Print

[melon]

when you have a smoke you cant even be arsed to spell guns never mind shoot them!

[The unProfessional]

[melon]

Any park at night is full of people doing illegal shit.
The police dont really care.

And about the green, ive just booked 4 days in Amsterdam over Christmas! I cant wait!!!!!!
Just me and my girl....

Actually cant wait to go to the Van Gough and Rembrant museums.

[The unProfessional]

I agree.  Legalization of substances like marijuana would actually do alot of good.  Cartels wouldn't be raking in as much dirty money, prisons wouldn't be packed full of poor bastards caught with weed, and tax payers wouldn't be paying for 'em.  Although, as much as I believe in individual responsibility, I don't feel legalization of crack or pcp, for example, is a safe move.  They tend to modify one's state of mind to a dangerous level, physically and mentally.  As far as I'm concerned, the only violent crime caused by weed is involved with the illegal selling and buying of it.  If it were legal, we wouldn't see people dying over it.  Who gets killed over cigarettes?

[The unProfessional]

Yeah, on marijuana we're definitely on the same page.  Even if it wasn't controlled by the state, but an entire private-sector industry could be formed, creating jobs and so-forth.  I really don't see marijuana as being any more harmful that cigs or booze.  How often do people beat their wives after a some hash

The heroin question is an interesting one.  It's one of those arguments where there are fantastic points on both sides.  It's tough to predict, without actual experimentation, what would become of such actions.  With drugs like heroin, users can't quit cold turkey.  The withdrawals are simply too intense.  So some sort of controlled rehab where they're actually given decreasing doses while undergoing some sort of counseling, I think, would work pretty well.  Addicts of chemically enhanced drugs, like heroin and cocaine, don't take their fix lightly, and the fewer addicts we have, the fewer related deaths and crimes we would see.  Cops are under a constant barrage of crime as a result of heavy drugs, so I can see why they'd support a fairly liberal legislation on drugs, solely because I imagine the violent crime rate related to drugs is proportional to the # of addicts.

I doubt we'll see a serious debate like that here in the US anytime soon.  People are too busy putting the burden of self responsibility on the government and law enforcement.  People blame the gov't for controlling our liberties, when it's us who creating these strict controls.  Regardless of the issue, there are tons of loud obnoxious voices telling the "authorities" they fucked up somewhere, instead of looking into their own households.  That conflict is occuring everywhere... schools are a major arena for that.

[melon]

Wow I knew it was messed up in the US but life for growing some skunk!!!

The heroin idea has been talked about quite a bit over here as well. Im sure it was tried in holland but i dont know how succesful it was.

There was a funny story in the papers about a year ago. The government was growing crops of ganja for medical experiments, but they grew it beside a major motorway with only a 2ft fence at its border. There was loads of photos in the papers with cars stopping alongside the field and filling there cars completely full of the crop, people had even gone and hired vans and where filling them up. It was quite embarrising for the authorities but it gave the country a laugh.

If we legalised most drugs, including pot andcocaine (pcp is still relitevely unheard of over here so i dont know much about it), we would destroy so much organised crime which is funded by the sale of these drugs. Not only that but as mentioned we could grow it ourselves and create jobs as well as the government taxing the drug.
The benefit for the taker is they would know what they were taking has not been mixed with crap but would be safer to take.

It can only be a matter of time before pot is legal over here. It has already been decriminilised (sp) and police turn a blind eye if your at a festival or an event. Even if your caught walking down the street the police will only take it off you and let you go, you might get a warning but even thats unllikely.
There are many people who go on tv and state they smoke it for medicimal reasons (things like ME or even bad arthritis).

Just think how many people die each year from alcohol and ciggerates. All the trouble in towns at the weekend is between drunken people after nights out. There are no recorded deaths from pot in this country and i have never known of a fight between two stoned people. Why can any government think it is bad?

Also by legalising you are cutting the chance of people trying harder drugs because they would not be in contact with dealers pushing it on to them.

[Ween311]

QUOTE

What would you think if the state gave herion and administered it through nurses and a safe needle exchange?

My state actually has something similar to this.  At the clinic, an addict can go and get "treatments."  They are given a substance called methadone which is similar to heroin and have to be checked for needle marks.  I don't know a lot about it, but hopefully the addict has to be in some kind of rehab program to be eligible.  From what I have heard though, the methadone is harder to kick than heroin.  I am all for the legalization of marijuana.

[The unProfessional]

[thomes08]

i agree that most drugs should be illegal.  Pot should be legal though.  Driving drunk imo is 10X worse than driving really high.  In my soc class i learned that 75% of all homicides in the US were committed when the person was legally drunk.  There was a HUGE chapter on how alcohol makes people violent.  It's been proven to over and over again.  Pot on the other hand makes people not want to be in any confrontation at all, it doesn't make people want to get laid so there won't be any "taking advantage" of other people.  

PCP, crack, coke, heroin and all that stuff should definately be illegal.  I  drink, smoke pot, do shrooms, no longer acid, and other legal stuff like 2ci, dmt, dxm and i think pot should be legal.  The other stuff i'm not so sure of though.

thomes08

[Dark_Link2135]

QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Jul 17 2004, 08:12 AM)

Dark_Link2135: Kerry has both a domestic and international plan to deal with Aids. You, or the sites you are using, are distorting the international plan. Kerry authored the best AIDS bill to pass through the senate, this is not just politics it's an issue he has been a big part of.. http://www.johnkerry...s/domestic.html and compare to: http://www.georgewbush.com/HealthCare/ BTW, it is GWB who wants to open the borders to illegal aliens, not Kerry. Whoever wrote your editorial doesn't seem to have a very good grasp on the platforms of the candidates. You should look for yourself at each of their websites and see which one makes sense to you.

you people can have your own opinions.  all we are doing now is saying the same thing over and over again.  and once again, you are only coming off as childish and ignorant yourself when you call anyone who has an opnion different than yourself ignorant and childish.  flaming gets you nowhere.  i notice that i havnt been resorting to flaming as the only basis to my arguement.

anywho......theres not much left to say.  ive said everything i possible have to say before....but finally someone responded to the kerry thing, and the utter stupidity (no offence, but you really do not know what you are talking about)  of it needs to stand out....so here goes.

i dont agree with opening borders to anyone.  thats the one of the things i hate about bush...his illegal alien policy.  o boy, lets let more illegal mexicans in so i can dish out taxes to pay for their welfare that they are sucking up.

sounds like fun.

anywho....you are entirely contradictory to yourself.

id like to see you find an article that is NOT an editorial.  any political artical is going to be a biased editorial slant on the issue.

this is kind of a side issue, but here you see again that kerry wanted to ban anyone with aids from coming into the united states....and now he wants to let them in.  yet another example of how he tells people what they want to hear.

http://www.vote-smar...can_id=S0421103


http://www.johnkerry...s/domestic.html[/URL]

i had to dig to find it, since the democrats obviously know how stupid this is, and how much it would raise health insurance, so they gave it a very small place hoping people would read over it.....im sure you could find it in more detail, but ill go ahead and use the liberally biased links.

"John Kerry supports a comprehensive, science-based approach to prevention and reject discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS.  He supports integrated care and prevention programs and will work to end the HIV travel and immigration ban.  John Kerry will also end the federal ban on syringe exchange and harm reduction programs to prevent the spread of HIV."

sorry, you are wrong.  and how the heck did we get to alcohol/drugs/violence?

lol, ive been gone the past 2 days, sorry.


also i dont see anything on aids in your link to bush's site.  i do see a plan to lower health care costs though.  were you supporting bush in your post?  strange, you seem almost as flip-floppy as kerry.

i just love it when people supply links without reading them.

[Colonel32]

QUOTE

you people can have your own opinions. all we are doing now is saying the same thing over and over again. and once again, you are only coming off as childish and ignorant yourself when you call anyone who has an opnion different than yourself ignorant and childish. flaming gets you nowhere. i notice that i havnt been resorting to flaming as the only basis to my arguement.

I wasn't flaming you at all

I linked you to the campaign site and also Bush's so that you can compare. Thats not biased at all. It's better to see what the candidate is saying than to get news from an editorial. The AIDS travel ban has nothing to do with opening up borders or citizenship.

QUOTE

also i dont see anything on aids in your link to bush's site

That was the point.  

You seem to think Kerry allowing AIDS patients to be treated in America is a political move. Who is that going to be popular with ?

There was no disrespect there at all, I was trying to link you to the sources so you could see both the candidates stances because honestly the original post in this thread didn't make much sense to me in comparison to Kerry's legislations and Bush's public stance.

Did you not notice the    thing at the end. go back to this thread and count the number of people that called you names, i can't understand why you would have found my post offensive.

[Dark_Link2135]

[AkumAPRIME]

ahh sorry, i wasnt intending to bash you. it was those other people who were bashing me on my opinon on fags

Man dark link... Skate, Thomes and many others shouldn't spend time arguing with you. We live in a world where seeing someones name alot means there important, on the news, in magazines, on the net. But here, anyone and everyone can post a million times, put their name everywhere, and unfortunately, I think we fall for that "  oh this guy must be somebody" Dark link and nemt are noone. The only things everyone has in common here is an opinion and an asshole. When you make comments like the one I pasted above, it shows how truly immature you are

ehb

[melon]

QUOTE

ahh sorry, i wasnt intending to bash you. it was those other people who were bashing me on my opinon on fags

That is highly offensive, for anyone.

Its akin to me mouthing off about coons or woks etc...

[thomes08]

fags......?  Fuck you darklink.  I hope you get shot trying to defend the homophobe bush, then the bullet goes through you and hits him.  It'd be nice to live in a country where people, especially the president, didn't disciminate against a group of people

thomes08