Article View: alt.games.mk
Article #63999Re: Happy Thanksgiving!
From: tabmok99.... 0MBAT
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 00:00
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 00:00
176 lines
9370 bytes
9370 bytes
This is in reference to <74gld2$fcj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, in which a one st...@dds.nl wrote: > With marijuana, the user is far too lazy to do anything violent - and > certainly too slow to do anything else illegal. Marijuana, besides inducing paranoia, causes brain damage. If there was some medicine that caused brain damage as a side effect, would you take it? Would you let other people buy or sell it, and let them get brain damage? > With LSD and other hallucinogens, the user is too involved in the trip to do > anything violent - they make the user more passive. Even if the user did do > something like steal a li'l ol' lady's bag (which is highly unlikely) they > would be no difficulty to capture because, as i said, they are too involved > in the trip. Yes, but people sometimes kill themselves while hallucinating because of the drugs. > Heroine and other drugs from the same family give the user far too intense an > experience for them to do anything at all, legal or otherwise. These drugs all have harmful long-term effects, which are too dangerous to let everyone fall victim too. > The only real potential problem would be with amphetamines - cocaine and speed > being the main culprits. But i have seen many people use these drugs > responsibly, and i would say that the crimes caused by them would not be > extensive, and certainly wouldn't exceed the crimes committed by the illegal > trafficking of drugs from South America and Asia. These would fuck too many people up also, as well as pregnant women's unborn children. > The real problem is people, not drugs. And "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." There are too many people who can't be trusted to use them right to make them legal to everyone. If they were legal to some people and not to others, (like guns, where you need a liscence and good history) you'd have even MORE crimes relating to drugs. The only real choice is to not let anyone take them. <snip> > If someone acts violently on drugs, they are already predisposed to act that > way when they're sober, the drugs just make it easier for them. And making it easy for them to act violent should be legal??? > We should not be trying to get rid of drugs, but trying to get rid of > people's pent-up anger and frustration. *That* is the cause of crime, > not drugs, or guns, or whatever. That would be great. If we got rid of their anger, we wouldn't even need drugs or guns. But it's not going to happen, and legalizing drugs right now would make the world a much worse place. > > So you have not seen watered down beer. A legal "drug" tampered with by > > unscrupulous retailers! > > There is a difference between weak drugs, and drugs which aren't at all what > you're expecting and instead *kill* you. You buy a bottle of beer and it's > laced with cyanide. That's not just "tampering" with it. Beer will kill all your brain cells anyway, if you drink it enough. I don't think even alcohol or cigarettes should be legal. But that's another discussion. > > Alcohol percentage labelling is a very new concept. Given how long > > alcohol has been available over the counter, do you think all your > > wonderful suggestions will be even considered by the first "legal" drug > > lords? > > Imho, the first "legal" drug lords should be the government. That way they > could make back the ridiculous amounts of money they've thrown away on the > "drug war". The government has a duty to the public to be Good, or at least > give the appearance thereof, and i don't think they'd give that appearance if > suddenly all their customers started dropping down dead. That's exactly what would happen if they started selling drugs. > > The only real argument I have ever heard for legalisation are to enable > > accessible medical treatment for junkies. Surely prevention is better > > than cure and legalisation would provide a much wider problem so I do not > > consider this argument even vaguely valid. > > Why would it provide a wider problem? If tomorrow you could freely buy heroin > from the pharmacist, hell, if someone came round to your place and gave you a > hit for FREE which you would guaranteed not get put in jail for, would you do > it? I don't think so. Would you Justin? Anyone else reading this thread? It would provide a wider problem because tehre are people who would use them and then do crazy things. And it's because they took drugs. And it's because they were made legal. > Most of the people who want to do drugs already do them. It's not as hard to > find drugs as the government wants you to believe. If someone wants a drug, > you can be sure they'll get it. But if someone's not interested, why would > making it legal interest them? Because they figure, "Well I'm not breaking the law, I'm not doing a thing wrong, I'll try it." Then they get addicted. Then they start doing stupid and violent things, all because drugs were made legal. > If gay marriage becomes legal does every man in the country get married to > another man? Of course not - because they're not interested. Even many gay > men aren't interested. Look at all the flocks of people flying down to Hawaii for that reason alone. > If heroin was legalized, there's no way i'd use it, despite me using other > illicit drugs. Then obviously you'll use drugs anyway. Drugs being illegal isn't enough to stop you, but that doesn't mean that it won't stop other people. > Legalization doesn't mean big public advertising campaigns "come get your hit > from me, only $5 - the best feeling you'll ever have in your life!!!", it just > means "look, everyone who used to be hanging out with dealers and constantly > being worried about the cops can just relax and come to us and get safe and > clean stuff". Why would they be any different than cigarette and alcohol ads? Look at all the cigarette ads in magazines and buses (sp?) where people are eating pizza and smiling with their clean white teeth and no tar stains at all holding a box of cigarettes. It would be the same thing with drug ads. > > Surely we would be far better showing people how to enjoy and enhance > > life without drugs including alcohol and cigarettes that to encourage > > escapism and degradationn into drug addiction. > > Escapism and addiction... Sheesh! You can talk - you program computer games! > What makes spending a night on drugs any worse than spending a night playing > Command & Conquer? Brain damage, and suicide. Command & Conquer won't make you kill yourself if you lose. > > I have never met anyone who is better off after taking heroin or other > > Class A drugs regardless of the price or quality of product. > > Well now you've met one person ;) Drugs can do alot positive for a person, > believe me. It does however have ALOT to do with your reasons for doing it. > Alot of people don't have very good reasons, but that's their own fault, not > the fault of the drug. Yes, but drugs being legal would bring out the worst in everyone, regardless of whose fault it is. > > Very few people choose not to drink. > > Interestingly enough, most of the people who i know who take illicit drugs > regularly won't touch alcohol with a 20 foot pole. It depends alot on the > kind of social group you find yourself in. > > Having said that, i do get your point. But the thing is, drinking has been > considered a part of life for hundreds of years. In the Western world, many > of these other drugs haven't - and i don't think that's about to change. > There are tribal people around the world who have used coca or peyote > (similar to LSD) and other drugs which we consider to be "hard drugs" the > same way that Christians eat bread and drink wine in church - again, it's a > cultural/social thing, not something biological. > > I don't think use of these drugs would increase dramatically with > legalization. It might seem that way because alot of people would come out > of the closet, but i do believe most of the people who want to do it already > are. If that were true, then you shouldn't care whether they're legal or not. _| _| _|_|_| Visit the Kombat Pavilion today. _| _| _| _| http://come.to/the.kombat.pavilion _|_| _|_|_| _| _| _| _| _| _|
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<MLTa2.1192$961.2092@server1.news.adelphia.net>Path:
mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<19981126132925.13710.00000827@ng108.aol.com> <73ktq5$ufv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cbfd22286840ae9896d3@news.demon.co.uk> <73tekn$hcv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cd5d075f3e37a9896d5@news.demon.co.uk> <7424qg$goh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cffa6ac39ec9089896db@news.demon.co.uk> <74799l$t5h$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10d3f680c08c867a9896ec@news.demon.co.uk> <74gld2$fcj$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
From: tabmok99....@damnspaz.com (]{0MBAT)
Subject: Re: Happy Thanksgiving!
Date: 1998/12/07
Message-ID: <MLTa2.1192$961.2092@server1.news.adelphia.net>
X-Deja-AN: 419681910
References: <19981126132925.13710.00000827@ng108.aol.com> <73ktq5$ufv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cbfd22286840ae9896d3@news.demon.co.uk> <73tekn$hcv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cd5d075f3e37a9896d5@news.demon.co.uk> <7424qg$goh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10cffa6ac39ec9089896db@news.demon.co.uk> <74799l$t5h$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <MPG.10d3f680c08c867a9896ec@news.demon.co.uk> <74gld2$fcj$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Trace: server1.news.adelphia.net 913049708 24.48.22.61 (Mon, 07 Dec 1998 11:55:08 EDT)
Organization: http://mk5.cjb.net/
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 11:55:08 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.games.mk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit