Should hard narcotics be legalized?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=75225
Printed Date: February 17 2025 at 18:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Should hard narcotics be legalized?
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Subject: Should hard narcotics be legalized?
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:07
|
An obvious companion to the other poll which users here answered emphatically in the affirmative. I suspect this one will be a bit less on the positive side. A big yes for me for the same reasons I supported marijuana decriminalization in the other thread, excluding the arguments about the drug's benign nature. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Replies:
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:12
| Drugs are bad, mmkay kids? |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:20
| Sure, why not. |
Posted By: The Truth
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:28
|
Em... They seem to cause more problems than juana so no. ------------- http://blindpoetrecords.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow">  
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:38
|
I voted yes.
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:44
| Yes - and good riddance to... |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 15:45
|
Yep, prohibition is like designing sunglasses for moths.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 16:30
If this helps weed out the morons of the world then I vote yes  -------------   
|
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 16:46
|
Here is interesting point of view, i strongly recommend it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2fV-_eiKxE" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2fV-_eiKxE
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 17:23
|
If only so I can make meth more in the open. You should see my kitchen holy crap. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 17:27
Banned for discussing drug use. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
stonebeard wrote:Posted By: Prog Geo
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 17:30
|
Absolutely yes again!!!
------------- Sonorous Meal show every Sunday at 20:00 (greek time) on http://www.justincaseradio.com |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 17:31
:(((((( ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 19:05
| they should sell heroin at the pharmacy |
Posted By: Anthony H.
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 19:09
|
Yes, so that they can be properly regulated. ^ It's that simple. -------------  |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 19:10
|
Speaking of strong addictions, when are we banning the internet? |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 19:25
| except by pharmacy I meant 7-11 |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 20:04
|
Heroin, morphine, crack, coke, and PCP. I just have to ask myself two questions, would I do any of this junk if it was legal? Hell no. Is having it illegal dissuading the users from using? Also, hell no. Legalize it, regulate it, and make help available for those that get into trouble. Better to treat drug addiction as a health problem.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Anthony H.
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 20:06
 ------------- |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 20:52
|
Short answer: yes. Long answer: yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees. -------------   
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 20 2011 at 23:34
Well they used to! In the good ol days  I am a bit surprised to see the voting has so many "yes" votes thus far. I'll add one more to the yes column. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 00:23
|
Yes. I'm tired of the impure sh*t they sell in the streets. I'm anxious to be able to cook my own rock.
Really, 100% yes. People should be free to do whatever they want with their body. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Kestrel
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 00:43
| Portugal decriminalized them and they're fine. I would start with marijuana (yes, not a hard drug) first though to see how the country reacts. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 07:11
It ain't as peachy as you make it sound, though. -------------
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 08:19
|
Who is going to pay for the increase in medical expense? Just wondering. The most potent opiate available, Fentanyl, sometimes called China White, is used in anesthesia and not suprisingly the most common abusers are people who work in operating rooms. The life expectancy after the first time one does IV fentanyl is 18 months.
PCP is notorious for causing people to harm themself and/or others.
The hypersexuality caused by meth leads to pregnancies that often lead to children living in truly atrocious situations.
Individuals don't live in a vacuum. Lots of other people get harmed when these powerful chemicals ruin people's lives. And addiction is not a trait of the weak. It's part of the way we're all wired.
I voted yes in the other poll...but no here. There's a big difference between coffee, THC, alcohol, LSD, PCP, herion, etc. etc.
Alcohol is much more dangerous than THC 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. |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 08:49
|
General reminder.
Please remember our rules relating to illegal activities. Do not use this forum to promote the use of illegal drugs.
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 08:59
We as a society should probably condemn all of these things. That does not mean we should use force to prevent them from occurring anywhere within our borders. Forget arguments about freedom, prohibitions don't work. They don't effectively remove goods from a marketplace. Especially as a bankrupt country, we can not afford to pour billions of dollars into a drug war which does nothing besides breed corruption of officials, disrespect for the law, create and fund violent gangs, encourage the production of more potent narcotics, and divert police resources away from true crimes which real, physical victims rather than abstract, nonsensical victims such as society and morality. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:00
Don't worry I got it under control for you. I already banned Stoney. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:22
I actually am quite conflicted on this one. Your arguments about central top-down control in this case have a lot of legitimacy in my mind.
However, the victims aren't abstract. At least around here (East Saint Louis area) we have some horrific case of some guy on meth killing a toddler, usually the child of whoever he's shacking up with for the moment, multiple times every year. Some drugs do predictably increase aggression and violence. In addition, there is an enormous amount of free care that is given out to overdoses and other complications of drug abuse.
I'm pretty certain that if you completely deregulate drugs, the experience is that there is an uptick in use but that it finds a new equilibrium point that is higher (but not nearly so high as many would have you believe). The predicted decrease in policing costs does occur, but there is increased medical costs. (And some less easy to quantify social costs in addition.)
I should try to find some hard data, but I recall reading this several times.
------------- 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. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:38
|
I thought that the people who voted "yes" did it for the "simple pleasure" of trolling, but I fear it may not be the case. I wasn't a fan of Slipknot, but I've been shocked to learn that their bassist died from an O.D. In 2010. Like if the deaths of Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Morrisson (and probably Brian Jones - maybe he drowned, I'm not sure), Sid Vicious, Darby Crash, Keith Moon, John Bonham and others weren't enough demonstrative about the perils of narcotics. And if not dying of OD, you can "dream" of turning insane (Syd, Rory, where are you?) or having several diseases linked to these products. I know that hard drugs don't enter the life of someone like thunder in a blue sky (again, last week, I saw some TV news showing children in the favelas sniffing glue - not to talk about Romanian orphans, and some French, Italian or German kids can suffer the same conditions of life)... But when I hear about middle to upper-class French teenagers doing cocaine, their elder brothers remembering their trips on extasy or even middle-class, white-collar WASP Americain citizens enjoying crack... Do they really suffer from harsh social life conditions? Are they really mis- or uninformed about the threats of hard drugs? And we still have the problems of alcoholism or the misuse of everyday medicine drugs... I'm not even discussing ethics, moral values or whatever would be described as "philosophical/intellectual issues"... I'm just asking: "What for? What use? Why? Why so few serious?" |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:52
I wonder if the deaths of Cozy Powell, Eddie Cochran, Tommy Caldwell, Marc Bolan, Cliff Burton, Rich Mullins, and Bessie Smith are enough to demonstrate the perils of automobiles. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:55
|
Cars can be useful. They have a benefit / risk ration.
What is the benefit / risk ratio of PCP? ------------- 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. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:57
Essentially zero. What's the benefit/risk ratio of skydiving?
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:00
People like it. I don't have the moral superiority to prohibit someone other than my children from using PCP. That's essentially my basis for voting yes in this poll. Just because something is probably a stupid idea doesn't mean it should be illegal. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:03
The poor mother who is on drugs will at least maybe still have the boy's father to help her, since this guy will not be in prison as he is today. Things don't have to have a benefit to society for existing. People will find their benefits and will decide. Unless god finally shows his face, I don't like nobody else to do the deciding for me. -------------
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:05
^^^Though, in reference to Pat's post, I might see a point in making Jersey Shore illegal...  -------------
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:19
Wow, I don't remember when I last read such a long serious post of you.   |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:24
|
Again, I'm not necessarily arguing for criminalization. Simply saying that that the car analogy is faulty. Skydiving is probably closer. Except on PCP or Meth you're more likely to hurt someone else than while skydiving. (Unless your aim is particularly bad)
There is the other point of - if we're going to allow people to destroy their lives, do we have to also pay for the mess they create on their way out?
------------- 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. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:27
|
Yes of course if they infringe in the rights of others. That's obvious.
People will find ways to do as they want with their lives no matter what you are ready to "allow". But if it's done with something illegal, they're much more likely to hurt others. -------------
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:45
|
I'm sure Pat's point would be simply criminalize the hurting of others. No pre-emptive regulation. And that's a very valid point in this case. Don't criminalize the PCP, just the violent crime that people tend to do while on it.
Just thinking this through though...what about Fentanyl? A drug that is so powerfully rewarding that addiction is virtually guaranteed, and the chance of overdose so high, that simply trying it is likely to mean you'll be dead in less than two years? Is that something to have available at a store for general sale?
I see the consequences of hard drug use every day. Occasionally I see deaths. I also see deaths from cigarettes all the time, but that's not banned.
------------- 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:46
There are laws against murder. Maybe more specifically, there are laws against using meth. Clearly the law against using meth didn't offer any deterrence. He can be persecuted due to murder. People commit murder for a variety of reasons. Just making them illegal fails to solve or even address the problem. The uptick will occur in usage. I don't believe it will in new users. The increased equilibrium will occur due to price more than anything else. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:48
Yeah I don't understand why saying that people enjoy drugs is not valid. If entertainment comes from a painting, it's okay to mention that. It's okay to spend a hundred dollars on a fine bottle of wine. But it's not valid to say that someone enjoys PCP. Well people do. End of story. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:52
|
I've never seen someone require 5 guys to hold him down to stop him from bloodying everyone in sight after seeing a painting, or enjoying fine wine. I've seen it multiple times after PCP.
Just throwing out the other side of the argument. Not sure where I stand on this one, really. ------------- 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. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:01
|
I haven't seen the consequences of hard drug use Jay, I've FELT and CAUSED them. Long ago in my country I had an addiction issue, about 9 years ago. And from personal experience I can tell you that the drugs being legal would have helped things a lot, and not in the easy "oh now I can buy more" way. Many of the crimes associated with drug use occur because is illegal.
On the Fentanyl or so drug, if the drug is legal and not a taboo, more advertising and edication can be devoted to explain that it's pretty much "use and die" sh*t. Now if someone still goes and tries it, it's their damn fault. Period. -------------
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:03
|
Anyway, if drugs cease to be so controlled and illegal, don't people think the market (oh The Shield) will come up with ways to help/treat serious addicts? Or to produce less ultra-dangerous drugs? -------------
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:08
I've seen this too. I've been on the receiving end. I've seen it from other behavior like a guy's girlfriend cheating on him. I understand it has adverse effects. Clearly prohibition does not stop these from manifesting, but look at the cost of prohibition. For the record though I'll bet PCP feels a hell of a lot better then staring at a painting. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:11
I've seen people needed to be hold down by 5 guys just because someone took their parking spot...  -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:15
That does it! Parking spots must be illegal! ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:25
I've tried to bring up the largely ignored issue of the increase in potency of drugs caused by prohibition. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:37
|
Some of us (I won't mention anyone in particular) just choose to take 12 of the low-potency delivery methods of our drug of choice. Why waste all that water? ------------- 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:40
|
I doubt many of us drink with the primary intention of becoming inebriated. I stopped that when I turned 19.
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:44
It's called kidney stone prevention.  ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date 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. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date 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. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date 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? |
Posted By: Garion81
Date 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. ------------- 
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?" |
Posted By: The T
Date 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. -------------
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:02
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. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:03
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. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:18
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. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 12:41
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. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date 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. ------------- 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date 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. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date 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 |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: January 21 2011 at 13:37
I'm a doctor in a community clinic run by a large private organization funded almost entirely by various government programs.  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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date 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. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date 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. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date 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. " |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 22 2011 at 11:22
Oh thank God someone finally did |
Posted By: markosherrera
Date Posted: January 23 2011 at 05:24
|
No
------------- Hi progmaniacs of all the world |