Drugs

[Der Freischuetz]

That still isn't enough to convince me that legalizing narcotics is the best course. This isn't the Netherlands; we actually have standards here in the United States. Drug users are looked down upon in society, and they are also punished for doing so, which they should be.

You could argue that if narcotics are illegal that alcohol should be illegal as well. Alcohol, unlike most narcotics, is something that people can use in moderation. There is no such thing as a narcotic that's used in moderation. Every person on a drug will more than likely overdose at least once and screw themselves up, and thus render themselves useless to society, which will then make them piles of meat who will beg for any cash that they can get, probably only to be spent on more drugs.

There is no benefit to legalizing drugs. People won't learn that drugs are bad if they are made legal. They'll buy them in even higher quantities than before, making for a much larger percentage of stupid citizens. Keep it illegal to prevent them from making such a poor decision. Not every choice should be free.  

[bluecherry]

"looked down upon in society"? Since when are you allowed to punish people - separate adults, not little kids here - for something just because you don't approve of it? I'm sure most people around frown upon even something as stupid as not showering for three months at a time, but that doesn't give us the right to arrest them. Also, even if somebody does mess themselves up and they become a beggar -- you don't have to give them money, so just don't.

Also, if they don't learn it's their own problem, though I think the majority of the U.S. citizens would not end up as the beggar hobo drug addict on the streets. If you think that, you must really have ZERO faith in humanity, because that just sounds almost ridiculously impossible that more people will fail then not. And my entire argument is that the only choices that should not be free are ones that violate other's rights. Put it this way, You have the right to make bad decisions and screw up your life, because only then when you have the option to freely fail can you take credit for earning success. If you legislate away all bad and/or majority percieved "bad" options, then it is no accomplishment anybody can take credit for and be proud of when they succeed because that was the only thing they could do any way by law, which has the right of the power of force it can exert upon you unlike any other average person who disagrees or doesn't approve.

 

[Der Freischuetz]

Do you really think that people will eventually learn that drugs are bad for them and simply choose not to take them even though they are legal? I don't think so. This is why the Government keeps drugs illegal, because it'll create even more problems than there are now. Drugs turn working-class citizens into useless meatbags, and the Government wants to have as many of its citizens as possible available for work in order to keep the country running.

Freedom of choice or not, the Government is allowed to make laws that tell people what they can and can't do. The only way that this is going to change is if they decide to take a vote on it and see what the results are. And I highly doubt that things will change unless we get a loony party, whose platform supports legalization of drugs, in power.

And remember, this is an Authoritarian government we are under. They are allowed to do this. Your rights are what the Government defines them to be; you would have no rights if there were no government. And currently, citizens of the US are not allowed to possess and drugs without being punished.  

[bluecherry]

Yes, I do believe people will learn. Why? If they don't learn to at least get themselves at least under control, the eventual outcome will be death, either by over dosage or potentially from complications of being broke and homeless, thus leaving only those who do know how to survive around.

And I don't find the government's job to be making sure people are productive any way. Productivity is also something a person can make the choice (or choices involved leading) to not be(ing.) And just because a choice is good/right or wrong/bad doesn't mean you get to make it for somebody.

--wait, see why I said already we won't agree based on our definitions of the purpose of government? In my definition, government does not exist AND then decide it will make up some rights it may or may not give to it's people-- rights are the name we've given things people have simply for being a human being that other people should not be allowed to take away, and it's in order to enforce the protection of these things that government (or good governments any way) then was made. Rights exist even without government or government sanction, just they may be getting no recognition or respect and violated left and right.

 

[Der Freischuetz]

bluecherry

--wait, see why I said already we won't agree based on our definitions of the purpose of government? In my definition, government does not exist AND then decide it will make up some rights it may or may not give to it's people-- rights are the name we've given things people have simply for being a human being that other people should not be allowed to take away, and it's in order to enforce the protection of these things that government (or good governments any way) then was made. Rights exist even without government or government sanction, just they may be getting no recognition or respect and violated left and right.

Okay, I'll say one more thing, and then I'm done with this thread for a while. I'll give other people a chance.

While a government can protect rights, it also has the ability to say what rights citizens do and don't have. The government can A) give you rights and define them and B) protect those, and only those rights.

One question: how can rights exist without government? Without a government that gives you rights and protects you according to those rights, you must do everything to defend yourself from such events. Without the government, there can be no rights, because they don't exist in the first place.

Well, this argument seems to have boiled down to what government's role is in society more than anything. I think I'll just leave this thread alone for a bit, and simply see what other people have posted.  

[GypsyFoxglove]

i wish these people who know absolutly nothing about addition would just shut up about something they know nothing about. hey, i think they should go do some heroin, and then come back and talk about their freedom of choice and not another word from then until they have gone through rehad and had their personal choice taken away by a nasty drug. in fact this post has become so ridiculious i do believe this is my last post for the ignorant children just keep talking in circles. heck if i want circles i will put my arms out and spin around and around and around. yea, i think thats what i will do rather then comment with the niaeve imbesoles about a topic they know nothing about. here i go spin spin spin circle circle circle


now i am having fun  

[bluecherry]

Go do some heroine? lol How about "No", because I already know it's a bad idea and I've made the free and conscious decision not to do so in the first place just like anybody can. Unless you had a mom who was doing drugs while pregnant, nobody is born an addict, so they have to make the initial choice to do any drug.

Der Freischuetz

One question: how can rights exist without government? Without a government that gives you rights and protects you according to those rights, you must do everything to defend yourself from such events. Without the government, there can be no rights, because they don't exist in the first place.

Which is why I said we had government exactly, because the way things stand, people don't all have respect for your rights and without something to force them to respect them, they'll violate them. And if rights don't exist without government naming them, then what exactly is it you're defending and why in the scenario of there being no government? Somebody is trying to kill you?-- why fight back? It's not like you have any right to your own life. Somebody stealing your stuff? What's the big deal? You have no property rights. And so on. You have no rights to be violated at all so who's to say anything done to you can be wrong? If anything done to you is wrong, then on what grounds?

Der Freischuetz

Well, this argument seems to have boiled down to what government's role is in society more than anything. I think I'll just leave this thread alone for a bit, and simply see what other people have posted.

Yeah, essentially. But it's what I saw coming. I'd leave it alone for a while too, but it seems like I may pretty much represent my whole side of the discussion, so I can't just leave and expect it to keep going on with anybody arguing my case in my place.

 

[GypsyFoxglove]

BLUECHERRY BLAH BLAH BLAH my arms are held out to my side while i spin around like an airplane propeller. This is to the post preceding this post. BLAH BLAH BLAH. Come up with something new, if you would read this thread you will find you are repeating yourself over and over and over again without managing to get to any valid point. OOOPPPS i swore off of this thread because it goes nowhere. LATER C YA WOULDN'T WANNA BE YA  

[bluecherry]

Wow. You're posting that I'm not getting anywhere with my posts by posting a post that does nothing but express animosity aimed at my direction, getting this topic no further, and leaving? neutral Actually, I've been aware for a LONG time in this thread that I've been repeating things. I've repeated them continually though because I made most of my point in my first post in here and ever since then the topic has been going:

Me: I think they should be legal because people have a right to do what they want with their lives even if it's a bad idea so long as it violates nobody else's rights so the government is overstepping it's boundaries making drugs illegal.
somebody else: But drugs are bad! We can't make them legal and let people do bad drugs because they'll mess up their lives! mad
Me: It doesn't matter that they're bad because-- [repeat initial statement here where it is already said that you have a right to take even bad options]
somebody else: But drugs are bad! [repetition here]
And so on, with a little progress made in the direction of the problem's real root, the question of what a government has the right to legislate and why due to what it's function and purpose are.

And as to your last statement, ditto. wink

 

[ChemicalSoiree]

I used to be an avid drug user, but now it's a very occasional recreation. I was addicted to Adderall, Pot (don't even f'n tell me it's not addictive), and DXM. I did Adderall for a few years until it completely stopped having an effect, but to this day, 6 months after I stopped, the cravings still come and go. Pot is something I do about weekly, and I no longer crave it. I think doing harder drugs helped me get off Pot, actually, because it's a "fake a** drug". It's not as cool of a high after you've experienced things like DXM and X. I did DXM for 11 days straight after this year's Schwag, and I lost so much because of it. There's a week of my life I don't remember. It was just after my Grandpa died. He was everything to me, and losing something that huge made me feel I had to replace it with something. I shouldn't have chosen drugs.

I don't believe they should be legalized because of how dangerous people can be on them. Pot shouldn't even be legal because of it's tendency to make people just as stupid.  

[AliasL]

If drugs are used to cure or help you lose weight, it is fine that they are legal. If it's mj, then it should stay illegal. They may say it is used for medicinal purposes, but there are other, more healthy drugs that can do the same thing. Drugs are destroying our lives, killing our loved ones. There are many unhealthful drugs out there. If they aren't illegal, they should be. If you can't live live without them, you should feel guilty for making your loved ones so sad.  

[ChemicalSoiree]

Comment on Medicinal Marajuana:

I don't understand why they go through the trouble of making and substance and costing us millions of dollars a year to do so, instead of letting them just use the plant. It's more natural and has the same effect, so why is it a bad idea, and so "wrong"?  

[The Jacketed One]

Drugs are things which make people loose control of their real senses. They break into animal cages, and make the animals get blamed for their own mistakes. It breaks up families, and makes them hate each other. Also it makes them do self destructive activities. I think that drugs that cause bad effects should stay illegal.  

[Asuka Inochi]

Should drugs be legal?
I think that, to a certain extent, and for certain reasons, yes, some drugs should be legal.
Which drugs do you think should be legal?
I feel that the medicinal drug(marijuana) should be legal.
Why do you think this way?
Because it is a known, scientific fact, that marijuana does help slow cancer. Though it does not cure it, it helps to lessen the pain, and does slow the effect of cancer. That and it has been proven to do the same with glaucoma
Do you use drugs?
I will admit that I have done drugs, in the past, and have chosen never to do them again. But that doesn't mean that, for medicinal purposes, they should be completely outlawed.
Have anything else about drugs you wish to share?
More will come as my debating goes... xd  

[Israk]

Natural drugs were being used by people LONG before there were laws about it. Human made drugs on the other hand, are much worse in the side effects department, but I personally believe it's your choice to do them or not. Any and all drugs can kill you, not many people seem to know it but caffiene can kill. I noticed back on the first page, aperson mentioned not drinking any alcohol to keep all brain cells, unfortunatly, if you've ever fallen down and hit your head, you've probably lost some brain cells. I'm basicy addicted to saying something in the subforum now, geez, my opinion is going wherever I feel like posting it!