is this government intervention allowed but not when it comes to fiscal matters? Is it not all relative - it all gives power to the government and it all advocates the idea that government is the best means to produce a successful or pleasing outcome. And by the way, drugs aren't the only reason people steal from family and friends. There are a plethora of reasons, etc. that can be involved: money, status, age, boredom, education, etc. My main point is to suggest that ending a war on drugs could open up billions upon billions of dollars (and more importantly save the lives of police) that could be used to permanently stimulate the economy. More jobs equals more education. More education means less crime. "In 1995, heroin was mentioned in 4,178 deaths." - Remember we have a population of over 300 billion. http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/treatan/treana11.ht... "diabetes contributed to a total of 233,619 deaths in 2005" - Where is the call to limit sugar? http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/DM/PUBS/statist... "Alcohol abuse kills some 75,000 Americans each year and shortens the lives of these people by an average of 30 years" - Where is the call to prohibit alcohol? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/ I would argue that because so many people eat sugar and drink beer a call to prohibit either would fail miserably. But drugs, ahh, that effects a much smaller number. Who would possibly care about this minority. I mean, after all, they are all thieves and hoodlums.
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
thamanjimmy wrote: <quoted text> "While I do feel for those addicted they are not from the same cloth as the alcohol or legally prescribed pill addict. Its comparing apples to oranges." I just don't understand why alcohol or pills, for example, are any different than hard drugs (besides that they are legal). Regardless apples and oranges are both fruit - they both have the ability to tear apart marriages, end relationships, and cause people to lose their jobs, etc. It is crazy about the apples and oranges statement because someone just told me that earlier about the same exact subject. I just don't understand what the difference is (besides the fact that legal "drugs" are considered ok and part of our culture). Would not illegal drugs do the same over time? Remember, there was a time when heroin was legal. The whole illegality of the drug occurred within the past few decades. During the great western expansion, Chinese workers would smoke opium all the time. It was alright until the late 20th century when government decided that they could change the social habits of its people (a Republican idea that was far from "conservative"). Why is this government intervention allowed but not when it comes to fiscal matters? Is it not all relative - it all gives power to the government and it all advocates the idea that government is the best means to produce a successful or pleasing outcome. And by the way, drugs aren't the only reason people steal from family and friends. There are a plethora of reasons, etc. that can be involved: money, status, age, boredom, education, etc. My main point is to suggest that ending a war on drugs could open up billions upon billions of dollars (and more importantly save the lives of police) that could be used to permanently stimulate the economy. More jobs equals more education. More education means less crime. "In 1995, heroin was mentioned in 4,178 deaths." - Remember we have a population of over 300 billion. http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/treatan/treana11.ht... "diabetes contributed to a total of 233,619 deaths in 2005" - Where is the call to limit sugar? http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/DM/PUBS/statist... "Alcohol abuse kills some 75,000 Americans each year and shortens the lives of these people by an average of 30 years" - Where is the call to prohibit alcohol? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/ I would argue that because so many people eat sugar and drink beer a call to prohibit either would fail miserably. But drugs, ahh, that effects a much smaller number. Who would possibly care about this minority. I mean, after all, they are all thieves and hoodlums. Jimmy you and I agree most of the time but absolutely not on this. You say deaths are low but fail to recognize that suppression due to criminal penalties makes it so. You provide the number of 75,000 for alcohol abuse can you imagine what it would be for narcotics. I get the feeling you have never been exposed to narcotics abuse. You don't have a family member or loved one who has been sucked into the hell of drugs. Save the lives of police? Do you really think police work would be less dangerous if drugs are legal? People are still going to be violent and with a flood of legal drugs the potential increases dramatically. I remember in college I had a professor who had retired from a New York police department. He said the most frightening thing in the world was somebody drugged out because nothing affected them. I think you are really stretching on that one. Hard narcotics change people and if you don't recognize that its because you have never been exposed to it. I still think the key is changing society. With a decent society you need not impose such laws. If people didn't seek to abuse themselves then we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place. Fix that problem and the rest falls into place.
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
dolander wrote: <quoted text> How do you reform society if you don’t stop the cycle? If you stop the drug cycle they will only pick something new. You have to understand that a whole segment of our society is morally bankrupt. Life has no meaning to them. Its nothing to create it or take it with no consequences. That will not go away because the source of income has. It will merely get transferred to something else. So lets say for just a minute we legalize drugs and prostitution. How will that have improved our society? Fix the mindset that allows for death and destruction and the rest cures itself. Until its fixed you hold the onslaught of death and destruction as best as you can.
|
|
scott1
AOL
|
dolander wrote: <quoted text> How do you reform society if you don’t stop the cycle? society doesnt want to be reformed.
|
|
Tony
Jacksonville, FL
|
scott1 wrote: <quoted text>society doesnt want to be reformed. Yep!!! america has become spiritualy, mentaly and physically bankrupt by choice. americans love living LIKE hell, but then get pissed when they find themselves living IN hell.
|
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
Comments: 456
Madrid, Spain
|
|
|
Julianna
Jacksonville, FL
|
thamanjimmy wrote: <quoted text> I just don't understand why alcohol or pills, for example, are any different than hard drugs (besides that they are legal). I just don't understand what the difference is (besides the fact that legal "drugs" are considered ok and part of our culture). Would not illegal drugs do the same over time? There are a plethora of reasons, etc. that can be involved: money, status, age, boredom, education, etc. "diabetes contributed to a total of 233,619 deaths in 2005" - Where is the call to limit sugar? http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/DM/PUBS/statist... Alcohol isn't the same as a schedule i drug. Drugs are classed for very good reason. The medicinal purposes, risks of side effects, addiction, adverse interactions, etc. are all different depending on the drug. And a class i drug serves no other good purpose than as a deliriant. Those are key differences. I agree there are many other reasons people steal. Some people just aren't worth a damn, plain and simple, even without a drug habit. But we do know that certain drugs, particularly class i drugs, will make a grown man crawl around on the floor in desperation for that piece of rock he may have dropped. It will also make someone desperate enough to inject themselves with dirty syringes, assuming the risk of hepatitis, AIDs and other communicable diseases. It reduces people to that. I agree with you that many Americans don't have healthy eating habits. It would seem you're thinking of sugar in the raw form. Corn, for example, turns to sugar in the system if it isn't burned off. So people often unknowingly eat things that aren't good for them, thinking it's healthy.
|
|
“How Do You Avoid Apathy? ”
Joined: Oct 25, 2007
Comments: 485
Mt. Clemens, MI
ISP:
Kirkland, WA
|
Julianna wrote: <quoted text> Alcohol isn't the same as a schedule i drug. Drugs are classed for very good reason. The medicinal purposes, risks of side effects, addiction, adverse interactions, etc. are all different depending on the drug. And a class i drug serves no other good purpose than as a deliriant. Those are key differences. I agree there are many other reasons people steal. Some people just aren't worth a damn, plain and simple, even without a drug habit. But we do know that certain drugs, particularly class i drugs, will make a grown man crawl around on the floor in desperation for that piece of rock he may have dropped. It will also make someone desperate enough to inject themselves with dirty syringes, assuming the risk of hepatitis, AIDs and other communicable diseases. It reduces people to that. I agree with you that many Americans don't have healthy eating habits. It would seem you're thinking of sugar in the raw form. Corn, for example, turns to sugar in the system if it isn't burned off. So people often unknowingly eat things that aren't good for them, thinking it's healthy. All I am trying to say is that effort to stop drug use is not worth the time and money of the government. That money would be better spent in the free market economy. I am also trying to point out how few people actually do heroin. According to the same study I used earlier only 500,000 people used the drug in 1996. Let's just say that 1 million people today do the drug. Is it "fair" for the other 300 million people to pay? http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/treatan/treana11.ht... I really wish people in this discussion would talk to people or read forums regarding alcohol use and its relationship with family violence or child abuse/neglect. People who are trying to cut off ANY addiction will go to any extremes to meet their needs - whether a "class 1" drug (as defined by those smart people in Congress) or not. Regardless of whatever occurs you are always going to have people who do bad things. My "liberal" point of view is to just limit the effects these few people have on the vast majority of Americans. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php... The above link is a great article regarding prohibition of alcohol during the early 20th century. The author points out that consumption of the "drug" decreased at first but then went back up to pre-prohibition levels shortly later. So, in effect, the prohibition didn't even work. And what you did have was an underground economy in which corruption was rampant. "Westside Conservative" points out that without our laws on drugs now the use of drugs would be much higher. I would wonder what people have to say about this after reading the above article.
|
|
noshellswill
Jacksonville, FL
|
Westside conservative wrote: <quoted text> I don't think business/government/science should act no better than society, I just believe they reflect the society in which they exist.
<clip>
. You did not answer the question. When the Republic is well-and-truly ruined where do you think to escape? (Surely?) you don't believe that a poker-playing Mississippi River steamboat slut is the IDEAL toward which (re)publican citizenship tends? When you have shuttered the last industry, sold the last patent, mortgaged the last property and bartered the last natural resource do you think Chi.com bankers will welcome your immigration? I believe you have not-thought-thru the consequences of a value.free, mercantile culture.
|
|
Westside conservative
Jacksonville, FL
|
noshellswill wrote: <quoted text> You did not answer the question. When the Republic is well-and-truly ruined where do you think to escape? (Surely?) you don't believe that a poker-playing Mississippi River steamboat slut is the IDEAL toward which (re)publican citizenship tends? When you have shuttered the last industry, sold the last patent, mortgaged the last property and bartered the last natural resource do you think Chi.com bankers will welcome your immigration? I believe you have not-thought-thru the consequences of a value.free, mercantile culture. While I am an advocate of the free market it falls to the same snares. A corrupt society will lead to exploitation of the markets and eventual collapse. However, rigid tariffs fail to address the same corrupt culture. No political system can withstand a population that is detached from responsibility and corrupt. All you can do is slow it down but collapse is inevitable. Once again if you fix the corruption of society then everything else falls into place and tariffs are not necessary. Our founders understood better than most that we needed decency from Americans to make this whole thing work. They spoke about it in their writings. Without the fundamentals of good and decent people no system can stand and no system can force a people to do the right thing, it must already be in them.
|
|
|