Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 12:53:00 AM
, feel free to counter any or everything, i always like a good debate...A trend is something that is popular among people, whether it is a way of thinking, dressing, acting, etc. I think there is a conservative trend throughout much of the middle and southern parts of America, which was clear from the election results. I believe its mainly from the uneducated, incest-ridden rednecks hardcore religious groups, mainly Protestant, throughout those areas and the older population, who are probably more religious and are more conservative. These older people are less likely to support change, like the conservatives were during slavery, womens rights, and civil rights movement in America. They want, for the most part, the world not to change, and stay as it was in the biblical times. The younger generation is more able to adapt to change and be in favor of issues like gay rights, stem cell research, minority rights, etc. instead of listening to a 2000 year old book that should have no say in a land of the free. I believe this trend seems to suggest that Americans do not want change. Our economy is doing horrible, we are going to war with countries that have more association with oil than they do terrorism, oh, and basically the entire world, other than the U.K., Poland, and half of Africas countries, think we are idiots, or at least our President is. I hope this all remains the same for the next for years, just as the conservatives want, and maybe that will break this trend and help people realize that change is good.
Good, someone to argue with and by the way I was joking about the uneducated incest-ridden redneck part, but I have heard that Democrats are generally more educated. They dont get into Yale with 1100 SATs like our President .anyway, I think there is a time and place for religion, though Im not religious, but it should not have anything to do with the direction of our country. We made clear when this country was founded that there should be a separation between church and state, and George W. Bush obviously has a religious agenda, especially for gay rights, stem cell research, abortion, etc. The majority of people in America believe that Bush has better morals than Kerry, but these morals are based on faith, and that is wrong. Him being Christian, or anyone being Christian, should not affect your political views about the above issues. It needs to be looked at from a human rights standpoint as if you were an atheist. You say sem cell research is great, but open the dam's gate on the matter could cause a
disaster, such as? Stem cell can now be made through therapeutic cloning, which has nothing to do with unborn fetuses, or human cloning. Scientists can now take a cell from a disabled person, and clone that cell the create a synthetic fetus and use those to cure disabilities. You say Christians invite change, my argument was more focused on conservatives, but how do they? Conservatives are called conservatives because they are more weary of change, and for you and our President this weariness is based on religion, which should not be part of politics. I dont believe in a higher power, so why should I and all those that dont or believe is some other religion be represented by Christian morals? I also strongly disagree with what you said about the war and and how we cannot go wrong with morality and God on our side. What makes you think morality and God is on our side? Islam is the most popular religion in the world, Im pretty sure its around 1/5 of the worlds religious followers, and MUCH older than Christianity and you think God is on our side. It doesnt seem like the Iraqis God agrees. And morality? Yes, the world is better off because Saddam is out of power, however it has been proven that he had nothing to do with the 9/11 and had no WMDs, so I ask you, why did we go to war with Iraq? What others reasons would he have? Saddam was bad but there were and now still are many other countries that we know support terrorism and we know have WMDs. Why didnt we go to war with Iran or North Korea before we attacked Iraq? We had and have solid cases against those two countries, yet Bush chose Iraq, which was just a speculation at best and an outright lie and worst. I believe its because Bush had a lot more to gain politically, economically, and personally with Iraq, and those are not reasons for going to war. Even today, after all this has been proven, Bush still makes the war on terror synonymous with Iraq. Bushs term has been nothing but deception, he literally stole the election in 2000 and he tricked the American people into going to war. That isnt someone I want to represent my country, and I dont understand how you believe, religion aside, he is. Kerry won all the debates, he won the intellectual war on issues, but Bush, a former drunk and cokehead who started a war, won the moral war. And that is why I will always be a Democrat. Ok, Im done
Post by: brandogg on November 22, 2004, 08:59:00 AM
Post by: Baner on November 22, 2004, 11:17:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| i always like a good debate... |
You won't find one here.
| QUOTE |
| from the uneducated, incest-ridden rednecks hardcore religious groups, mainly Protestant, throughout those areas and the older population, who are probably more religious and are more conservative. |
Ok, so you're saying the majority of Conservatives are old stupid religious redneck southeners, I'll agree that some might be stupid, while other might be rednecks (whatever your definition of redneck is), and some are religious. Being all of them probably isn't likely (you won't find too many religious rednecks, not true religious people anyway). I don't tend to like people who discriminate against groups by the actions of a few people, I'll just leave it at that.
| QUOTE |
| These older people are less likely to support change |
I'll agree, but the same goes for liberals, and people in general. Once they find what they feel reflects their wants and needs, they don't want to or need to change.
| QUOTE |
| stay as it was in the biblical times. |
I wouldn't mind people haveing their hands cut off for stealing, tongues cut out for being a traitor, and for rape... well you get the point. But to stay that we want to keep it the same as it was in biblical times is so far from the truth. I, for one, enjoy my electricity, health care, education systems, freedoms, cars, central heating, national money system, government.
| QUOTE |
| Our economy is doing horrible, we are going to war with countries that have more association with oil than they do terrorism |
Sure, our economy is in the crapper right now, but it's been worse, in worse times, with a worse president.
As for going to war with a country that has more to do with oil than terrorism, that's hard to believe. Considering Saddam would pay families of suicide bombers. If that's not a terrorist action, or a terrorist leader, I don't know what is.
| QUOTE |
| basically the entire world, other than the U.K., Poland, and half of Africas countries, think we are idiots |
Stats don't lie, our IQ is one of the lowest in the world. The other countries don't just think that, they know that.
| QUOTE |
| I hope this all remains the same for the next for years, just as the conservatives want |
You would think that would work, but with Bush's reelection, the conservatives have received a large majority in congress, meaning that more and more people are voting for republicians. You can't base the votes for president, as the number of republicans and demos in the states.
| QUOTE |
| George W. Bush obviously has a religious agenda, especially for gay rights, stem cell research, abortion |
Bush never says, "Because the Holy Bible says there should be no gays, I agree", he states his views, which are equal to those in the bible. He is not basing his ideals on the bible, or we'd have stricter laws on pre-marital sex and the like. He bases his ideals on the teachings of the bible, but doesn't take it word for word.
| QUOTE |
| but these morals are based on faith, and that is wrong. |
Why? If I don't murder a man because I believe I will go to hell, does that mean I'm not murdering someone for the wrong reason? Religion helps keeps the peace, people don't wanna sin against the bible, so they don't break the laws that were created around the teachings of the bible. We are what we are because of the protistants that created the first civilizations on the new land, and helped spread their teachings.
| QUOTE |
| should not be part of politics. |
Religion allows people to find out what their morals are. I'm sure a Muslim will have different morals than a christian, but that's what they feel comfrotable with. Even if you take their religions away, they will be left with the same morals. And you can't say morals aren't a part of politics.
| QUOTE |
| I believe its because Bush had a lot more to gain politically, economically, and personally with Iraq |
Politically: Having people calling you out on a lie, and losing many votes due to that isn't the best political move...
Economically: It can, but looking at our economy right now, it doesn't seem to have an effect.
Personal: Sure, his dad didn't like Saddam, I'm sure he was brought up around that.
| QUOTE |
| but Bush, a former drunk and cokehead |
Do you believe we should have jails? They are created as a form of rehab, not just punishment. We release people becuase, supposely, they are better people after their term in prison. I don't think him being a drunk and a cokehead in the past affects any of his decisions today, much like Kerry's mistakes in Vietnam don't have an effect on him now.
| QUOTE |
| Im done |
Me too.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 02:44:00 PM
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 02:56:00 PM
| QUOTE (brandogg @ Nov 22 2004, 05:02 PM) |
| I'm just going to post about how Bush "stole the election in 2000" - that's ridiculous. He WON the election, and the democrats went for recount after recount, trying to steal the election from him, after CNN falsely reported that Florida had been won by Gore, which made many people turn away from the polls. |
lol, when i say he stole the election, i mean it quite literally...he is a thief...the "recounts" were nothing more than i way for that racist bastard and his brother to take the election, i say stole because there were a large amount of precincts whose votes did not count, and i guess it was just a coincidence that these precincts were mostly black, and ,of course, mostly democrat...did they appeal? Yes, but unfortunately all of the Senate members required to sign the petitions(even a single petition) could not be found....how inconvenient...and so the moron that didnt even win the first election has actually won two.....amazing.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 03:50:00 PM
You conspiracy theory nutjobs crack me up. Don't you weak minded fools understand you are no different from the Nazi's you claim everyone else to be? 
Here are a show of hands of the people who agree that 9/11 was staged, and that the US is the evilest and most corrupt country on the planet.
Don't be a tool to fear, and I'm sorry you still feel the world is rascist. I guess it won't ever change, because there are still fuckers like you out there promoting racial pride, and saying the world is rascist, and playing the fucking race card every chance you get. No one is forcing you to stay here, you can always leave.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 04:50:00 PM
Post by: pepsik on November 22, 2004, 05:13:00 PM
| QUOTE (EverythingButAnAnswer @ Nov 23 2004, 12:53 AM) |
| You conspiracy theory nutjobs crack me up. Don't you weak minded fools understand you are no different from the Nazi's you claim everyone else to be? Here are a show of hands of the people who agree that 9/11 was staged, and that the US is the evilest and most corrupt country on the planet. Don't be a tool to fear, and I'm sorry you still feel the world is rascist. I guess it won't ever change, because there are still fuckers like you out there promoting racial pride, and saying the world is rascist, and playing the fucking race card every chance you get. No one is forcing you to stay here, you can always leave. |
I still don't see the connection between what Tupac said and the nazi party. Honestly if you can't say something constructive then STFU. Nobody asked for your right wing propaganda and your image is on other threads where all you do is bash teh poster and call them a nazi when in reality, you my friend are the real nazi. If you care to disagree you can PM this nazi hating Punk Rocker with a place to meet and I'll be happy to kick your face in.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 05:29:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 05:30:00 PM
| QUOTE (pepsik @ Nov 23 2004, 02:16 AM) |
| If you care to disagree you can PM this nazi hating Punk Rocker with a place to meet and I'll be happy to kick your face in. |
You sound a lot like a Nazi to me. You will threaten me with violence; perhaps even kill me if I don't conform to your ideology? That sounds an awful lot like the tactics used by the Nazis to discourage dissenters. Go fuck yourself, Nazi.
Post by: Hercules Q Einstein on November 22, 2004, 05:40:00 PM
| QUOTE (pepsik @ Nov 23 2004, 02:16 AM) |
| I still don't see the connection between what Tupac said and the nazi party. |
Taken out of context i think this quote is hilarious
.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 06:06:00 PM
| QUOTE (EverythingButAnAnswer @ Nov 23 2004, 01:32 AM) |
| How can I not compare you to a Nazi? You are a bigot, you are a weak minded tool of the Democratic Party, and you feel everyone in this nation who voted republican or independent is a racist and is unfit to vote (maybe even unfit to live). You feel its ok for say blacks to promote their race, and joke about every other race, but not for whites. The minute someone (a white man) says something about blacks or any other minority or tries to promote their race, you feel its racist and ok for the offended for to play the race card. People like you are the reason racism still exists; there can't be a double standard. Racism is present on both sides, I know of few a black racists who think the "white man" should be eradicated from this planet, just like the Nazis intended to do to the Jews. You also believe every conspiracy you hear. How do you think the Nazis came to power? It was by scaring the people into thinking the Weimar Republic was a corrupt and weak government and one that wasn't in the best interest of the people. There was no need for you to state that 9/11 was staged, it was implied through your post about the faults of the current administration. Also why don't you try to make a complete, coherent, structured sentence before posting again? |
wow, did u even read what i posted? absolutely nothing of what uve said makes any sense whatsoever....why the fuck are you going on about this racism crap...it was one point i brought up...do u not think that INTENSE racism existed in the late 1800s? How stupid are u, honestly? The roots of the drug prohibition today ARE based on racism, religion(mainly radical christian values, look up mr. anslinger, u want a nutjob, read about your fellow christian)and how can u imply that i said 911 was staged, absolutely nothing of what i said even remotely pointed in that direction, and id like u to quote where u think i did...let me say what i said before, without using the word racism, and u can take it for what it is....in the 2000 election it all came down to florida, and if all the votes had been counted, al gore would have won, period...however, bush and his brother were able to dispuite many( at least over 20) districts that have a history of voting democratic and are mainly made up of minority voters....when those districts appealed all of the senate members were absent and none got a signature, so all of the votes in those districts did not count...im not calling it racism, it was probably more aimed at getting rid of democratic votes which are usually cast by blacks...those are the facts, that is what happened and it takes anyone with half a brain, which i doubt u have, to figure out what was going on.....i didn't play the race card, im not saying the "white man", which includes me, is always out to get blacks...but i am stating what happened.....once again, this has nothing to do with nazi party at all...and u want complete sentences? Fuck you.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 06:29:00 PM
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 07:05:00 PM
), and other than drugs have never committed a crime in my life....i don't kill people, i dont rape people, i am not a thief, and yet someone like you would like to see me put behind bars for the rest of my life,a nd if i got caught for every did i used drugs i probably would be...you tell me if thats justice...drugs dont make people bad, people do....and the bottom line is that drug use is a consensual "crime," i choose to use drug..i dont go crazy when i use them, i dont commit other crimes, most of the crimes involved with drugs r from dealer disputes...i use them on occasion and do so responsibly...thats why i urge people not to believe all the bullshit they read and hear on tv...drugs have power, and the govt, religion, and other groups will do whatever it takes from keeping people from what they truly are and what they truly can do....if all the stuff ive read were true id be dead 100 times over and be about as intelligent as u r, but im not, am i?
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 08:07:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Nov 23 2004, 04:08 AM) |
| i don't kill people, i dont rape people, i am not a thief, and yet someone like you would like to see me put behind bars for the rest of my life,a nd if i got caught for every did i used drugs i probably would be...you tell me if thats justice...drugs dont make people bad, people do....and the bottom line is that drug use is a consensual "crime," i choose to use drug..i dont go crazy when i use them, i dont commit other crimes, most of the crimes involved with drugs r from dealer disputes...i use them on occasion and do so responsibly... |
Try PCP then come back and say that. The thing is while you might be responsible, not everyone else is, and that is why they are prohibited.
| QUOTE (tupac @ Nov 23 2004, 04:08 AM) |
| thats why i urge people not to believe all the bullshit they read and hear on tv...if all the stuff ive read were true id be dead 100 times over and be about as intelligent as u r, but im not, am i? |
Keep taking it and you will be
. People don't know the long term repercussions of a lot of those drugs.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 08:38:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 08:45:00 PM
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 09:01:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 09:26:00 PM
. That reminds me, you should try meth sometime, I hear it's wonderful, and powerfully addicting. .Here's to the future.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 09:48:00 PM
Post by: brandogg on November 22, 2004, 10:01:00 PM
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 10:06:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 10:36:00 PM
| QUOTE (brandogg @ Nov 23 2004, 07:04 AM) |
| I've never heard of someone sucking dick for a cigarette. |
That is odd, neither have I. Of course that is because cigarettes are cheap, legal, and readily available. Tupac is right though about nicotine being addictive, and it is probably the most if not one of the most addictive drugs out there. Fortunately because it is so readily available people have not had to result to offering sexual favors in exchange for cigarettes, at least not to my knowledge (it seems like you can apply economic philosophy to just about everything). Anyway what I'm trying to say, and what I've been trying to say is that not everyone is YOU, and YOU don't know how everyone will react to those types of drugs, and that is why they are illegal. Maybe you should start documenting all of your highs and trips, over a period of 10-20 years (that is if you survive that long) and then submit that research to the FDA
.
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 10:58:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 11:18:00 PM
You sound a lot more like a libertarian than a democrat, might I ask why you didn't vote for Badnarik?
Post by: tupac on November 22, 2004, 11:28:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 22, 2004, 11:50:00 PM
Post by: tupac on November 23, 2004, 12:10:00 AM
Post by: pepsik on November 23, 2004, 10:10:00 AM
| QUOTE (EverythingButAnAnswer @ Nov 23 2004, 08:53 AM) |
| I'm sorry that you felt that way, Badnarik although a nut job, he is a man of principle, like Ralph Nadar (principle seems to be absent from both the democratic party and the republican party as the seem more and more to be controlled by the extremes of each party, although I feel that this extreme is more prevalent in the democratic party than the republican, since the extreme democratic base is progressive, while the extreme republican base is traditional). As for the drugs, I understand exactly were you are coming from, as I know of few a people who one could consider "responsible users" (who don't take serious drugs like XTC, Cocaine, PCP, etc.). However I also live only a few blocks away from one of the shit parts of the city, which doesn't lead me to recalling all the great things drugs have done for society (although they arent the reason that part of town went to shit, they certainly arent helping). Drugs inhibit judgment, which in turn can put people's security in jeopardy, what happened in Vietnam should be proof enough of that (some dumbasses would get high at their post, and their base would end up getting overrun and they would get killed, a perfect example, of how everyone is not a responsible user, and how THEIR CHOICE, put other's lives in jeopardy). |
It's the first logical thing you've said, sorry about the bashing but nazi propaganda is nazi propaganda
Whether you call someone a nazi or not, spreading those images is propaganda and instead of helping the solution you are clearly part of the problem.Strong nationalistic pride is only one step away from fascism, so it gets me a little edgy when someone clearly doesn't read the post and calls someone a nazi. You wanted a reaction and so you got it. I especially like this:
| QUOTE |
| How do you think the Nazis came to power? It was by scaring the people into thinking the Weimar Republic was a corrupt and weak government and one that wasn't in the best interest of the people. |
Isn't the Bush Administration's main focal point since 9/11 been scare tactics? National Alert Systems that don't mean shit, false reports of supposed terrorist attacks that never take place.Weapons of Mass Destruction that don't exist. The campaign against Sen. Kerry was all scare tactics that focused on Sen. Kerry's past and his decision making process instead of focusing on the issues that affect our daily lives. I saw the new Boogie man being portrayed by the neo-cons, and a new level of smoke and mirrors. If economy was the subject then the response would be gay marriage, diversion and tricks, just like the nazi's. The world didn't like the nazi party either, but the people of Germany still elected Hitler.
-
Title: Conservative Trend In America
Post by: Baner on November 23, 2004, 11:14:00 AM
-
Post by: Baner on November 23, 2004, 11:14:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| because kerry is was the only chance we had |
That made me smile. I love thinking back when Kerry first made the scene. I used to think the same way you do, that he was our best bet. Then I begin looking deeper into what he had to say(or what little rather). His shallow plans, plans for Iraq, and ridiculous plans didn't appeal to me. I'll explain:
1. Stated that he wanted to better supply our troops at home and abroad(we all know that costs money), and also wanted to move the troops out of Iraq, and persue Bin Laden. Ok, that sounds good, but he wanted to do this, while saving money on the war on terror and with cut backs on funding. Anyone else see how that wouldn't have happend?
2. Wanted to send another 2 brigades of troops to the Middle East(If I remember right, a brigade is somewhere between 7 - 10 thousand troops). While Bush wanted to increase our reserves, yet the Demos arguement was the Bush wants to reenact the draft. Kerry's plan would result in a draft being reenacted.
3. "I voted for the Patriot Act, before I voted against it" I never did like his voting record, especially on tax increases, and how it clashed with his tax cut plans.
| QUOTE |
| National Alert Systems that don't mean shit |
If the Bush Admin. didn't create a way of warning the people of a probable attack, the people would be angered. He supplies the people with what they want, and they still get mad. Not much he can do about that.
I just glanced over the topic, don't have the patience to read it all. As for your first reply to my post tupac, I feel that this has gotten far off topic, but if you want me to respond to it, I will.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 23, 2004, 11:17:00 AM
| QUOTE (pepsik @ Nov 23 2004, 07:13 PM) |
| It's the first logical thing you've said, sorry about the bashing but nazi propaganda is nazi propaganda Whether you call someone a nazi or not, spreading those images is propaganda and instead of helping the solution you are clearly part of the problem. Strong nationalistic pride is only one step away from fascism, so it gets me a little edgy when someone clearly doesn't read the post and calls someone a nazi. You wanted a reaction and so you got it. I especially like this: Isn't the Bush Administration's main focal point since 9/11 been scare tactics? National Alert Systems that don't mean shit, false reports of supposed terrorist attacks that never take place.Weapons of Mass Destruction that don't exist. The campaign against Sen. Kerry was all scare tactics that focused on Sen. Kerry's past and his decision making process instead of focusing on the issues that affect our daily lives. I saw the new Boogie man being portrayed by the neo-cons, and a new level of smoke and mirrors. If economy was the subject then the response would be gay marriage, diversion and tricks, just like the nazi's. The world didn't like the nazi party either, but the people of Germany still elected Hitler. |
Do you think the Democrats are innocent of all of this? They are just as bad, if not worse. Let's us see, first they attempt to scare voters into not voting for Bush by saying there will be a draft (Charles Rangel (R-D) brought that legislation hoping it would scare people into voting for that bullshit excuse for a leader, Kerry), then they try to scare seniors into believing their medicare/social security will be dissolved in order to help cut back on the deficit (which might happen, after all it was suggested by Alan Greenspan, and he knows his shit), some even went as far as to say 9/11 was staged. Shit like that really makes me sick, to disgrace the 3000+ people that died with some bullshit like that, have some fucking respect for the dead. So don't for a fucking second, tell me the Democrats are innocent of that same bullshit. Ralph Nader was right about one thing, we all seem to be tools of a corrupt two-party system, and although he his a man of principle, he is a socialist/communist, so no one really gives a shit about what he says, even though at times he does have some valid points. As for the Nazi deal, I clearly read his post. He appeared to be one of those weak minded conspiracy theory nut jobs and a bigot, a tool to his fear, just like the Nazis, who were fucking tools. So if someone's acting like a Nazi I have no fucking problem pointing that out. Also the rest of the world didn't hate Hitler; in fact there were many Nazi sympathizers in the US, and throughout other parts of the world. I honestly feel, and it not been for Pearl Harbor, we probably would have set that war out, and today the rest of the world would be sprechen sie deutsch. Europe is so fucking ungrateful for what we have done, I hope they realize their economies rely almost solely on the US (as they rely almost solely on exports which make up nearly 80% of their GDP), so when the dollar tanks, their economies will go to shit. Fortunately because we are capitalist our dollar will be able to make a quick recovery, while those socialist fucks end up becoming 3rd world nations (that is of course if we don't offer any aid, and I hope we don't, because they are ungrateful fucks, and we are capitalist not communist/socialist, let them deal with their own fucking problems).
Post by: pepsik on November 23, 2004, 11:26:00 AM
Nazi Sympathizer
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 23, 2004, 11:30:00 AM
Post by: pepsik on November 23, 2004, 11:36:00 AM
Post by: damam on November 23, 2004, 02:16:00 PM
| QUOTE (EverythingButAnAnswer @ Nov 23 2004, 08:21 AM) |
| You sound a lot more like a libertarian than a democrat . . . |
I almost thought the same thing - then I read his posts a little closer - he wants the government to teach the "truth" about drugs.
no self respecting libertarian is ever going to want the government to do something like that.
Post by: tupac on November 23, 2004, 06:19:00 PM
Post by: Baner on November 24, 2004, 05:59:00 AM
Post by: tupac on November 27, 2004, 05:22:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Nov 24 2004, 02:02 PM) |
| 100 years ago drugs weren't as availible, you didn't have the large cities you ave today, and people didn't need to use drugs to "get away". People didn't have the debits we have, the times were different. The people who did need something to wash down the problems, looked at the much more potent alcohol. Now, im a dumb nigger and the creation of large cities created quicker lifestyles, and people wanted to experiment with their free time. This was followed by street bums buying the drugs, and gangs using drugs to make money. |
100 years ago we still had humongous cities, and it isnt really the size of the population that matters...its the percentage and that basically stays the same..and drugs were readily available u could go to legal pubs/smokeshops/headshops and pick up all the drugs u need. and what does "people not needing drugs to get away"?, like people have changed that much since then that makes our generation "in need if drugs to get away"? i doubt it, times change, people dont. I didnt know quicker lifestyles and being able to experiment with your FREETIME was a crime, i guess u think it should be. what i do on my freetime, not bothering anyone else, is my business alone..there have always been bums, and even without drugs they would be there, our society was set up to always have the poorest of poor and richest of rich..and lol, the only reason gangs and criminal orginizations make so much money selling drugs is because they are illegal, if they were legalized legitimate businessmen would take up the business, drug related crime would drop, and most of these gangs and orginizations would dissappear...
Post by: cainedna on November 28, 2004, 11:29:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| ^^ agreed. Same thing happened when prohibition was lifted on alcohol. Gangsters went away almost overnight. So druglords today would just die away as there is no market for drugs. |
I saw something recently in passing on TV about modern bootleggers, and how the lack of regulation on it was the reason it was so unsafe. Of course, that's how the bootleggers make such great profit...
I haven't sorted out how exactly I feel about legalization of a lot of drugs out there. I've tried weed, but it never did much for me. Honestly, I feel the same way about tobacco and alcohol. Games are more than satisfactory as far as escapism goes in my life.
The case I've got against regulation of MJ has to do with looking at the models the tobacco and alcohol industries have set so far. If marijuana isn't terribly addictive now, it certainly will become so if Phillip Morris is selling it.
Post by: nemt on November 28, 2004, 11:44:00 AM
Post by: bluedeath on November 29, 2004, 12:23:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Nov 28 2004, 08:47 PM) |
| ..while we're at it, let's pull all western forces out of the mideast and make Islam the state religion of the USA...that'll stop terrorism. |
Only if the Saudis tell us to
Post by: Baner on November 29, 2004, 11:03:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| 100 years ago we still had humongous cities, and it isnt really the size of the population that matters...its the percentage and that basically stays the same.. |
Learn some history, 100 years ago our humongous cities were begining to grow. America was more centralized on your nieghborhoods and communities, and national problems didn't affect the average Joe as much. As far as the problems I was talking about were the massive lay-offs, increasing divorce rates, and the such. If you lookat the numbers, people didn't have those many problems in the past.
| QUOTE |
| and drugs were readily available u could go to legal pubs/smokeshops/headshops and pick up all the drugs u need. and what does "people not needing drugs to get away"? |
I'm all for legalizing the natural growing drugs(opium, Mary Jane, and the few others), but I don't feel the need to allow people to make pcp and Xtc legally.
| QUOTE |
| like people have changed that much since then that makes our generation "in need if drugs to get away"? i doubt it, times change, people dont. |
That, i don't agree with. Times change, and people change with them. It's not hard to see, look at our "view of beutiful"(or the one that public media feeds down our throat), skinny, tanned, with curves. Look back to medieval times, they liked their women fat and pale, cause that showed that they had money and didn't have to work. Sure, some people like thier women fat, but the majority follow the "trend".
| QUOTE |
| I didnt know quicker lifestyles and being able to experiment with your FREETIME was a crime, i guess u think it should be. what i do on my freetime, not bothering anyone else, is my business alone..there have always been bums, and even without drugs they would be there, our society was set up to always have the poorest of poor and richest of rich..and lol, the only reason gangs and criminal orginizations make so much money selling drugs is because they are illegal, if they were legalized legitimate businessmen would take up the business, drug related crime would drop, and most of these gangs and orginizations would dissappear... |
I don't think it should be a crime, like stated above. I agree that we could rid America of many of the gangs and cartels who smuggle and sell drugs in our cummunities. The thing is, many drugs don't allow you to experiment on your freetime, and not bother other people. I've done my fair share of drugs, and can handle them pretty well, but every now and then, anyone can get a bad trip. People kill themselves and others while on drugs, and when, or if, they come down off their trip, don't even realize anything happend.
I'm all for being able to see herb baggies being sold in our convient stores, but if it has to be made in a lab, I'd rather not see it.
Post by: tupac on November 29, 2004, 01:48:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Nov 29 2004, 07:06 PM) |
| Learn some history, 100 years ago our humongous cities were begining to grow. America was more centralized on your nieghborhoods and communities, and national problems didn't affect the average Joe as much. As far as the problems I was talking about were the massive lay-offs, increasing divorce rates, and the such. If you lookat the numbers, people didn't have those many problems in the past. I'm all for legalizing the natural growing drugs(opium, Mary Jane, and the few others), but I don't feel the need to allow people to make pcp and Xtc legally. That, i don't agree with. Times change, and people change with them. It's not hard to see, look at our "view of beutiful"(or the one that public media feeds down our throat), skinny, tanned, with curves. Look back to medieval times, they liked their women fat and pale, cause that showed that they had money and didn't have to work. Sure, some people like thier women fat, but the majority follow the "trend". I don't think it should be a crime, like stated above. I agree that we could rid America of many of the gangs and cartels who smuggle and sell drugs in our cummunities. The thing is, many drugs don't allow you to experiment on your freetime, and not bother other people. I've done my fair share of drugs, and can handle them pretty well, but every now and then, anyone can get a bad trip. People kill themselves and others while on drugs, and when, or if, they come down off their trip, don't even realize anything happend. I'm all for being able to see herb baggies being sold in our convient stores, but if it has to be made in a lab, I'd rather not see it. |
learn some history, lol, have u done any research into this? from what uve said, i really doubt it..."national problems didn't affect the average Joe as much", i agree, because drug were not a "national problem" till racist bastards and biblebent nutjobs made it our problem. And id really like to see some of ur stats relating drug-use and drub abuse to divorce rates, massive lay-offs, and such...
Why are u for all the naturals and none of the synthetics? is natural somehow always better? id agree that for the most part natural drugs are healthier(and this would be a great first step in our country)but synthetic ones like lsd, xtc, cocaine(kind of), etc hold a lot of power and we shouldnt punish people for using them if they choose to. drug orginizations will not stop until all drugs r legalized...
And no, times will always change, but people NEVER will....and i don't mean whether a guy thinks your fat or beautiful, tastes and trends can change, but the basics of mankind, power, lust, greed, evil, good, oppressing others, etc. will always be here as long as people are.
you said "but every now and then, anyone can get a bad trip. People kill themselves and others while on drugs, and when, or if, they come down off their trip, don't even realize anything happend." people do not kill other people on drugs or themselves as much as ud like us to believe...most drug related crimes involve dealing the drugs...and wow u had a bad trip, ive known plenty of people that have done plenty of drugs and not one, including myself, has ever tried to kill themselves or others....thats not what drugs do, again, thats what people do...and if u start going on a killing spree cuz of a bad trip then u were already crazy, and should be locked up.
Post by: tupac on November 29, 2004, 09:21:00 PM
Post by: Baner on November 30, 2004, 11:49:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| And id really like to see some of ur stats relating drug-use and drub abuse to divorce rates, massive lay-offs, and such... |
Yuo misunderstood me, I said that divorce rates are rising, along with lay-off rates, which causes stress, anger, adn depression... which are the leading causes of drug abuse.
So I'm saying divorces lead to drug abuse, not the otehr way around.
| QUOTE |
| racist bastards and biblebent nutjobs made it our problem. |
I don't understand how racisms plays a role in this, and I agree that biblical nutjobs can ruin many things for everyone.
| QUOTE |
| but the basics of mankind, power, lust, greed, evil, good, oppressing others, etc. will always be here as long as people are. |
The thing is with that, is that all those are different with every person you meet. Not everyone is going to be power hungry, so really, everything you listed above, changes quite often, but you are right, they are characteristics of humans, just like intelligence. some poeple have it, some people don't.
| QUOTE |
| drug orginizations will not stop until all drugs r legalized... |
I agree that legalizing drugs will rid us of many crimes, but I'm not sure if it's worth every nutjob being able to buy cocaine, the most addidctive substance I know of. Take alcohol for an example, we legalized it (after banning it), but it is still the leading cause of death in America.
| QUOTE |
| people do not kill other people on drugs or themselves as much as ud like us to believe |
I'd much rather have only the people who are buying the drugs now, be in risk of getting a bad trip and killing themselves or others, rather than any everyday guy buying a bag of coke to try out, and tripping out. They say weeb is the gateway drug, which it is. It's easy to get, and cheaper than most other drugs. for the most part, it teaches the user how to control themselves with drugs, before they encounter something stronger. I know I was an herb smoker long before I did other drugs, and was able to control them better because of that. But imagine if your first drug experience was some acid, you wouldn't know how to react. I'd rather someone buy the stronger drugs illegally, cause that would mean that they are experienced with drugs if they know where to go to get it, or are doing the drug with people that are experienced, and know how to take care of something that might happen.
You're right, jsut because you're on a bad trip, doesn't mean you wanna kill yourself, or someone else, but everyone is different, maybe they had a horrible day, and can't get that off their mind. I know this can happen when it's illegal, but the drug won't be as available, so lesser people have a chance to have this bad trip. 100 people have less of a chance of something going wrong than a 1000.
| QUOTE |
| xtc are pretty hard to od on |
xtc is one of the most dangeous drugs out there, it slowly eats away your brain, leaving it looking like swiss cheese. Don't take me like I'm all anti drugs, I'm often doing xtc, acid, and smoking herb. I've tried ice, and a few other drugs, but didn't like the high. I would rather see drugs kept to the smaller percent of the population it is now, rather than letting everyone be able to get their hands on it, by driving up to their gas station 24 hours a day.
| QUOTE |
| ...and with heroin, odd but tree, most ods are caused because of the impurities in the drug |
Agree, it usually involves an air bubble in the needle that gets caught in your blood stream, or an impurity in the drug, but herion is highly addictive, and shouldn't be released to the public, for that reason.
| QUOTE |
| because of these actions of a few |
again, I agree. The actions of a few shouldn't reflect the rest, but it does, and you can't change that. I'm all for the selling of drugs you can grow in your backyard, but once it has to touch a lab to get created, I don't agree with it being legal.
Post by: tupac on November 30, 2004, 07:10:00 PM
edit: the racist bastard part referred to the original prohibition on drugs like opium and cocaine, which were definitely fuled by racism...chinks smoked theyre opium and everyone wanted them gone, and the negros had there coke....
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 30, 2004, 07:32:00 PM
Just remember you aren't the one in control. Sorry just had to add, how many more people have access to aspirin than cocaine? Quite a few I would presume. Your figures mean nothing. It's like the age old comparison between automobile and plane accidents to help people overcome their fear of the flying.
Post by: bluedeath on November 30, 2004, 08:15:00 PM
LSD may seem to be rather harmless but it can cause chromosome damage. The area affected is random and completely unpredictable. Basically this means that anything can happen.
EX causes hemorrhaging in the brain. If you are stupid enough to take EX knowing this then you deserve whatever you get.
Whenever I think prohibition I think money. Every Cartel in the world would pay any amount of money to keep certain drugs illegal or make them illegal if they are not already. Especially opiates and cocoa derivatives.
Post by: tupac on November 30, 2004, 09:37:00 PM
and for the other post, i was talking about the illegalization of cocaine...which originated because of "coked up" blacks, at least thats what ive read, and it makes since, the same happened to the chinese as i said.....and my stats comparing cocaine and heroin deaths to aspirin was meant to show how little of a "problem" these drugs r, they r probably considered the 2 hardest drugs, and they kill a very small percentage of people...even with all drugs combined (and cocaine and heroin make up most of this) there are roughly 5000 ods a year, with 40 million users....when u look at the facts ull see tobacco and alcohol r the real killers in the US, drugs r not killing people left and right....im hoping to become a doctor in pharmacy, "my" figures, which are really govt figures (the truth is out there open ur eyes), and do u think the age old car/plane stat is a myth too? its as real as what im saying...planes r safer, and drugs r safe when used responsibly(and plz dont come back at this saying "well not everyone is like u, not everyone is responsible blah blah" stfu, if ur an adult, u have responsibilities, deal with it, ur not a fuckin kid anymore that cant make decisions for urself), people r stupid...
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 30, 2004, 09:50:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 1 2004, 06:40 AM) |
| lol, i recently read about chromosome damage from lsd and it doesnt...drugs like xtc do and xtc not "ex" lol, maybe x, only put holes in ur brain and damage ur chromosomes if u do a ton of em....which i dont.... and for the other post, i was talking about the illegalization of cocaine...which originated because of "coked up" blacks, at least thats what ive read, and it makes since, the same happened to the chinese as i said.....and my stats comparing cocaine and heroin deaths to aspirin was meant to show how little of a "problem" these drugs r, they r probably considered the 2 hardest drugs, and they kill a very small percentage of people...even with all drugs combined (and cocaine and heroin make up most of this) there are roughly 5000 ods a year, with 40 million users....when u look at the facts ull see tobacco and alcohol r the real killers in the US, drugs r not killing people left and right....im hoping to become a doctor in pharmacy, "my" figures, which are really govt figures (the truth is out there open ur eyes), and do u think the age old car/plane stat is a myth too? its as real as what im saying...planes r safer, and drugs r safe when used responsibly(and plz dont come back at this saying "well not everyone is like u, not everyone is responsible blah blah" stfu, if ur an adult, u have responsibilities, deal with it, ur not a fuckin kid anymore that cant make decisions for urself), people r stupid... |
If there were just as many people using those hard drugs as there were using Alcohol and Tobacco, then yes you could make that argument, but since that isn't the case, so you can't. The same goes for the cars/planes argument. As for the "not everyone is you deal" you must understand NOT EVERYONE IS YOU, NOT EVERY ADULT MAKES RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS, and if you think otherwise then you sir are the "child" (foolish/ignorant).
Post by: tupac on November 30, 2004, 10:10:00 PM
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 30, 2004, 10:56:00 PM
I'm fine with you "living" as long as it doesn't endanger the lives of others.
Post by: bluedeath on November 30, 2004, 11:08:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 1 2004, 06:40 AM) |
| lol, i recently read about chromosome damage from lsd and it doesnt...drugs like xtc do and xtc not "ex" lol, maybe x, only put holes in ur brain and damage ur chromosomes if u do a ton of em....which i dont.... and for the other post, i was talking about the illegalization of cocaine...which originated because of "coked up" blacks, at least thats what ive read, and it makes since, the same happened to the chinese as i said.....and my stats comparing cocaine and heroin deaths to aspirin was meant to show how little of a "problem" these drugs r, they r probably considered the 2 hardest drugs, and they kill a very small percentage of people...even with all drugs combined (and cocaine and heroin make up most of this) there are roughly 5000 ods a year, with 40 million users....when u look at the facts ull see tobacco and alcohol r the real killers in the US, drugs r not killing people left and right....im hoping to become a doctor in pharmacy, "my" figures, which are really govt figures (the truth is out there open ur eyes), and do u think the age old car/plane stat is a myth too? its as real as what im saying...planes r safer, and drugs r safe when used responsibly(and plz dont come back at this saying "well not everyone is like u, not everyone is responsible blah blah" stfu, if ur an adult, u have responsibilities, deal with it, ur not a fuckin kid anymore that cant make decisions for urself), people r stupid... |
Enjoy dwindling in ignorance and disbelief. You bring racism into the picture whenever it suits you. Here is the funny thing. If we were truly racist (us whites) then we would set up clinics where you could get your drugs for free. Then we would allow as many people as possible to get hooked and then encourage an OD.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on November 30, 2004, 11:48:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 12:08:00 AM
| QUOTE (EverythingButAnAnswer @ Dec 1 2004, 06:59 AM) |
| Whose fault is it then when some nut job gets high on PCP and goes out and kills your whole fucking family I bet you would rethink your pro-drug platform. Of course that would never happen, because everyone who uses PCP is a responsible adult, and while under the influence they can make responsible decisions. I'm fine with you "living" as long as it doesn't endanger the lives of others. |
thats fucking rediculous, u cant make claims like that, u sound like the idiots in the early 1900s, i bet u think "reefer madness" is all real to, right? u said it urself, "that wouldnt happen". people dont go out and murder people because theyre high on some drug, or even because of a really bad trip...people murder people cuz theyre insane...u show me one case where a guy hopped up on pcp kills a famil and ill show u a thousand others where a "normal" person does the same.....but think what u want, i cant argue with a moron
Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 12:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (bluedeath @ Dec 1 2004, 07:11 AM) |
| Enjoy dwindling in ignorance and disbelief. You bring racism into the picture whenever it suits you. Here is the funny thing. If we were truly racist (us whites) then we would set up clinics where you could get your drugs for free. Then we would allow as many people as possible to get hooked and then encourage an OD. |
what are u talking about? seriously, can u read? i think ive said this on every fucking page...racism was an issue when drugs were first illegalized in the late 1800s, not anymore, religious values, science, and "helping people and society" are our new reasons.....and no matter what u believe, u r the one that is truly ignorant...this is annoying responding to morons that dont bring up any points and just babble about stuff they really have no idea about...heres an idea, not everything u see in anti-drug ads and what u read in 7th grade health is true...........yeah, free drugs so people can od, but only for non-whites, wow, amazing, u r truly a genius...id really like to know how old u two are cuz i cant imagine it being more than 15.
Post by: bluedeath on December 01, 2004, 07:36:00 AM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 1 2004, 09:18 AM) |
| what are u talking about? seriously, can u read? i think ive said this on every fucking page...racism was an issue when drugs were first illegalized in the late 1800s, not anymore, religious values, science, and "helping people and society" are our new reasons.....and no matter what u believe, u r the one that is truly ignorant...this is annoying responding to morons that dont bring up any points and just babble about stuff they really have no idea about...heres an idea, not everything u see in anti-drug ads and what u read in 7th grade health is true...........yeah, free drugs so people can od, but only for non-whites, wow, amazing, u r truly a genius...id really like to know how old u two are cuz i cant imagine it being more than 15. |
At some point you have to stop rationalizing drug use. Every statement you have made seems to be saying that all reference material related to drugs are corrupt and only you as a drug user know the truth. That's classic denial.
Granted I believe that white suburia is glossing over it's own problems. I see very little difference in a soccer mom who medicates herself with the latest purple pill and someone who is addicted to an illegaly obtained controlled substance. Meth seems to be a problem that no one wants to talk about. In fact they seem to be trying to hide the quickly spreading problem.
Post by: bluedeath on December 01, 2004, 08:31:00 AM
| QUOTE (Arvarden @ Dec 1 2004, 04:52 PM) |
| "Soccer" *cough* Football ffs! |
You have got it wrong. Soccer is for men who seek to be women and football is for men who need an outlet for their supressed homosexual urges.
Post by: Baner on December 01, 2004, 11:53:00 AM
) I don't see a point in cigs, theirs no health benefits, the buzz they do give you is weak, and you can't seem to get it again after smoking 3-4 cigs in your life. They're a waste. As for the synthetic drugs, I know the bad things that can happen from them, and use them as responsibaly as I can, I nor the government can trust others to do the same. Sure, alcohol is legal, but alcohol has a hill you have to go up before you can get shit faced, while many drugs take you striaght to the top, and have no problem dropping you all the way to the bottom when your done.I do agree that natural drugs do have many bad side effects, but they take time to develop, while one high on a synthetic can fuck you over.
I know, the probability of this happening isn't bad, but the probability of a synthetic screwing you over vs natural drugs, is far worse.
I've done ice (in my eyes, por mans coke) and never had a craving for it again, thank god. Saem with cigs, I often use them as after smokes, but never have a need to take a puff. I can be in a room of a thousand smokers, and not feel the need. It affects people different, and my experience hasn't shown me any different, so I'm just basing what I say on what I've seen(ice went big around these parts, worse than cigs, that's bad...).
Post by: pepsik on December 01, 2004, 02:19:00 PM
Cocaine eats away at the cartildge and mucus membrane of the individual after the first dose, frequent users look at psychological changes(bi-polar disorder, anxiety) along with chronic sinusitis(infection of the muscous membranes) and the loss of the bony structure within the nose. Cardiac problems like ischemia and cardiomyopathy can occur because of the drugs rapid absorption in the blood stream.
Meth is just plain bad, it's a drug cocktail of everything that gives you a buzz at a local pharmacy, the medication is not measured it's just cooked together in recipes that vary in every dose. The individual quickly develops schizophrenia or bi-polar mood disorder. The toxicity from the cocktails usually leaves the individual with various medical conditions that can range from coronary to hepatological(liver) to renal(kidney).
Heroin is bad becuase your liver just can't handle that stuff, people deteriorate in a matter of months. 6 months of abuse on this drug will leave the individual with irreversable liver damage that usually requires a liver transplant, not to mention the fact that heroin addiction is only treated with methadone addiction.
MJ should be legal but the racial scares of the 1920's known as "Reefer Madness" caused the gov't to ban the substance based on assumptions that black males get 10x the strength of a normal person when on the drug which is just superstition. The main corporate opponents of the legalization are the alcohol industry, the tabacco industry (people only smoke cigs when they can't get high IMO) and the cotton industry(Hemp is cheaper to produce and it's plants produce more canvas fibres that are more durable than cotton).
Synthetics = bad news physically and mentally.
Natural Drugs = No known cases of overdose.
If your going to study pharmacology then you will be schooled on synthetics during toxicology and bio-chemistry courses.
Post by: Baner on December 01, 2004, 02:32:00 PM
Post by: damam on December 01, 2004, 02:58:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Dec 1 2004, 08:56 PM) |
| My friend is pretty messed up from a bid hit of acid, he can't see striaght lines, everything is somewhat curvy, kinda sucks. |
| QUOTE |
| LSD after the initial dose is fused with the individuals spinal fluid, it never exits your system ever. Frequent users will eventually trip out(paranoid schizophrenia) from the chemical imbalance caused from the drug. |
Its more likely that thats due to some chemical deviation in his own body that was triggirred by taking acid, than the acid alone causing the problem. Kind of like Vioxx causing heart attacks in 15/1000 people. There is always bound to be a small segment of the population that is going to get an undesirable effect. An example is that I have a friend that is severely allergic to grain alcohols. That means no beer.
In high school I regularly dropped acid or xtc every weekend (most of the time mixing in other things as well), and occasionally through the week. I have probably taken well over 100 doses of lsd alone and have suffered no side effects. Again its your personal physiology that matters. They also teach you that in Biochem and Psychopharmacology. There simply has not been enough research done to justify your claim that you eventually "trip out" on lsd pepsik. There have been synthetics (mostly designer drugs) that have caused massive problems. The Case of the Frozen Addicts by J. WILLIAM LANGSTON is one of the best books ive read about a designer drug gone bad. We read it in my Psychopharmacology class.
| QUOTE |
| I can't seem to note one natural drug that can be picked and taken on spot, that will screw you over for life. |
| QUOTE |
| Natural Drugs = No known cases of overdose. |
mistletoe, Holly, hemlock, and Death Cap to name a few and their are more these are just the ones I know of off the top of my head. OK, so these are not typical recreational drugs, they are natural, and have been used as drugs in various cultures and it is said to make a point. Chemicals have no moral value. We place that on them based on how we decide to use them. And natural does no equate to safe.
Having said all that, I have no problems legalizing all current recreational drugs so long as atleast these things are taken care of:
1)I dont have to pay for their habbits in any way shape or form. I dont want to pay for their rehab, medical needs, etc because I largely see these as self inflicted and anything bad that comes of it is their own fault. I think the same should apply for drinkers and smokers too.
2)before a drug becomes completely legal, we should have a way of quantitizing the dosage in the body (like a breathalizer), to prevent people from driving under the influence or other irresponsible use that puts third party bystanders at risk. As it stands, there is no way to quantitize most of the drugs and most DWI's dont stand up in court because they are a hesaid/shesaid arguement. Bottom line, I dont want people on triple hit blue unicorn blotter driving while peaking.
3) companies should be able to get FDA "Seals of Quality" that basically states that the FDA randomly tests this product to insure that it is what it says it is chemically (not necessarily the effectiveness of the claims made by the company).
I am an old drug user that quit several years ago. You name it I have taken it, and as I have read through all these posts its really funny cause I used to rationalize drug use in the same ways. Hell, we all did. I still have friends that are either in jail or on the streets because of this lifestyle meanwhile they are still convinced that they are among the ones that can "handle it". Its sad, really sad. Yet it is their choice to live like that, and I will never take that away from them. I want to live in a righteous country. I dont believe you can be righteous or show virtue in the abscence of choice. Take Iran for instance. The people of this country have all elements of rightousness, yet they are not rightous because they lack the real choice to do the right thing. They are forced too by law. Only when you have complete freedom to do wrong and choose to do right, can you be rightous. And that to me is really what drug laws boil down too.
Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 03:42:00 PM
, u could od on if u tried and thats all natural, ever hear of peyote? now, what u said about lsd, lol, lsd is gone from ur system in many cases before u even begin to trip, they cant test for it...and i dont know abut the spinal tap stuff but i think that applies to all drugs(if thats even true) and no one is going to give u a spinal tap.....cocaine eats away at ur nostrils huh? no, the the hydrochloric acid and other impurties in cocaine do, and if it was legal people wouldnt have to snort the stuff because it wouldnt be so damn expensive, and itd be pure......and sorry, but the crap u said about "one synthetic can fuck u over, but naturals take time to develop" is just that. ur assuming, u dont know what ur talking about, and either one can do those things.....on to heroin, most ods caused my impurities in the drug, high price so people inject it, and 6 months of abuse, i bet thats from a study of a guy doing it a lot, everyday, well i could have figured out something wuld be wrong with him to....and by ice u mean speed, u put that in ur eyes???? maybe acid, but speed?Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 03:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (damam @ Dec 1 2004, 11:01 PM) |
| Its more likely that thats due to some chemical deviation in his own body that was triggirred by taking acid, than the acid alone causing the problem. Kind of like Vioxx causing heart attacks in 15/1000 people. There is always bound to be a small segment of the population that is going to get an undesirable effect. An example is that I have a friend that is severely allergic to grain alcohols. That means no beer. In high school I regularly dropped acid or xtc every weekend (most of the time mixing in other things as well), and occasionally through the week. I have probably taken well over 100 doses of lsd alone and have suffered no side effects. Again its your personal physiology that matters. They also teach you that in Biochem and Psychopharmacology. There simply has not been enough research done to justify your claim that you eventually "trip out" on lsd pepsik. There have been synthetics (mostly designer drugs) that have caused massive problems. The Case of the Frozen Addicts by J. WILLIAM LANGSTON is one of the best books ive read about a designer drug gone bad. We read it in my Psychopharmacology class. mistletoe, Holly, hemlock, and Death Cap to name a few and their are more these are just the ones I know of off the top of my head. OK, so these are not typical recreational drugs, they are natural, and have been used as drugs in various cultures and it is said to make a point. Chemicals have no moral value. We place that on them based on how we decide to use them. And natural does no equate to safe. Having said all that, I have no problems legalizing all current recreational drugs so long as atleast these things are taken care of: 1)I dont have to pay for their habbits in any way shape or form. I dont want to pay for their rehab, medical needs, etc because I largely see these as self inflicted and anything bad that comes of it is their own fault. I think the same should apply for drinkers and smokers too. 2)before a drug becomes completely legal, we should have a way of quantitizing the dosage in the body (like a breathalizer), to prevent people from driving under the influence or other irresponsible use that puts third party bystanders at risk. As it stands, there is no way to quantitize most of the drugs and most DWI's dont stand up in court because they are a hesaid/shesaid arguement. Bottom line, I dont want people on triple hit blue unicorn blotter driving while peaking. 3) companies should be able to get FDA "Seals of Quality" that basically states that the FDA randomly tests this product to insure that it is what it says it is chemically (not necessarily the effectiveness of the claims made by the company). I am an old drug user that quit several years ago. You name it I have taken it, and as I have read through all these posts its really funny cause I used to rationalize drug use in the same ways. Hell, we all did. I still have friends that are either in jail or on the streets because of this lifestyle meanwhile they are still convinced that they are among the ones that can "handle it". Its sad, really sad. Yet it is their choice to live like that, and I will never take that away from them. I want to live in a righteous country. I dont believe you can be righteous or show virtue in the abscence of choice. Take Iran for instance. The people of this country have all elements of rightousness, yet they are not rightous because they lack the real choice to do the right thing. They are forced too by law. Only when you have complete freedom to do wrong and choose to do right, can you be rightous. And that to me is really what drug laws boil down too. |
finally, someone to back me up lol...i agree completely.
Post by: pepsik on December 01, 2004, 04:37:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| There simply has not been enough research done to justify your claim that you eventually "trip out" on lsd |
That's personal experience, not every case is the same and personal chemistries vary. I can't think right now, but there was a study recently(maybe in the last 5 years) that noted that users of the drug can have a recurrent feeling of being on the drug even though the consumption was say 20 years ago due to the drug residing in the spinal fluid. A neurolgist or a pscychiatrist might have better information on the effects. I could get you a deffinitve answer in a few phone calls, but I'm swamped right now.
about the natural drugs, I was reffering to marijuana, mushrooms and salvia divinorum( good shit, way more hallucongenic than lsd, and still legal in the US) all the other shit is just ragweed that bums smoke.
Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 04:43:00 PM
Post by: pepsik on December 01, 2004, 04:47:00 PM
sorry, when i have more time i'll finish these answers abit more.
Post by: tupac on December 01, 2004, 05:04:00 PM
Post by: damam on December 01, 2004, 05:12:00 PM
| QUOTE (pepsik @ Dec 2 2004, 01:40 AM) |
That's personal experience, not every case is the same and personal chemistries vary. |
That was the point of my first paragraph. My exception with you is that your examples are not the norm. They are outliers. Every drug has outliers. Its the nature of the beast. If lsd really had that wide spread of an effect then 60% of my high school would have been dribbling idiots in psychiatric wards.
| QUOTE |
| I can't think right now, but there was a study recently(maybe in the last 5 years) that noted that users of the drug can have a recurrent feeling of being on the drug even though the consumption was say 20 years ago due to the drug residing in the spinal fluid. A neurolgist or a pscychiatrist might have better information on the effects. I could get you a deffinitve answer in a few phone calls, but I'm swamped right now. |
My husbands a pscychiatrist. But this is not really his area (he focuses on mentally retarded adults and children)
If your refering to flash backs, they are relatively common (although i have never had one). The current thought is that they are enviromentally triggered. Dont know if your a hibitual pot smoker, but i have a really easy way of demonstrating this if you are. This only works is your a hibitual pot smoker, so I dont want to hear from you experimentalists saying it doesnt work. First prepare some oregano, dry it out, etc then put it in the place where you keep your pot. Next day, take out your pot, bong, lighter exactly as you would if you were going to get stoned, except load the oregano. Then smoke it. The first 10 - 30 min will feel just like you are stoned even though you smoked nothing. Its the ritual of smoking the pot that causes the response. This is so powerful that I was actually able to do this for about two years after I stopped smoking pot. I used to smoke pot 2-3 times daily for about 5 years.
this is where hibitual drug use gets real interesting. most of the heroin overdoses are due to an interuption in the drug taking ritual. The ritual of taking heroin prepares the body for a certain dosage level. An interuption in the ritual means the body isnt expecting it and it usually results in death. This is also how people like my husband can give heroin addicts going through with drawl placebos and have them feel fine.
Bringing this back to the point, a flashback has nothing to do with alleged lsd in the system. The subject generally say that something enviromental matched a previous lsd experience, and that generally causes the flashback. Risidual lsd in the system is a theory, and it has never been proven or disproven.
Just for the record - I want to state that I dont think there is a good reason for taking recreational drugs.
Post by: damam on December 01, 2004, 05:29:00 PM
| QUOTE (pepsik @ Dec 2 2004, 01:50 AM) |
| I'm a clinician and see fucked up people everyday, it's not a gov't study. I could give you names and phone numbers but federal law restricts me. Take my views or not, it seems your mind is made up anyway. |
i almost asked in my previous post if you were worked in the medical field.
I dont doubt that you see lots of really messed up people. The problem is that when someone is messed up, they go and see you. Your not allowed to go out and randomly select the public so you get a misinterpreation of reality.
My brother-in-law has the same problem. Hes an AIDS researcher in San Francisco. He has a really warped oppinion of the homosexual culture in america because of it. Some of the stuff that he talks about would blow your mind.
My friends husband is a cop, and he basically thinks that all people are inherently evil again because thats all he sees.
I really am interested to hear of your experiences though . . .
Post by: pepsik on December 02, 2004, 01:26:00 AM
I think I might be biased on the subject. The individuals in particular that I've run across all had alittle too much of the stuff in the 60's, maybe the impurities caused it, or maybe the habitual use, I don't know really. I haven't had a "normal" day since I started doing this kindof stuff, I'm sure your husband has some interesting stories.
About the oregano, it gave me a headache
The reality of legalization of all drugs is:
Society as we know it would crumble if all drugs where legalized. The reason being that both alcohol and tabacco get abused everyday, introducing everything else into the mix is kindof scary. I don't think it would solve the crime problem, the cartels would just be working for our government and the gangs will be tougher to get rid of since they won't have anything to charge them with until they stab each other or some innocent bystander. It's an idealistic concept but the dangers outweigh the benefits. Think about children, as a child I would dip into the liqour cabinet to see what the big deal was- say some coke or who knows what where laying around instead of the alcohol. Some people just aren't good parents, how many children do you think would suffer from the recreational drug use of their parents?
The possible solution:Legalizing soft drugs, treating the users of hard drugs, and locking up the pushers. Keep the prisons for the criminals.
Post by: tupac on December 02, 2004, 02:55:00 AM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 02, 2004, 10:36:00 AM
Post by: Baner on December 02, 2004, 11:05:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| You're an idiot. |
thanks for adding so much...
About that in my eyes statement, i was trying to say I call it poor man's coke, but it came out wrong.
I'll pick up at the last post, cause i don't feel like sifting thru the other ones...
| QUOTE |
| i just dont think someone who uses hard drugs should not have to be locked away for a while for what they choose to do |
I wouldn't mind seeing something like underage cigs be put into effect here. If you sell the cigs to a minor, it's against the law, but if you're underage and caught with cigs, then there is no crime. This would put the people who dispense the drugs in jail, and keep the users out. I know it sounds a bit contradictory, since the user has to buy it somehwere, but it's the only thing I can see as working.
As for natural drugs, I was talking about the everyday drugs that the common person would see. I've been using drugs for about years now, and I've never seen most of the other drugs you've talked about. I don't think the government would be into legalizing a drug that you can use once, and be dead from it, it it not have to do with the one persons body's unnatural reaction. ie heart failure do to the drug, but heart failure hasn't been documented with that drug before. make sense?
Also, if the governmnet is iffy on legalizing something as innocent as canibus, I highly doubt they would be ok with convienent stores selling bags of coke. The legalization of hard drugs sounds highly doubtable, so I tend to ignore that all together. If mj does get legalized, I might consider the legalization of some hard drugs.
Also with that quote, this might sound sick(and is totally untrue), but if I had sex with a 12 year old girl(even tho it was mutual on both sides) it'd be illegal. It's our choice, but the government restricts it, and for good reasons.
Post by: The unProfessional on December 02, 2004, 11:17:00 AM
So while much of the level-headed population sees marijuana as something harmless enough that we should make our own assessments, it'll remain illegal. Many believe that it's symbolic - that legalization of MJ will only lead to legalization of everything. People often fall for the Slippery Slope. In the mean time, the people with the pens are catering to the extreme nutbars who can't make up their minds. Thus, we don't break any new ground.
I'll add that I don't do any drugs other than my fair share of booze. To me it has little to do with substances, and more to do with rights and freedom.
However, synthetic drugs and generally unsafe drugs (such as substances that magnify adrenaline and are proven to induce uninhibited, often violent behavior) should remain illegal.
Because if some asshole down the street who hates you happens to hop up on drugs X Y and Z and comes and kills your kid, you'll have something else to say about it.
But weed? The asshole might come over and watch my TV for too long. I can live with that.
Post by: damam on December 02, 2004, 12:58:00 PM
But as an adult, I honestly believe that the freedom to do great moral wrongs against yourself is essential to our being. Obviously we cant legalize everything, but we also cant walk rightous in the eyes of our creator without a true choice. It is a balancing act, and orbitrary lines are drawn in the sand. Its simply my belief that the lines should not be designed to protect us from ourselves, and should be rigorously consistent within themselves. The drug laws are neither. The freedom and independent responsibility to choose to do the right thing, rather than being forced to by law, is incredibly important to the character of this nation. The drug laws are nothing but another form of the seatbelt laws. Every time we add another law like the "seatbelt laws", we widdles away at this notion.
Post by: The unProfessional on December 02, 2004, 06:35:00 PM
| QUOTE |
Its simply my belief that the lines should not be designed to protect us from ourselves |
And there it is. Laws are designed to protect us from the harm others can bring us, be it physical, financial, whatever. But legislation should not, also in my opinion, not be in effect to protect us from ourselves. I'm willing to take responsibility for myself... isn't everybody else?
Post by: tupac on December 02, 2004, 10:42:00 PM
unprofessional no offense but u cant says things like "However, synthetic drugs and generally unsafe drugs (such as substances that magnify adrenaline and are proven to induce uninhibited, often violent behavior) should remain illegal.
Because if some asshole down the street who hates you happens to hop up on drugs X Y and Z and comes and kills your kid, you'll have something else to say about it." Its just doesnt happen...drugs do not induce violent behaivior, perhaps for a small percentage of people who are already fucked up, but, correct me if im wrong, i think alcohol if u look at percentages would cause more violence than any other drug i know of......ive taken many drugs(and i know everyone isnt me.....)but ive neevr had violent reactions, and if some is so fucked up on some drugs that they dont know what theyre doing, i think itd be pretty difficult to go out and murder someone, theyd probably just be running around the streets naked or something......and u said drugs that magnify adrenaline, like speed, which does not create murderers, it creates speed freaks if u abuse it, but they, in most cases, and im sure there has been some case of a guy on speed killing someone someone, but in general, do not kill people.
Post by: Baner on December 03, 2004, 10:50:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| ok, for one, the 12-year old girl argument really makes no sense, because that is not a consensual crime, no matter how u look at it, a 12 year old cannot make a responsible decision like that, and thats why its a crime...and i all for under 21 no drugs, maybe 18, not sure.... |
k, if you want to pick and nag, speeding
It's my choice, me speeding won't hurt anyone(if I don't wreck), but I can still get tossed in jail for it.
Lets make some comparisions.
I speed = I do drugs
both are my choice and don't affect other people
I wreck = I can't control myself = I kill someone
See how that worked? I lost control of my car and got in a wreck, or I lost control of myself, and killed someone.
Even though I could have been a professional racecar driver for 40 years, shit happens. Experience is good, but not everyone has it, and it won't save you 100% of the time.
Post by: pegasys on December 03, 2004, 12:40:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 03, 2004, 12:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Dec 3 2004, 07:53 PM) |
| k, if you want to pick and nag, speeding It's my choice, me speeding won't hurt anyone(if I don't wreck), but I can still get tossed in jail for it. Lets make some comparisions. I speed = I do drugs both are my choice and don't affect other people I wreck = I can't control myself = I kill someone See how that worked? I lost control of my car and got in a wreck, or I lost control of myself, and killed someone. Even though I could have been a professional racecar driver for 40 years, shit happens. Experience is good, but not everyone has it, and it won't save you 100% of the time. |
Post by: Baner on December 03, 2004, 12:45:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| But most drungs don't make you lose control, with the exeption of PCP alchohol and some others. Many drugs you will be lucky if you can get off the couch. |
Most speeders don't get in wrecks.
You're right, alot of drugs will make you want to just sit around, that's why I don't want the other drugs that on't fit in this catogory to stay illegal.
Can't see the pic, my work comp sucks.
Post by: The unProfessional on December 03, 2004, 02:08:00 PM
| QUOTE |
Its just doesnt happen...drugs do not induce violent behaivior |
After that sentence, your post lost all credibility - it's clear you're taking this topic from an extremely biased pro-drugs standpoint, rather than from a non-partial logical one.
Drugs are not all the same... which is the point of my entire post.
Post by: tupac on December 03, 2004, 06:04:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Dec 3 2004, 06:53 PM) |
| k, if you want to pick and nag, speeding It's my choice, me speeding won't hurt anyone(if I don't wreck), but I can still get tossed in jail for it. Lets make some comparisions. I speed = I do drugs both are my choice and don't affect other people I wreck = I can't control myself = I kill someone See how that worked? I lost control of my car and got in a wreck, or I lost control of myself, and killed someone. Even though I could have been a professional racecar driver for 40 years, shit happens. Experience is good, but not everyone has it, and it won't save you 100% of the time. |
i was going to say thats a horrible comparison, but it does make sense...still it doesnt happen that often, and what happens to the person that speeds and kills someone?...they go to jail, like they should, the same should apply to drugs. Tell me this, are u for everythiong single thiong the govt can do to save lives? do u want the govt to hold ur hand all the time? guess what, if alcohol was illegal it would save lives, less people would drive drunk, less alcoholics would be out there, less families would suffer, less kids would suffer....so isnt the only logical comclusion to illegalize alcohol? is that what you think? and maybe houses should be made out of cottonballs and guns shouldnt exist so we cant hurt ourselves....however, im very sick of u people thinking drug users kill people, most drug related violence occurs between drug sales, not someone taking a drug and going out and killing people.......u act like people who use drugs are just so evil that they will snap at any moment and go on a killing rampage, if u truly belive that either uve neevr tried these drugs or uve been brainwashed.
Post by: tupac on December 03, 2004, 06:13:00 PM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Dec 3 2004, 10:11 PM) |
| After that sentence, your post lost all credibility - it's clear you're taking this topic from an extremely biased pro-drugs standpoint, rather than from a non-partial logical one. Drugs are not all the same... which is the point of my entire post. |
oh really? what im saying is theres no pharmaceutical effect of drugs listed as "makes you want to murder people," everyone is different and alcohol sets some people off, but i dont know of a drug(maybe pcp, dont know about that)that causes the violent behavior that alcohol does in some people, yet alcohol is legal.....u show me some proof that drugs cause violence, not just cases, proof....99.999% people dont do drugs and kill other people, so please stop using this argument....and im willing to bet that the amount of people on any drugs that kill people is less or equal to the same amount of u "normal" folks that kill people.
Post by: tupac on December 04, 2004, 08:19:00 AM
Deaths per user:
Alcohol = 100,000/140,000,000 = .07 % or 70 per 100,000
Cocaine = 1,000/ 12,200,000 = .008 % or 8 per 100,000
Deaths per abuser:
Alcohol = 100,000/18,000,000 = .56 % or 56 per 10,000
Cocaine = 1,000/ 250,000 = .40 % or 40 per, 10
So even considering abusers, with advantage to alcohol (probably
should be over 1%), cocaine is still healthier.
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 08:43:00 AM
P.S. you left a zero out at the end of (40 out of 10"0")
Post by: tupac on December 04, 2004, 09:17:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 04, 2004, 09:24:00 PM
Of all psychoactive substances, alcohol is the only one whose consumption has been shown to commonly increase aggression. After large doses of amphetamines, cocaine, LSD, and PCP, certain individuals may experience violent outbursts, probably because of preexisting psychosis. Research is needed on the pharmacological effects of crack, which enters the brain more directly than cocaine used in other forms.
Alcohol drinking and violence are linked through pharmacological effects on behavior, through expectations that heavy drinking and violence go together in certain settings, and through patterns of binge drinking and fighting that sometimes develop in adolescence. . . .
Illegal drugs and violence are linked primarily through drug marketing: disputes among rival distributors, arguments and robberies involving buyers and sellers, property crimes committed to raise drug money and, more speculatively, social and economic interactions between the illegal markets and the surrounding communities.
All major authorities agree that the vast majority of drug-related violent crime is caused by the prohibition against drugs, rather than the drugs themselves. This was the same situation which was true during alcohol Prohibition. Alcohol Prohibition gave rise to a violent criminal organization. Violent crime dropped 65 percent in the year Prohibition was repealed.
There are about 25,000 homicides in the United States each year. A study of 414 homicides in New York City at the height of the crack epidemic showed that only three murders, less than one percent, could be attributed to the behavioral effects of cocaine or crack. Of these, two were victim-precipitated. For example, one homicide victim tried to rape someone who was high on crack and got killed in the process.
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 09:30:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 09:41:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 09:46:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 09:59:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 10:21:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 10:32:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 10:38:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 10:43:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 10:48:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 10:55:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 11:04:00 PM
The abolition of drug laws has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of taxation without representation. So please in the future, if you would, refrain from making such foolish comparisons.
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 11:07:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 04, 2004, 11:13:00 PM
I'm done.
Post by: pegasys on December 04, 2004, 11:29:00 PM
LOL
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 02:54:00 AM
Post by: pegasys on December 05, 2004, 08:53:00 AM
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 10:04:00 AM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 05, 2004, 10:09:00 AM
Post by: pegasys on December 05, 2004, 12:24:00 PM
Post by: gronne on December 05, 2004, 04:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (pegasys @ Dec 5 2004, 09:27 PM) |
| Ok, I concede, we should make sure he dosn't reproduce. We can't have a bunch of Fection's running around now can we? |
I usually try to leave out insulting other people as it ALWAYS destroys anything worth of debate, but FektionFekler truly asks for it. After having a "debate" with this moron on the other thread, I've come to the conclusion that some people only want meaningless fights on the forum.
He btw resemble incredibly a lot to Everythingbutananswer, leaving me think he's made multiple accounts. He's the worst bigot I've EVER seen, and I've met Nemt several times.
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 07:17:00 PM
| QUOTE (FektionFekler @ Dec 5 2004, 06:12 PM) |
| |
my point exactly........u sir, should be shot in face.
Post by: FektionFekler on December 05, 2004, 08:15:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 6 2004, 04:20 AM) |
| my point exactly........u sir, should be shot in face. |
Thank God for the internet.
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 08:17:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 05, 2004, 08:19:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 09:09:00 PM
Post by: enderandrew on December 05, 2004, 09:30:00 PM
Why get defensive?
If you are just upholding personal principles, kudos to you. Most of my beliefs and principles are pretty liberal. I'm a big proponent of personal freedom and choice.
Yet, most people misunderstand what this country is founded on.
True capitalism has no concern for individuals, or those without wealth.
True democracy has no concern for protecting minorities.
True socialism would never let corporations and government bureacracy run rampant.
We are a blend of capitalism, democracy and socialism. The virtues of each three philosophies must be blended, and carefully balanced against each other. To uphold individual rights discounts majority rule. Some think that what is in the best interest of society as a whole (say, national security) outweights one individual's rights.
How we weight the ideals of capitalism, democracy and socialism against each other will aways be a topic of debate. And in some cases, I'm not sure there is a perfectly right answer.
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 09:49:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 05, 2004, 10:04:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 11:17:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 05, 2004, 11:40:00 PM
It will be just like Brave New World, and 1984. I can't wait .
Post by: tupac on December 05, 2004, 11:57:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 12:51:00 AM
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 12:56:00 AM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 01:03:00 AM
Also I laugh simply because I find your pro drug platform amusing.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 01:23:00 AM
| QUOTE (FektionFekler @ Dec 6 2004, 09:06 AM) |
| They weren't talking about drugs. Drugs aren't essential to a productive society. On a side note, think of books as psychedelics, they both help to expand your mind. Also I laugh simply because I find your pro drug platform amusing. |
you really r a fool, what do u think they were talking about? of course they were talking about drugs. they were talking about guns, alcohol, cigarretes, drugs and anything else that could be illegalized. u really cant be serious, right? "On a side note, think of books as psychedelics, they both help to expand your mind." what is that supposed to mean? thats a reason i use psychedelics, thats a reason to use drugs. when jefferson said "taking away liberty for order" he was most definitely talking about things like drugs, because as an American it is our right to use them. When Lincoln basically said "prohibition is unAmerican" he was also talking, in part, about drugs, because he was talking about all prohibition....admit it, u cant counter these statements, this is what america stands for, and laughing at them is laughing at america. and, on a side note, i laugh at u simply because of how ignorant and stupid u and your beliefs our, and how little they have to do with what u think rather than what uve been told....i laugh at all Americans who think this way, but at the same time its saddening that the ignorance and outright stupidity of the majority is valued more than the intelligence of the few....oh, and again, u didnt make a single point, try again.
Post by: Baner on December 06, 2004, 11:14:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| He btw resemble incredibly a lot to Everythingbutananswer, leaving me think he's made multiple accounts. He's the worst bigot I've EVER seen, and I've met Nemt several times. |
And I thought I was alone.
| QUOTE |
| im sorry all that happened andrew, but u r the minority...for most, stuff like that doesnt happen. also, u blame all of that on drugs, i do not. one, ur father's friend must have REALLY been tripping hard to stab someone to death |
First off, when you turn a blind eye to the truth, it does seem like people affected by the truth are a minority. You won't hear stories like this on the news, cause it makes the government look bad. The fact that a drug that is suppose to be banned, has caused death, doesn't look good for the people that are suppose to be enforcing these laws.
Secondly, that drug is designed to make you trip, that's why people take it. To say that he must have been REALLY tripping is just wrong. It's stupid to blame the drug for causing the stabbing because the drug worked "too well".
| QUOTE |
| your family abused drugs, and, as with anything that powerful, if you abuse it it will destroy u. |
I'm not sure how you can correct someone who you've never met, but nevermind that.
As of right now, It's harder for the masses of people to abuse drugs. For the most part, people are scared of hard drugs, and these drugs aren't readily available to them 24 hours a day. Once drugs become legal, every convienent store is going to be carrying baggies of everything from herb to coke, and any everday Joe can walk in and buy some, anytime of the day. You say drug use isn't bad unless it's abused, and I say drug abuse will, considering the facts, raise after legalization. So using the trasitive property of equalities (how nerdy...), then drug use will be bad.
| QUOTE |
| Deaths per user: Alcohol = 100,000/140,000,000 = .07 % or 70 per 100,000 Cocaine = 1,000/ 12,200,000 = .008 % or 8 per 100,000 Deaths per abuser: Alcohol = 100,000/18,000,000 = .56 % or 56 per 10,000 Cocaine = 1,000/ 250,000 = .40 % or 40 per, 10 |
Look at the scale of users, 18,000,000 alcohol abusers to 250,000. You need to realize that alochol(with the aid of it being legal) is alot more wide spread, you can find it everywhere from your house, to restaurants, to bars, and even amusement parks. You can't believe that all these places can server alcohol, and no one is goign to drive home under the influence... You won't find many people now using drugs away form thier home, or another safe enviroment. Many people won't use drugs while at a restaurant, or most other public places, cause it's not illegal. Therefore, they do it in a more private place.
| QUOTE |
| u act like people who use drugs are just so evil that they will snap at any moment and go on a killing rampage, if u truly belive that either uve neevr tried these drugs or uve been brainwashed. |
I act quite different, I don't believe that people who use drugs are evil, because I'm a drug user. I believe what unPro was saying, cause I've tried many drugs, and have been thru bad trips with them. I'm in no way violent in nature when I'm sober, so that carries over when I'm under the influence, but I didn't have much control of myself when I was using these drugs, and luckily didn't hurt anyone in the process.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 11:55:00 AM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 11:58:00 AM
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 12:04:00 PM
edit: oh and congrats, i think thats your 100th post without making a valid argument!!!!! hurray! cheers to u
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 12:17:00 PM
. Read Brave New World and 1984, or if you are too lazy to read you could try watching Equilibrium. Does a nice job of showing how the government manipulates the population through drugs and is able to more easily control them.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 12:58:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 01:53:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 6 2004, 10:01 PM) |
| if the govt wanted to manipulate people USING drugs they would make them legal |
My point exactly, which is what I would like to avoid.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 02:31:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 02:49:00 PM
Sigh.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 02:54:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 02:56:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 03:01:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 6 2004, 11:57 PM) |
| nothing i can say will save your pathetic soul or change your pathetic mind |
I thought you were an atheist, since there is no scientific proof of a soul, it doesn't exist, so why would it need saving? Since you claim to be a liberal (albeit you seem more like a libertarian to me) you should respect my opinion, as it is after all, my constitutional right to have it.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 03:10:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 03:13:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 03:16:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 03:33:00 PM
.
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 03:35:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 03:36:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 03:37:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 03:40:00 PM
Post by: pegasys on December 06, 2004, 03:55:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 04:04:00 PM
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 07:33:00 PM
Post by: FektionFekler on December 06, 2004, 07:37:00 PM
| QUOTE (tupac @ Dec 7 2004, 04:36 AM) |
| fektion, sorry buts dicks dont count, just because u put em in ur mouth doesnt mean its a drug. 8::::::;D |
So I guess that makes you a dickhead instead of a crackhead?
Post by: tupac on December 06, 2004, 08:05:00 PM
, to pretty much everything i bring up, followed by what basically translates into "heres more proof that im a moron." im 18.