StoneMtn Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 how can you be talking about decriminalizing or legalizing Heroin? what possible positive purpose does the drug serve? Pot yeah, but heroin, crack, what positives can come from the decriminalizationIn fairness to Birdy, there are very good arguments from a sociological as well as financial perspective why "hard drugs" would be best dealt with as a health issue; not a legal issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggzz Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I wasn't even directing to Birdy, moreso Chameleon, and I'll admit I don't have any expertise, I just don't see anyway to justify these drugs being easier to obtain, seeing as though it falls on the rest of society to try and clean people up from the addictions that go hand in hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Well, the arguments, which I tend to agree with, are that by making these drugs illegal, we are causing people to go underground to obtain them. This costs more, and also criminalizes those people. Now that they're in debt and already criminals, they tend to go out and commit other crimes to get the over-priced drug. (Sometimes this happens after they are incarcerated due to a drug crime, and have had the opportunity to learn how to be a better criminal from experts they met in prison.) They are also reluctant to seek treatment, because they would have to admit to committing a crime, in that they were taking an illicit drug. There are also further problems with people being underground in that they are more likely to reuse needles, therefore, the spread of AIDS and other problems.If we treat it as a health issue, however, we give people the opportunity to deal with this in the open. Overall, this is better for society, or at least that's what the data seem to show from places that have taken such an approach (with safe injection sites and other things). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 And, of course, one of the easiest ways for a junkie to get money is to take advantage of the connection(s) he already has, and start dealing, which spreads the problem.I saw a report on (IIRC) Edinburgh, which had a growing heroin problem (particularly at the university there), for just that reason: people tried it recreationally, got hooked, and started dealing to support their habit. By taking willing junkies and putting them on prescription heroin, the number of addicts levelled off.Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancingbear Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 great thread...dr evil mouse...well said.birdy, i agree with all your points, however am having trouble wrapping my head around how you hold the ideals you have, yet vote conservative. even if they believe in less/smaller government, the scale to me still tips heavily to a harsher more restrictive close-minded authoritarian government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 that's just it dancingbear, there's no alternatives in my riding.. it's ndp, liberal or conservative. like i said above the most important thing to me, politically, is saving society from the path of dependency we seem to be spiralling down into. i could vote ndp but i don't agree with their idea of the role of government, i have voted liberal, but when they break out talks of national daycare, etc. they scare the hell out of me. i don't agree with conservative social policy, but do agree with conservative fiscal policy and the aim for lesser government (which is of primary importance).. so what am i to do? not vote? from what i can tell, politics is the ultimate game of sacrifice in order to get what you want. i voted conservative this time around for lesser government, which also goes hand in hand with fiscal policy. ideally, governments wouldn't even have the authority to legislate on issues such as gay marriage and that's what i mean by "lesser government", so casting a vote to the left, is backpeddling.. so what am i to do? i cast a vote to the conservatives because i don't have a libertarian candidate, i hope the opposition can keep whacky right wing religious social policy at bay and i take baby steps towards what i think government should be. i do hope this clarifies how i think.. a lot of people seem confused with it.. really though it's libertarianism.. randism.. whatever you will.. check this website out.. Libertarian Party of Canada it just strikes a chord with me that is so real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaggyBalls Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 hard drugs...hmmm...a topic many of us can relate with. true, they rarely enrich anyone's life but StoneMtn brings up incredibly important points. you can't legislate morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgnor Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 Let me get this straight... Birdy wants smaller government (and therefore lower spending on gov.), and more freedom personally (which should not be legislated) but at the same time voted for putting more police on the streets and longer sentences for criminals? Doesn't this mean fewer people choosing what's ok and more people in your face making goddamn sure that the bullshit of the few is properly enforced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blurry Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 Back to the smugglin for a minute......how else does anybody here get their drugs over the border?? I've always used our dogs as smugglers. We're even thinking of having a baby and throwing it into the "smuggling" mix. Mix a little bag of heroin with some pablum to settle nicely into our little kid's stomach........and voila......a super fun trip out of country follows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 thorgnor - i know it's jaded, but it's more philosophy than political reality anyway. but on what you said, the cpc's will not have nearly as many people in your face telling you what to do than say the liberals or the ndps will. maybe when it concerns criminals.. but honestly? i'm not going to sit and complain that someone is putting a criminal in his/her place. i'd rather that then have a government who tells new parents how to raise their child, tells them where to have their children babysat, refuses to "trust" them with their parenting choices and so creates a "national" day care. "national" anything is f'in scary. i'll take harsher penalties for criminals anyday when it boils down to it. like i said before, i have three choices in my riding and the libertarian party of canada isn't one of them. even though i don't agree with the CPCs on a lot of stuff their platform mentioned, i don't agree with the liberals and the NDPs on more and that, and only that, is WHY i voted CPC.. not cuz i'm a card carrying conservative, not cuz i'm a crazy christian, not cuz of any it. just trying to mesh a little of my ideals with a government- give and take, if you will. check out the libertarian homepage.. they have this little quiz thing that the link description sums up where i stand:Are you left, right, or just you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgnor Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 I know what a libertarian is.I have seen them fighting for the right of a four year old to bear arms.I have seen them fight against Universities as places where freedom is stifled.I have seen them fight against nationality as stifling personal freedom to roam across our planet.And I have also seen them fight against prisons and asylums... MENTAL HOSPITALS!... as hegemonic institutions of national propagandising.Weren't we talking about pragmatic voting a moment ago?Never mind...I'm with Babs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 hah!i guess this means i'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgnor Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 I took the quiz... I guess I'm a Liberal (capital L). What's a socially conscious guy to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Evil_Mouse Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 Quiz?Btw, I remember not too many months back someone posting a quiz that produced a bi-axial result for where you could be placed politically - L/R, but also authoritarian/I-can't-remember-what (I don't think it was libertarian, but I might be wrong). Anybody remember that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggrtrhhrtgg Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 so what you are suggesting is that if all drugs were "legalized" none of these atrocities would occur???I would think that the distribution of narcotics would probably become a territorial conflict. Which would still propose a very different, yet, similar problem as to what they have now... If the Government took over the distribution of drugs, like alcohol, you would probably see black market sales of drugs... You would see similar conflicts between the territorial drug ringers.. Thus, I would suggest that you would probably still see disgusting atrocities to life. I would agree with Stone Mountain, I think it has more to do with the individual, then it does with the circumstance--regarding the cause of people using animals for importing illegal drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 I would think that the distribution of narcotics would probably become a territorial conflict. Which would still propose a very different, yet, similar problem as to what they have now... If the Government took over the distribution of drugs, like alcohol, you would probably see black market sales of drugs... You would see similar conflicts between the territorial drug ringers.. Thus, I would suggest that you would probably still see disgusting atrocities to life. and this here is the argument why governments should NOT be the distributor.. leave it up to the free market.. i say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggrtrhhrtgg Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 and give criminals power over government??? Oh ya, I forgot you voted conservative...hehehehehehehehehhehehe...joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 lol.. i read the first line and was about to type "HOLY" and then looked a little further down to see the "heheheheheheheeheh" part. man i'm feeling feisty today.. i need to get out of the house.. but it looks disgusting out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggrtrhhrtgg Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 ditto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazlo Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 I'm really very sad that this thread digressed from the mutilation of puppies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now