|
Whenever you get high, one of us may die
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lira |
Disclaimer
First of all, I'd like to say that I'm not against drugs: whoever wants to use them should be allowed to do so if there are no harmful consequences to other people who have got nothing to do with it. Also, this is not a "everytime you masturbate God kills a kitten, please think of the kittens" thread - I'm actually looking for discussion, and people who can prove me wrong. Last, but not least, this thread DOES belong to the chill-out room. That being said, let's focus on the topic, shall we? :)
Some of you probably use drugs (hemp, heroin,...) and most of you probably live in "most developed" countries. Why am I comparing these two facts? Because you'll hardly feel the consequences of drug using as much as we do here in South America.
As you know, there's a lot of money involved in drug dealing (Europeans and North Americans pay 10x more than its original price), reason why this activity became so intersting for criminal organisations (let's face it, drugs are illegal and most countries wouldn't be able to support the legalisation because of their health system). Because of the impressive revenues earned by this trade, small criminal groups became stronger as time passed by, leading to the creation of para-military armies in Colombia and a pseudo civil war in some parts of Rio de Janeiro, where drug dealers have weapons better than our own army. Like a cancer, it quickly spreads to other cities, and because of the greed of drug dealers, they join other activities such as kidnapping and robbery in order to support this commerce - and this is why I'm posting it here on the chill-out room.
Not long ago, my girlfriend was blitz-kidnapped by drug dealers, who wanted money and her mobile phone (I don't know what the proper English word for this event would be... they kidnapped her for a couple of hours, got all they wanted from her and then let them go). She never used drugs, mind you (she's ironically alergic to most of these sorts of substances, including legal drugs like alcohol). One of my best mate's father had also been blitz-kidnapped some time ago. Heck, even I, who also never used drugs, by the way, had my watch nicked by a bloody drug addict.
No, Brasilia is not a dangerous place actually (countless times I was hanging out on the streets after midnight, and oldskool TA's may remember I once crossed the city on foot in a tour with a Japanese tourist), but I reckon the situation is getting worse... and all these crimes were linked to drug dealing. Coincidence? Not really.
That's why I'm telling you guys of the situation down here. Many of you complain about immigration, but you're not aware of the harm done in our countries because of things some of you are also to blame. You guys complain about September 11th, but we lose far more people here every year in this terrorism sponsored by these people who want to get "high".
I guess you guys got what I mean by now. I'm aware of the fact we've got drug addicts in Brazil too, but I'm doing the best I can: spreading the word, both here and there :) |
|
|
| tranceDJ |
I see your point on this and am sorry that you and your friends have been affected like that. I myself only smoke weed and i'm pretty sure most of the time the weed I get is from people who grow it locally. I know weed is part of the problem that you speak of but it probably has more to do with heroine being that it's so much more addictive therefore having a much higher demand and it's more expensive. The only way to solve the problem is to eliminate the demand here in the US which unfortunetly will never happen, people are highly addicted and there are new users everyday. I still understand though that you're trying to make people aware.
The US however does try it's best to keep drugs from crossing the borders even though they can't catch everything.
To be honest, lots of people who do drugs will think you're bullting them when you tell them it could support crimes like these. It's because of these people that there will continue to be a demand and therefore continue to be a problem. Hopefully, things will improve in the future for your country. |
|
|
| DJ Mil0 |
i also loive in brasil and also in rio which is probly where 30% of the east cost cocaine comes from in the us, iv noticed these wars too it can vbe very dangerose at some times, the favelas (shanty towns) are always at war bettween the different rival gangs (comando vermelho, tercero comando ect) and this all results in alot more death and suffering, in the time iv lived in brazil iv seen 3 people killed been cought in a gun battle twice and almost been robed many times but this is not the start of the problem.
what people in the us dont realize is that well they support the importation of these drugs their runing the country that they get it from. Here in rio all the cops are corupted with drug money iv been stoped in a blitz 3 times and every time iv had to pay the cops off. Becouse at night i dont find the place very safe i carry around a 6 inch long butterfly. ALl of this is becouse of the drugs.
Why you ask, if its so bad do we allow it to continue to go on. Its for a simple reason, Money. Most of brazil lives in poor areas that are semi desserts and when the people move to the city it amazess them. Since there allready adept at farming tecniques with poor soil and little ammounts of water it is easy for them to start growing marajauna or coco plants and then sell it off to one of the big gangs.
The gangs here are not like they are in the us, their more like the mob is as they are fully organized. They have the ability to stop the intire city if they so choose (this has happened on several occasions when the gangs have simply told the shops not to open and the ones that do they firebomb) It is so embeded into society that everyone almost knows someone that works or is related to the drug indestry (a freind of mines father is in charge of the plant where they purafy the cocaine) This is all becouse of the billons of dollers that is spent on the drug trade each year
I do not the people that use drugs for this problem, i see to every person there own view on what type of state they should be in to enjoy themselves. I blaim more the goverments that impose lawas on drugs like marijona and use billions of dollers on arest people becouse of it that could be used towards drug rehab for the people that are seriosly ill.
Last i would like to finish by stating that i love rio, its my favorit city in the world. THough it may have many problems none of them compare to the kindness of the people and the constant beuity of a city thats borders to the enviroment are none exsistant |
|
|
| nrjizer |
You cannot blame the drug users for this, it's the governments that run the "war on drugs" bull. 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 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 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.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| DJ Mil0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by _-MIl0
I do not the people that use drugs for this problem, i see to every person there own view on what type of state they should be in to enjoy themselves. I blaim more the goverments that impose lawas on drugs like marijona and use billions of dollers on arest people becouse of it that could be used towards drug rehab for the people that are seriosly ill.
|
hence that, also i have to agree the rules about sex in the us are kinda stupid too, i think the most forward thinking country for all these aspects would have to be amsterdam. They seem to have the best working system |
|
|
| Arbiter |
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 |
|
|
| djSlain |
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 |
|
|
| tranceDJ |
| quote: | Originally posted by djSlain
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.
|
It makes sense that it's violent. The big drug dealers are very greedy and they want to be making the most money and when you're involved in something illegal to begin with, whats the problem with going and killing off your competitors so you can make more money? I'm sure in these countries when politicians go against the gangs, they too are killed. Just look at inner-city violence in American cities...most of it is drug-related, often times drugs and violence go hand in hand. |
|
|
| Omegasox |
| quote: | Originally posted by djSlain
also, why is drug trafficking such a violent underworld? |
Greed |
|
|
| DJ Mil0 |
| THink of it like this, two wall street companies will do whatever it takes to get rid of the compatition becouse that meens more profiits, in the drug trade since there allready doing something ilegal there isint much difference from them going out and killing the compition, theres a limited space within the citys in brazil that drugs can be produced on large scales these arer favelas, whichever gang controlls the favelas is able to produce more drugs, more drugs = more profit. its farly simple |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| 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. |
|
|
| djSlain |
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. |
|
|
|
|
