 |
|
|
|
 |
nrjizer
vive le deep

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: Bumfuck, GA
|
|
|
You cannot blame the drug users for this, it's the governments that run the "war on drugs" bullshit. If the governments stopped trying to tell people what they can or can not put into their own bodies (You've got a god given right to put whatever you want into your own body, don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise), they could spend those billions and billions (not to mention the countless lives lost) from the "war on drugs" and put it to use funding public education about drugs and free detox clinics for those who really need help. People have been using substances for thousands of years, they're not going to stop now, because its suddenly illegial. Have we (the U.S.) not learned from Prohibition?
I think it's because of the "war on drugs" that drug dealers in South America are forced to go underground and do seedy things like this. Unfortunately, my country refuses to wake up and smell the 21st century. I heard something like 40% of all current inmates in U.S. prisons are charged with marijuana posession. Isn't that ridiculous? Like alcohol and cigs aren't any worse.... oh wait, we tax the shit out of them, thats why.
Its like this with sex too. If you go through an American public school system, all your going to hear is preaching about abstinence. We practically shit ourselves in disgust when we see 3 seconds of a half covered tit on the superbowl. And now we have a potential constitutional amendment kicking around the bookx wanting to outright ban Gay Marriages in the whole country. Duh.

___________________
NEW MIX [Feb/March 2008]
|
|
Feb-21-2004 18:59
|
|
|
 |
 |
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ

Registered: May 2002
Location:
|
|
|
I think it would be more appropriate to say,
"Whenever a thick-headed legislator passes a new anti-drug law, one of us may die."
I'm very well aware of the problems faced in South America due to the economic impact of drug trafficking, so I'm not going to dwell on the facts but rather go on to discuss causality, and how it pertains to these unacceptable events.
The direct cause of any event like this is quite obvious: some individual or group of individuals involved in the drug trade volitionally decided to carry out these violent acts.
Things like the demand for drugs, anti-drug legislation in most countries around the world, the failure of South American governments to adequately control the problem (admittedly easier said than done), et cetera are all indirect causes. If these things were not the case, it is true that the undesirable event probably wouldn't have happened. But it's very dangerous to try to blame indirect causes for the undesirable event or phenomenon. Consider the folowing analogy:
Suppose I were to go up to a random person on the street and stab them to death with a knife. Obviously, this is an undesirable event. The direct cause of it was my volitional choice to do so. However, the event couldn't have happened if the following things (and many others) were not true:
1. Someone had to sell me the knife, or put it somewhere where I could obtain it.
2. The victim had to be out on the street, where I happened to be.
Obviously, this wouldn't be an sound argument to not manufacture or sell knives. And likewise, it wouldn't be proof we should never leave our homes. These things are really incidental to the undesirable event.
But that doesn't mean we should completely disregard indirect causes, either. For example, if I'm playing my music too loud, the direct cause of the disturbance is the sonic vibrations produced by my speakers and sub. However, if someone wanted to solve this problem, they might be better off asking me to turn it down than trying to prevent the vibrations manually.
So the question is, what indirect causes are there of these events which are themselves unnecessary, and which can be removed without causing new and more serious problems to arise?
Philosophically, I don't think that telling people not to use drugs is such a cause because it violates the principle of self-ownership. That is to say, you are taking away the right of a person to control their body to the fullest extent possible. Some people, myself included, believe that self-ownership is a Natural Right, and therefore it is a moral imperative for all humans not to infringe upon it.
Which leads me to anti-drug legislation. The justifications given for it are simply not logically valid. It is ideologically flawed, and unnecessary, and it could be removed without causing new and more serious problems to arise - at least, that is my claim (I don't want to turn this into a legalization debate unless necessary).
To just reference what you said about health-care systems, I've heard that argument a million times and am thoroughly unconvinced. Health care costs are invoked by drugs only when drugs are used improperly (if using a drug properly would send you to the hospital, it couldn't gain popularity). And why are drugs used improperly? Here are the main reasons:
1. People don't know exactly what they're taking due to impurities.
2. People don't know how much is too much, and overdose.
3. People mix drugs which interact harmfully.
These three factors would all be significantly reduced if drugs were legal. If they were legal, and produced by companies like pharmaceutical companies, then they could be subject to regulation for the complete elimination of impurities. Dosages could be precisely measured, and acceptable dosages could be listed on the product label (just like they are for medicinal drugs). More research could be done on drug interactions, and it would be easier to keep people informed about what might be harmful.
Due to these factors, I would go so far as to guarantee that health care costs associated with drug use would plummet within 2-3 years of legalization. Ergo, although I do not personally use drugs other than alcohol, I believe that legalization is the answer to the problems in South America - and the philosophically sound course of action to boot!
Best Wishes,
Arbiter
|
|
Feb-21-2004 19:22
|
|
|
 |
 |
djSlain
[Suspended]
Registered: May 2001
Location: San Diego CA
|
|
|
what drugs should be illegal and which shouldn't?
I don't know if this goes on in other states, but California is slowly disregarding marijuana as a criminal offense. Upon looking for jobs round here in San Diego, i noticed on a lot of applications and questions that say:
"have u ever been arrested for drug use (excluding marijuana)?"
I'm guessing there is a lot of leniance on marijuana use over other harder drugs.
also, why is drug trafficking such a violent underworld? I haven't put too much research into International Sex Slavery trade or Foreign Piracy Rings, but i really don't think that i've heard of any gang/turf wars or violence caused by competition among these underworlds.
One thing i cannot argue with Arbiter about:
Here in California i believe they still allow medicinal marijuana for relief of suffering from the terminally ill. I never hear on the news about these people causing any trouble. Occasionally there will be people who commit a DUI, but other than this, these users keep to themselves and mind their business without any trouble making.
just not harder drugs
___________________
Thank You and Goodnight
|
|
Feb-21-2004 19:55
|
|
|
 |
 |
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ

Registered: May 2002
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by djSlain
what drugs should be illegal and which shouldn't?
|
All drugs should be legal.
From a teleological standpoint, you have to ask the question, "What beneficial effects are being produced by legislation banning hard drugs?"
Here are some of the effects of such legislation:
1. Hundreds of thousands of individuals not guilty of harming another human being are in prison, where they are an economic burden on society while being denied basic freedoms.
2. More people die as a result of drug use due to impurities or ignorance, while yet more require medical treatment that they cannot pay for, placing an additional economic burden on soceity.
3. The black-market-only availability of drugs drives up drug prices resulting in additional crime as addicts seek money to pay for their habit.
Of course, none of these could really be called "beneficial." In fact, detrimental might be a more appropriate choice of diction. I'd be lying if I said I didn't feel that it was a violation of my Natural Right to property that my personal income is pillaged in order to pay to imprison people who've never done anything to harm anyone except perhaps themselves.
Making hard drugs illegal doesn't stop people from using them, but rather exacerbates the problems associated with drug use.
I'm glad I had the privilege to serve on a jury last summer in a trial against a cocaine dealer. The poor man would have been imprisoned for most of the rest of his life, probably. Thankfully, I was there to exercise my right to jury nullification, and rather than being a burden to society, he's still out there contributing to it.
|
|
Feb-21-2004 23:18
|
|
|
 |
 |
djSlain
[Suspended]
Registered: May 2001
Location: San Diego CA
|
|
|
for me, i am growing a leniance for marijuana. I would still vote for a ban on marijuana should a bill come up for that decision, but i base that on the fact that i would also not like to eat in the smoking section of a resteraunt. It's something i don't believe it, but i would accept it if it ended up being passed anyways.
i do not believe that some of the harder drugs should be legal. Especially coke and needle-required drugs. These two drugs are way too strong and are too easy to abuse if all drugs became legal.
I remember listening to the radio on my way to work and they were talking about Robert Downey Jr's 15 minute spotlight on Ally McBeal. After bouncing back onto TV, he was once again caught with drugs. The VJ said she felt sorry for Downey, but that "he doesn't belong in a jail. he belongs in a hospital to help with his addictions." I have to agree with this, on drug USERS. However, i feel DEALERS deserve prison time for selling a product that potentionally diminishes a person's life to function correctly.
___________________
Thank You and Goodnight
|
|
Feb-21-2004 23:40
|
|
|
 |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|