"Drugs are the curse of the land and turn women into prostitutes" - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-27-2007, 06:06 PM   #46
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24


True we'll have a bunch of drug king pins claiming racism and how the white man took their product. And we will have FYMders saying it's true.


edited...it wasn't worth a response
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-27-2007, 06:07 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
As my father (a doctor) has always said, he'd rather me smoke a joint and scoff a pizza on a Friday night
Really?
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 06:10 PM   #48
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Yeah a little education would show you that a natural plant is much healthier than booze and cigarettes anyday of the week.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-27-2007, 06:30 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 12:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24
What I meant on the grave diggers is that they will be busier than usual since many want all drugs legalized. Think about it. What if a child accidently took it? Used it for murder to OD someone? Or mixing drugs? Yup the grave diggers will surly be busy because of this.
But that would be balanced Justin. A massive % of drug deaths today occur from simply not getting what you think you are buying. A 20yr old girl here in Sydney died a fortnight ago after taking, apparently, two ecstacy pills over a decent period of time. This, if it is all you have, should not kill someone. Not even close. Problem is, as it turns out, what she bought as 'ecstacy' was not ecstacy at all. This makes up a huge % of drug emergencies and even deaths. These are not the addicted heroin junkies, this is not effecting the well connected regular drug user, this is striking down the kid who takes a pill a couple of times a year and is absolutely no curse on society. Regulated legalised drugs would knock these emergencies and deaths out completely. Most 'saturday night emergency room' drug issues are directly related to this problem, and nothing else.

I think you would find an increase in use, a slight increase in addiction, but a big drop in deaths/emergencies and a huge, mammoth, incredible drop in crime.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 06:35 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 12:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


Really?
Really. Of course he'd prefer I have a cup of tea, watch a DVD and go to bed early, but you will be hard pressed to find a doctor who thinks a regular pot smoker is worse off than a regular drinker/cigarette smoker. There are obviously loads of health problems associated with pot - physical and mental - but they come nowhere near those associated with the physical, mental and social problems that come with regular drinking and cigarette smoking.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 07:00 PM   #51
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 07:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


I didn't mean that this was a bad thing - meant for there to be some sarcasm. My bad.
No problem. It seemed odd given the rest of your post. I shouldn't have jumped on it.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 07:59 PM   #52
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers


But that would be balanced Justin. A massive % of drug deaths today occur from simply not getting what you think you are buying. A 20yr old girl here in Sydney died a fortnight ago after taking, apparently, two ecstacy pills over a decent period of time. This, if it is all you have, should not kill someone. Not even close. Problem is, as it turns out, what she bought as 'ecstacy' was not ecstacy at all. This makes up a huge % of drug emergencies and even deaths. These are not the addicted heroin junkies, this is not effecting the well connected regular drug user, this is striking down the kid who takes a pill a couple of times a year and is absolutely no curse on society. Regulated legalised drugs would knock these emergencies and deaths out completely. Most 'saturday night emergency room' drug issues are directly related to this problem, and nothing else.

I think you would find an increase in use, a slight increase in addiction, but a big drop in deaths/emergencies and a huge, mammoth, incredible drop in crime.
Quite right, if a legal supplier was selling adulterated products they would be open to punishment through legal avenues. People are always going to use drugs, pursuing an authoritarian campaign of zero tolerance masked in the language of social justice won't change that.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:20 PM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 05:15 PM

I will say that the pro-legalization crowd makes some good arguments that are worthy of consideration.


Quote:
Originally posted by indra
Drugs (yes, all of them) should be legalised. There would still be addiction problems, but you aren't going to be able to ever completely stop that -- there are people who will get addicted no matter how tough the drug laws are. What legalising drugs does do is bring them out into the open where the people with problems (and that isn't everyone who uses drugs) can get help, and it also keeps the thugs out of the supply chain. A great deal of the problems societies face from drugs is caused not by the drugs themselves, but by the illegality of the drugs.
If we are admitting that the drugs can and/or do lead to problems for some people, then who should this burden be on in the legalized drug world? Should all of society, including those who do not use the drugs nor support their use in society, bear this burden in their taxes? I think that tax money would be much better spent on paying public educators and improving the quality of education in Lowndes County, Alabama rather than subsidizing a safety net recovery program for for more people who choose to get their thrills via dangerous chemicals.

What about the additional dangers created by the behavior of additional persons who are "under the influence" of drugs/chemicals which they can readily and legally purchase in their neighborhood stores? There will undoubtedly be some people who do not do drugs while they are illegal but would choose to experiment if they were legalized. This would mean more people on the roads, in our communities, who could negatively be affected by their new hobbies and pose dangers to other members of their community.

I realize these legalized drugs would be "more controlled" in their production and distribution, but those weaker versions may not be enough for addictive users who want more, more, more.

I enjoy a Tecate with my meal at a Mexican restaurant; but a few shots of Jaegermeister would be more fun if I were up for an adventurous evening. Which is more dangerous to me and people whom I may encounter? Obviously, a few shots of Jaeger. I was at a lake party once where jetskis were present. A guy said, "We ought to get smashed and drive these things around the lake all day." He and everyone else were sober when he said that, but you do see the risk that he would have posed to people all over the lake if he were under the influence of alcohol (or any other drug for that matter) and piloting any type of watercraft.

As it is today with currently illegal drugs being illegal, even in my low-crime community we have problems with burglaries commited by meth addicts. Just two weeks ago, a string of burglaries were commited in peoples' private homes by two twenty-something women; eight of these burglaries occured in my neighborhood alone. The two women would go to the front doors of houses, knock, and if no one answered,they would break into the homes and take things that did not belong to them. What would/should have happened if they encountered a frightened resident and someone, be it the intruder or the resident, had gotten hurt? The two women were caught and are believed to be addicts. Do we really want to introduce more people to meth, opiates, cocaine, etc. so that they run the risk of posing such dangers to themselves and society, including innocent people?


Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers


Regulated legalised drugs would knock these emergencies and deaths out completely. Most 'saturday night emergency room' drug issues are directly related to this problem, and nothing else.

I think you would find an increase in use, a slight increase in addiction, but a big drop in deaths/emergencies and a huge, mammoth, incredible drop in crime.
Even today, many "Saturday night emergency room" situations, as well as those occuring on Tuesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, or whenever, are brought about by alcohol, which is legal, albeit controlled. Who's to say that introducing legalized chemicals and drugs to the buying public won't increase these situations? And with many of these situations arising from the use of chemical drugs, not pot or alcohol, I would suspect that the medical risks would be further complicated as well, especially when it comes to emergency rooms that have not historically faced these issues.

I don't mean to offend any of you and I am not trying to be authoritarian by denying any of you your rights to get your kicks, but I do see the legalization of many of these drugs, particularly meth, cocaine and opiates, as bringing increased danger to broader segments of society. Meth does not bring any positive value to people or to society.

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:24 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 06:15 PM
Not adding anything productive to the discussion here...but I wanted to pop in and say a big howdy to U2Bama. It's been ages since I've seen you post in here! I hope this isn't just a one-off and that you'll be sticking around.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:59 PM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 05:15 PM

Hello, Sula! I am a habitually infrequent poster these days but do occasionally read this forum just to get a glimpse of the political goings-on of the U2 fanbase.
I had read where you and Sul are in the US now; I hope y'all are doing well and that he is enjoying it here. Thanks for saying howdy.

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 11:39 PM   #56
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lindenhurst Long Island
Posts: 174
Local Time: 11:15 PM
If Drugs were legal I believe there will be less violence,no more drug deals on street corners.No more gang wars on the streets because of drugs.less prostitution,an increase in drug safety,prisons will be less crowded..
People who do drugs now are the same people who would do drugs if they were legal,and if someone decides to do drugs because it was legal at least it would be more safe to do so.
The idea that kids would be more likley to accidentaly swallow drugs is false.Kids are more likely to swallow house cleaners.
I'm not saying i'm for drug use..lets justmake it safer.
__________________
u2fan628 is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:58 AM   #57
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers


Really. Of course he'd prefer I have a cup of tea, watch a DVD and go to bed early, but you will be hard pressed to find a doctor who thinks a regular pot smoker is worse off than a regular drinker/cigarette smoker. There are obviously loads of health problems associated with pot - physical and mental - but they come nowhere near those associated with the physical, mental and social problems that come with regular drinking and cigarette smoking.
From my understanding, which is limited about this, pot smoking is worse than tobacco because 1) there's no filter and 2) the tar created by pot is more carcinogenetic.

And regarding alcohol – there have been many medical reports about the benefits to a healthy person of moderate drinking, especially red wine. I’ve never seen any such reports about pot (except possible benefits for those already suffering from ailments like cancer and glaucoma.)
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:07 AM   #58
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 07:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
If we are admitting that the drugs can and/or do lead to problems for some people, then who should this burden be on in the legalized drug world? Should all of society, including those who do not use the drugs nor support their use in society, bear this burden in their taxes? I think that tax money would be much better spent on paying public educators and improving the quality of education in Lowndes County, Alabama rather than subsidizing a safety net recovery program for for more people who choose to get their thrills via dangerous chemicals.

What about the additional dangers created by the behavior of additional persons who are "under the influence" of drugs/chemicals which they can readily and legally purchase in their neighborhood stores? There will undoubtedly be some people who do not do drugs while they are illegal but would choose to experiment if they were legalized. This would mean more people on the roads, in our communities, who could negatively be affected by their new hobbies and pose dangers to other members of their community.

I realize these legalized drugs would be "more controlled" in their production and distribution, but those weaker versions may not be enough for addictive users who want more, more, more.

I enjoy a Tecate with my meal at a Mexican restaurant; but a few shots of Jaegermeister would be more fun if I were up for an adventurous evening. Which is more dangerous to me and people whom I may encounter? Obviously, a few shots of Jaeger. I was at a lake party once where jetskis were present. A guy said, "We ought to get smashed and drive these things around the lake all day." He and everyone else were sober when he said that, but you do see the risk that he would have posed to people all over the lake if he were under the influence of alcohol (or any other drug for that matter) and piloting any type of watercraft.

As it is today with currently illegal drugs being illegal, even in my low-crime community we have problems with burglaries commited by meth addicts. Just two weeks ago, a string of burglaries were commited in peoples' private homes by two twenty-something women; eight of these burglaries occured in my neighborhood alone. The two women would go to the front doors of houses, knock, and if no one answered,they would break into the homes and take things that did not belong to them. What would/should have happened if they encountered a frightened resident and someone, be it the intruder or the resident, had gotten hurt? The two women were caught and are believed to be addicts. Do we really want to introduce more people to meth, opiates, cocaine, etc. so that they run the risk of posing such dangers to themselves and society, including innocent people?
That's pretty much where I stand myself. I don't support drug legalization either.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:40 AM   #59
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


From my understanding, which is limited about this, pot smoking is worse than tobacco because 1) there's no filter and 2) the tar created by pot is more carcinogenetic.

And regarding alcohol – there have been many medical reports about the benefits to a healthy person of moderate drinking, especially red wine. I’ve never seen any such reports about pot (except possible benefits for those already suffering from ailments like cancer and glaucoma.)
This is pretty far from the truth.

It depends on how you smoke it, if there is a filter or not. And yes there is tar, but who smokes a pack of joints a day? Very few. Who smokes a pack a day of cigs? Quite a few. So that argument doesn't hold much weight. Plus pot doesn't have all the chemicals that a cig does. It's the chemicals that will kill you...

And yes alcohol can have benefits, but what drug out there has the worse addiction problem? Alcohol!!!

And this comes from someone who did inhale in college and hasn't touched it in years, don't really care for the stuff. But I educate myself on the facts.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:42 AM   #60
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama


If we are admitting that the drugs can and/or do lead to problems for some people, then who should this burden be on in the legalized drug world? Should all of society, including those who do not use the drugs nor support their use in society, bear this burden in their taxes? I think that tax money would be much better spent on paying public educators and improving the quality of education in Lowndes County, Alabama rather than subsidizing a safety net recovery program for for more people who choose to get their thrills via dangerous chemicals.

You don't think you pay for it now? You are paying for a first time offenders stay in prison right now...
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com