Heroin and cocaine and acid -- Oh My! - Page 2 - 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 01-18-2005, 06:47 AM   #16
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 03:41 AM
i have smoked plenty of pot. it makes me fat, stupid, lazy, and forgetful. i stopped smoking pot for all these reasons. it is also no worse than alcohol, it doesn't lead to many of the social hazards of alcohol (drunk driving and date rape, just to start), and has clear medicinal benefits. i think an important first step towards the legalization of pot would be its decriminalization. ignore people carrying a dimebag on them. or take the dimebag, but don't throw them in jail. jail is not a place for stoners, it is a place for actual criminals who pose a threat to society.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 08:15 AM   #17
BAW
The Flower
 
BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The OC....!!!!
Posts: 11,094
Local Time: 12:41 AM
I think pot should be decriminalized and people should get treatment instead of jail for most drug offenses. However, being raised by heroin addicts and living the hell that goes along with it, it makes me sick to my stomach to think about harder drugs being legalized. There is no way I can see see both sides of the issue.
__________________

__________________
BAW is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 08:30 AM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Let's say you legalize drugs and that a certain percentage of the population take these drugs on a regular basis.

Would it be acceptable to discriminate against people who take these drugs (i.e., not hire them because of their choice to live under the influence of drugs)?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 08:45 AM   #19
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Let's say you legalize drugs and that a certain percentage of the population take these drugs on a regular basis.

Would it be acceptable to discriminate against people who take these drugs (i.e., not hire them because of their choice to live under the influence of drugs)?

no, would be a privacy issue. if drugs were decriminalized, you'd have no business asking as an employer.

also, this would probably ever only apply for marijuana. people on heroin can hardly hold down a job.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:00 AM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Drug testing is currently used in many businesses. Since drugs may remain in your system after you leave home and go to work, it may become the business of an employer.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:15 AM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Drug testing is currently used in many businesses. Since drugs may remain in your system after you leave home and go to work, it may become the business of an employer.

that's true, and it's certainly true of government jobs. i suppose as the law stands right now, it is at the discretion of the employer, but if drugs were to be made legal, and even if you were subject to drug testing, the substances found in your body would be 100% legal, so an employer would be on much shakier ground. you cannot fire anyone for consuming alcohol (i think), but you can fire someone for showing up intoxicated. here, it's not the use/abuse of alcohol, but the state of intoxication that's the issue. i would imagine newly legalized drugs would fall under the same category. it would not be grounds for firing if one were to have the remants of marijuana in your body, but it would be grounds for firing if one were to show up stoned.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:23 AM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
that's true, and it's certainly true of government jobs. i suppose as the law stands right now, it is at the discretion of the employer, but if drugs were to be made legal, and even if you were subject to drug testing, the substances found in your body would be 100% legal, so an employer would be on much shakier ground. you cannot fire anyone for consuming alcohol (i think), but you can fire someone for showing up intoxicated. here, it's not the use/abuse of alcohol, but the state of intoxication that's the issue. i would imagine newly legalized drugs would fall under the same category. it would not be grounds for firing if one were to have the remants of marijuana in your body, but it would be grounds for firing if one were to show up stoned.
I guess that goes to the core of my question. The drugs may now be legal, but some may not want to employ people who take these drugs.

Is legalization for the benefit of individual freedom, or is it something that society as a whole must accept?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:26 AM   #23
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Is legalization for the benefit of individual freedom, or is it something that society as a whole must accept?

are the two mutually exclusive? seems like another false choice to me .... ideally, the increasing of individual freedom, so long as it doesn't encroach upon the freedom of another individual, should benefit society -- at least in the libertarian line of thought.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:33 AM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
are the two mutually exclusive? seems like another false choice to me .... ideally, the increasing of individual freedom, so long as it doesn't encroach upon the freedom of another individual, should benefit society -- at least in the libertarian line of thought.
Does the freedom of another include the freedom to not hire them because of their drug use?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:34 AM   #25
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Re: Heroin and cocaine and acid -- Oh My!

Quote:
Originally posted by indra
Soooo...let's talk about drugs.
I do think it would lessen the problems we as a society face from drug use, as the focus would shift from law enforcement to education and treatment, which I believe is much more proactive.
Just to touch on this portion of your post....

Do you mean spend more money to tell people drugs are bad?
I have three children, two of which are in elementary school (one's in 1st grade the other in 4th). They have already been educated on drug use and the dangers of it.

What, other than what is being done already, would you suggest in order to educate people on the dangers of drug use?
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:37 AM   #26
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by beli


Im not Indra, (obviously) but......

Alcohol is already legal.
As are cigarettes which contain the most addictive and lethal drug of all..... nicotine.
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:40 AM   #27
Refugee
 
ImOuttaControl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,340
Local Time: 02:41 AM
Re: Re: Heroin and cocaine and acid -- Oh My!

Quote:
Originally posted by thacraic


Just to touch on this portion of your post....

Do you mean spend more money to tell people drugs are bad?
I have three children, two of which are in elementary school (one's in 1st grade the other in 4th). They have already been educated on drug use and the dangers of it.

What, other than what is being done already, would you suggest in order to educate people on the dangers of drug use?
I sort of wonder the same thing. It always sort of confuses me when people say "we should quit spending all this money fighting drugs and instead legalize them. Then, we should focus on treatment and prevention."

That seems like shooting yourself in the foot to me. If the goverment legalizes drugs, it enables people who would have never done done before to become junkies, then we'd have to pay for their treatment and all the extra prevention education...ect. Sounds like a vicious cycle to me. Government legalizes, saves money on fighting, people become addicted, government spends money on treating addicted people.
__________________
ImOuttaControl is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 09:58 AM   #28
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Overall in terms of legalizing it I honestly don't know how I feel.

I guess it comes down to which benefits society more? That is the purpose of law anyway right? To maintain order and provide a society in which everyone benifits from that order?

If drugs were legalized what the cause and effect be?

In terms of personal liberties, I think drugs should be legal yes, certainly. In terms of how it would affect society as a whole? I can't think of any sound evidence that would show it to be of benefit. Would the money government saved on law enforecement not have to be redirected to treatment of people who have addictions? Would the government not have to spend even more resources on monitoring how drugs are made then it already does with legal drugs (i.e alcohol, cigarettes and medicinal drugs)?

I guess the question here would be would the personal liberty of someone buying a dimebag at the cornershop out weigh the cost of more treatment programs and more monitoring by the FDA that the American taxpayer would be responsible for?

Also considering the limited access people have to drugs (not to say that if someone wants drugs they can't get them, cause they certainly can) but with it being difficult to just go to Chevron and pick up a sheet of acid does that not prevent even more people from using drugs? And furthermore prevent horrible drug related deaths as we see with the legal substance of alcohol (drunk driving)?

I guess I am in the middle on this one. From a the view of personal liberties I say yes, from an overall societal view I see it as doing more harm than good.
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 10:00 AM   #29
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 03:41 AM
Re: Re: Re: Heroin and cocaine and acid -- Oh My!

Quote:
Originally posted by ImOuttaControl


I sort of wonder the same thing. It always sort of confuses me when people say "we should quit spending all this money fighting drugs and instead legalize them. Then, we should focus on treatment and prevention."

That seems like shooting yourself in the foot to me. If the goverment legalizes drugs, it enables people who would have never done done before to become junkies, then we'd have to pay for their treatment and all the extra prevention education...ect. Sounds like a vicious cycle to me. Government legalizes, saves money on fighting, people become addicted, government spends money on treating addicted people.
Yep, just what I finished posting.
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 10:13 AM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:41 AM
There is already a problem with drunk driving, why should we have to worry about the spread of delusional drugs legally placed in the hands of drivers? (not to imply that stoned driving would become legal, but it would become a much greater problem)
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
 

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 03:41 AM.


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