Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Should hard narcotics be legalized?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedShould hard narcotics be legalized?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Poll Question: Items such as heroin, morphine, crack, coke, and PCP
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
21 [60.00%]
14 [40.00%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
markosherrera View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 01 2006
Location: World
Status: Offline
Points: 3252
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Should hard narcotics be legalized?
    Posted: January 23 2011 at 05:24
No
Hi progmaniacs of all the world
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2011 at 11:22
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

General reminder.
 
Please remember our rules relating to illegal activities. Do not use this forum to promote the use of illegal drugs.

Don't worry I got it under control for you. I already banned Stoney.


Oh thank God someone finally did Tongue
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 22:50
The research side of things made more sense for her for a variety of personal reasons.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 14:53
It's probably not worth it. Some amazing life experience though.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 13:59
Cool cool. My girlfriend was med school bound before I talked her out of it.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 13:37
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

It is doomed to failure for certain things, but only if you have a conception of certain things that you want regulated in a certain way. I don't see a need for much regulation at all obviously. Without a government, bands of firms don't really ever become quasi-government in the way I mean the word.

EDIT: Are you a doctor or just in the research end of medicine? I've always assumed the latter.

I'm a doctor in a community clinic run by a large private organization funded almost entirely by various government programs. Big smile My boards are in Family Medicine but I do about 2/3 Adult Medicine and 1/3 Psychiatry.


You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 13:15
When children suffer because of the bad habits of their parents then there needs to be a way for said children to escape the situation until such a time when those parents get their priorities straight. raising a human life should always come before destructive habits
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 13:05
It is doomed to failure for certain things, but only if you have a conception of certain things that you want regulated in a certain way. I don't see a need for much regulation at all obviously. Without a government, bands of firms don't really ever become quasi-government in the way I mean the word.

EDIT: Are you a doctor or just in the research end of medicine? I've always assumed the latter.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - January 21 2011 at 13:06
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:49
Well those are important distinctions. But having the suppliers self-regulate seems like a plan doomed to failure. Doctors don't self regulate worth a crap and that's part of why we have the tort problem. Licensing is ostensibly the medical profession self-regulating, and I know you're not a fan of that. The question I have is when do a "band of firms" become "quasi-governmental?"
 
 
ed. I don't even belong to the AMA for various reasons. It was just an example.


Edited by Negoba - January 21 2011 at 12:49
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:41
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Well that's the hard part. When does a semi-private body (like the American Medical Association) get just as bad as "government" when they are handed the keys to regulation. I certainly think that a group of pharmacists and doctors would be better at choosing rules about medicine than businessmen and lawyers, but there are alot of conflicts of interest that could muddy that system too.
 


I didn't say allow the AMA, which is nothing more than a cartel, to control the supply. Each individual firm producing it would control the supply. However, firms often band together and set certain industry standards. I don't mean establishing a quasi-governmental body embedded in a private organization.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:30
Well that's the hard part. When does a semi-private body (like the American Medical Association) get just as bad as "government" when they are handed the keys to regulation. I certainly think that a group of pharmacists and doctors would be better at choosing rules about medicine than businessmen and lawyers, but there are alot of conflicts of interest that could muddy that system too.
 
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:18
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Just curious Pat, do you think non-psychoactive medication should be unrestricted. Such as cardiac medicine that is great for ailing hearts with correct monitoring but can kill if incorrectly used? Guys like me would just give suggestions for use rather than prescriptions?


Well unrestricted is a vague term. If you mean unrestricted by any sort of government mandate then yes. Professional and industrial means of restricting the sale, I have no objection to that. I think that some drugs should be more freely available. Some should probably remain a little more rigidly kept.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:11
Just curious Pat, do you think non-psychoactive medication should be unrestricted. Such as cardiac medicine that is great for ailing hearts with correct monitoring but can kill if incorrectly used? Guys like me would just give suggestions for use rather than prescriptions?
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:03
Originally posted by Garion81 Garion81 wrote:

Just a question for clarity.  When you say legal do you mean completely legal with no restrictions whatsoever?  Do you mean light regulations like cigarettes and alcohol but still sold in the common market?  Heavily regulated that you would need permits and doctors administration? or legalized for medical purpose only?  I mean there are many degrees of legalization.  

I probably would support it this way for Marijuana the second step I mentioned.  For harder narcotics if you are already addicted then the third solution and only legal for the medical purpose only.  For sure though the unregulated manufacture and distribution of these drugs should always be illegal.  Way to much potential for death other than the API main effects or side effects on people. 



I'm in the minority, probably a minority of one, but I think it should be sold by anyone, anywhere, to anyone, anywhere, subject to no restriction, tax, etc.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:02
Originally posted by harmonium.ro harmonium.ro wrote:

Wouldn't the problem with hard narcotics (addiction, side effects, ruining lifes, etc.) be solved by legalizing the softer drugs? I mean, would one still need them if the softer option would be legally and comfortably available? 


It would just reduce the size of the drug market. People will still desire the hard stuff.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:01
For example with coke leaf products: I'm pretty sure legalization would reduce the cost of powder cocaine, thus effectively eliminating the need for most production of crack, thus eliminating its most dangerous alternative. But with coke being illegal, the price is so high that low-income people had to be offered the much more addictive crack.
Back to Top
Garion81 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:56
Just a question for clarity.  When you say legal do you mean completely legal with no restrictions whatsoever?  Do you mean light regulations like cigarettes and alcohol but still sold in the common market?  Heavily regulated that you would need permits and doctors administration? or legalized for medical purpose only?  I mean there are many degrees of legalization.  

I probably would support it this way for Marijuana the second step I mentioned.  For harder narcotics if you are already addicted then the third solution and only legal for the medical purpose only.  For sure though the unregulated manufacture and distribution of these drugs should always be illegal.  Way to much potential for death other than the API main effects or side effects on people. 



Edited by Garion81 - January 21 2011 at 11:59


"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:47
Wouldn't the problem with hard narcotics (addiction, side effects, ruining lifes, etc.) be solved by legalizing the softer drugs? I mean, would one still need them if the softer option would be legally and comfortably available? 

Edited by harmonium.ro - January 21 2011 at 11:48
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:45

No, not the primary intention. But that is often one of the benefits.

You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:44
Personally the carbs in beer worries me much more than the alcohol. 
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.350 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.