Drug Prohibition Item

[lester1/2jr]

Suddenly it's like the government, and in essence overall society

I don't think too many people would equate what the extaordinarily unpopular people in washington think as what "society" thinks but then I'm an anarchist. I don't consider being a raging alcoholic "acceptable" even though it's legal and I don't consider being a casual marijuna smoker morally abbhorent even though it's illegal.

to me the government are far worse criminals than drug lords.  they take 33% of my paycheck, I don't give anything to drug lords.  

at the same time I don't like that this is coming up now simply to help the government get more revenue. it's a civil liberties issue.

the government isn't in massive debt because they aren't collecting revenue from drugs, they are in debt because they have no idea how to sontrol spending and say yes to every expenditure, war subsidiy whatever.

[HappyGilmore]

Yes I can't imagine too many employers who'd be thrilled with hiring someone with a drug problem. I think Skull's previous point of teen alcoholism is important to remember...more easy access to currently illegal drugs would likely lead to more youth culture users (not that we don't have too many already, as I understand high school is the prime place for acquiring illegal drugs these days )  and an even greater number of addicts. Abusing drugs aren't ever the way to go kids. Hard work & self-discipline - those very qualities gained from abstinence - now that can lead to success and respectability and it won't cost you your life, your family, your loved ones, your health, your record, your freedom.

High school is a place where you could very much get any drug or substance you want.  I avoided many parties in high school due to that very reason.

Ironically, as much as I avoided them, I ended up having some substance problems. 

I'm curious to know, though.  You have a Straight Edge thing in your signature.  You Straight Edge?  How's that work?  I'm just curious...I'm a little familar with it but not overly so.  I know some punk bands proclaimed to follow it, and CM Punk from the WWE. 

[JaseSF]

I consider myself Straight Edge yes. To me, it means a commitment to a personal lifestyle choice. It means I plan on going through my entire life never drinking alcohol, never smoking cigarettes, never using recreational drugs, never being sexually promiscious and never abusing medication. It's all about being clean and doing the right thing. It's very much about self-discipline and the culture (which did start during the hardcorepunk era, kind of a subculture counter-reaction to the excesses often associated with punk, thanks to bands like Minor Threat, Youth of Today, Gorilla Biscuits and 7 Seconds) also tends to promote the values behind hard work, race harmony and environmentalism. Some Straight Edge people also believe you should be also Vegan or Vegetarian (which I'm considering) but personally I consider that element to be separate. Some hardliners out there also believe in trying to force others to live the same way even against their will and I understand there's even been cases of straight edge gangs attacking smokers or drinkers. Personally I don't believe in that at all as I think being Straight Edge is a simply a positive personal lifestyle choice, whereas others see it as a movement, and I think everyone should have the freedom to choose what they want to do as individuals within the boundaries of the law. A lot of teens do seem to embrace the lifestyle though which can be quite a positive thing for them I think although the more militant, hardline element of it is worrying.

[lester1/2jr]

if marijuana were legalized and others drugs weren't,  I bet alot of drug using people would make due with marijuana rather than risking getting arrested to get something a little more potent

[Rev. Powell]

if marijuana were legalized and others drugs weren't,  I bet alot of drug using people would make due with marijuana rather than risking getting arrested to get something a little more potent

Honestly, I doubt that's the case.  Certainly exitsing heroin and meth users wouldn't switch to pot, it's just not a substitute any more than alcohol is. 

On the other hand, there is some short-term evidence that decriminalization of all drugs in Portugal was followed by an overall decrease in drug use: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html.

As I recall the statistics on whether hard drug use increased or decreased in the Netherlands is a matter of hot debate.  Each side accuses the other side of cooking the statistics to make their case look stronger.  It would take a lot of work by a neutral party to sift through all the evidence and see what the truth is.

[Doggett]

I'll tell you what else Grinds my Gears...
Huh?

Oh, wrong thread....

Sorry, my mistake.

 

[HappyGilmore]

Honestly, I doubt that's the case.  Certainly exitsing heroin and meth users wouldn't switch to pot, it's just not a substitute any more than alcohol is. 



[/quote]
I know a lot of meth and heroin users who certainly wouldn't go to marijuana if it were legal.  Hell, most of em HATE smoking pot.  I certainly wouldn't.  While I never used meth or heroin, I've used stronger drugs than pot, and frankly, I wouldn't have given them up to use weed legally.

[Flick James]

if marijuana were legalized and others drugs weren't,  I bet alot of drug using people would make due with marijuana rather than risking getting arrested to get something a little more potent

Honestly, I doubt that's the case.  Certainly exitsing heroin and meth users wouldn't switch to pot, it's just not a substitute any more than alcohol is.  

On the other hand, there is some short-term evidence that decriminalization of all drugs in Portugal was followed by an overall decrease in drug use: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html.

As I recall the statistics on whether hard drug use increased or decreased in the Netherlands is a matter of hot debate.  Each side accuses the other side of cooking the statistics to make their case look stronger.  It would take a lot of work by a neutral party to sift through all the evidence and see what the truth is.

That's why I typically keep statistics out of my arguments. People love to use manipulated numbers, and even made-up numbers, in an effort to prove their point and win. Now, the article you cite would support my position, and while I am very tempted to use it as such, my objective mind will remember that there are studies and statistics and numbers that support both that decriminalization works and that prohibition works, and in copious amounts in both cases.

I prefer to stick to the issue from an ideological standpoint. Freedom,both economic freedom and personal freedom, is what I favor over government intervention into out lives. I've made my own choices in life, just as xJaseSFx has made his, and I respect and applaud his choice be straight-edge. Since the adoption of this nation and its constitution, the government has slowly but surely instituted one control on our lives after another. I would imagine that Americans from 100 years ago would look on our life today with a mixture of wonder and horror, wonder over the technology we have, and horror over how much influence our government has over our lives, and how much information the government holds on us. I have no doubt that the institution of prohibition started with good intentions, but the amount of government intervention into our private lives is the inevitable result of prohibitive attitudes, laws, and policies. I have brought up various arguments that support my position, but if you want to know what really drives my position, and what drives my outlook on every view that I hold dear, it is that. I want xJaseSFx to retain his right to make his own decision to be straight edge, a decision, by the way, that he has had to make depite prohibition being in place, a system that does not work, and will not work no matter how much you try to crack down on it and no matter how much money and resources and govermental power you throw at it.

So, yes, when I see that article, Rev., it makes me feel good, and I am glad that you have shared it, but human-nature being what it is, people who stubbornly hold on the the notion that prohibition works will reject it as a lie, and people on the other end will gladly accept it, and neither will likely care whether or not it is the truth.

[Flick James]

if marijuana were legalized and others drugs weren't,  I bet alot of drug using people would make due with marijuana rather than risking getting arrested to get something a little more potent

Honestly, I doubt that's the case.  Certainly exitsing heroin and meth users wouldn't switch to pot, it's just not a substitute any more than alcohol is.  

On the other hand, there is some short-term evidence that decriminalization of all drugs in Portugal was followed by an overall decrease in drug use: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html.

As I recall the statistics on whether hard drug use increased or decreased in the Netherlands is a matter of hot debate.  Each side accuses the other side of cooking the statistics to make their case look stronger.  It would take a lot of work by a neutral party to sift through all the evidence and see what the truth is.

One more side note on that article, Rev. I forgot that it's been that long since they instituted decriminalization. I was in Lisbon on a port visit when I was in the Navy in 2000, a year before that was instituted. I was amazed how many times I was approached on the stree to buy drugs, usually hashish. The street was filled with young men and women who were, despite prohibition, trying to support themselves through illegal drug sale on the streets. My wife and I want to visit Portugal for vacation (it is a very beautiful country, afterall). I will have to bump up that priority. I am very curious to see how much the streets have changed. I have a strong suspicion that most of those strung-out kids are no longer there, but we'll see.

[Skull]

I consider myself Straight Edge yes. To me, it means a commitment to a personal lifestyle choice. It means I plan on going through my entire life never drinking alcohol, never smoking cigarettes, never using recreational drugs, never being sexually promiscious and never abusing medication. It's all about being clean and doing the right thing. It's very much about self-discipline and the culture (which did start during the hardcorepunk era, kind of a subculture counter-reaction to the excesses often associated with punk, thanks to bands like Minor Threat, Youth of Today, Gorilla Biscuits and 7 Seconds) also tends to promote the values behind hard work, race harmony and environmentalism. Some Straight Edge people also believe you should be also Vegan or Vegetarian (which I'm considering) but personally I consider that element to be separate. Some hardliners out there also believe in trying to force others to live the same way even against their will and I understand there's even been cases of straight edge gangs attacking smokers or drinkers. Personally I don't believe in that at all as I think being Straight Edge is a simply a positive personal lifestyle choice, whereas others see it as a movement, and I think everyone should have the freedom to choose what they want to do as individuals within the boundaries of the law. A lot of teens do seem to embrace the lifestyle though which can be quite a positive thing for them I think although the more militant, hardline element of it is worrying.

I don’t consider myself as a Straight Edge. I do drink alcohol but occasionally. Although my dad was an Alcoholic and my mom is a binge drinker, my choice is based upon the hangovers [I don’t like the feeling] and I don’t like the taste of beer.

I choose not to smoke cigarettes because I didn’t want to succumb into the same nicotine addiction that my grandmother had. This choice I made when I was 12; she would have me walk to a gas station to buy her a pack of cigarettes at the cost of 1.15 cents. [Yes, in 1982 you could buy cigarettes at 12-years-old in Chicago]. We were poor and sometimes it was very hard to find the 15 cents. [To me the addiction was an annoyance.] Then, I remember one day we started popping Buffalo Nickels from a bracelet so we could get the money for my grandmother’s habit. She died from cancer when I was 19.

In High School some of my friends started to smoke pot and they would often ask me if I would like to join them. From my observations their actions seem quite similar to my grandmothers addiction so I told them that I don’t smoke cigarettes so I don’t see why I need to smoke pot. They were cool with my choice but I soon became an outcast; in my second year I seen very few of them in my third year they dropped out of school.

I really do believe the major reason why people actually give in to such habits is the fear from being rejected and become an outcast. I did felt hurt when my friends started to disassociate with me but I also figure they were no longer the kids I knew.

But I do blame pop culture because drugs is a thrill yet nobody wants to be accountable for their own choices, pop culture gives these addicts a voice so they can point their finger at something else and say they are the victim. Pop culture then make fun of any attempt for doing something right, like Nancy Reagan say no to drugs, because pop culture wants people to believe that society has accepted drugs to be normal and its not normal for people not to try drugs at least once.

I am asking for accountability for your choices. If you do drugs and you get busted by the law its your fault (not mine), so accept your punishment and stop your b!tching!

[Flick James]

I consider myself Straight Edge yes. To me, it means a commitment to a personal lifestyle choice. It means I plan on going through my entire life never drinking alcohol, never smoking cigarettes, never using recreational drugs, never being sexually promiscious and never abusing medication. It's all about being clean and doing the right thing. It's very much about self-discipline and the culture (which did start during the hardcorepunk era, kind of a subculture counter-reaction to the excesses often associated with punk, thanks to bands like Minor Threat, Youth of Today, Gorilla Biscuits and 7 Seconds) also tends to promote the values behind hard work, race harmony and environmentalism. Some Straight Edge people also believe you should be also Vegan or Vegetarian (which I'm considering) but personally I consider that element to be separate. Some hardliners out there also believe in trying to force others to live the same way even against their will and I understand there's even been cases of straight edge gangs attacking smokers or drinkers. Personally I don't believe in that at all as I think being Straight Edge is a simply a positive personal lifestyle choice, whereas others see it as a movement, and I think everyone should have the freedom to choose what they want to do as individuals within the boundaries of the law. A lot of teens do seem to embrace the lifestyle though which can be quite a positive thing for them I think although the more militant, hardline element of it is worrying.

I don’t consider myself as a Straight Edge. I do drink alcohol but occasionally. Although my dad was an Alcoholic and my mom is a binge drinker, my choice is based upon the hangovers [I don’t like the feeling] and I don’t like the taste of beer.

I choose not to smoke cigarettes because I didn’t want to succumb into the same nicotine addiction that my grandmother had. This choice I made when I was 12; she would have me walk to a gas station to buy her a pack of cigarettes at the cost of 1.15 cents. [Yes, in 1982 you could buy cigarettes at 12-years-old in Chicago]. We were poor and sometimes it was very hard to find the 15 cents. [To me the addiction was an annoyance.] Then, I remember one day we started popping Buffalo Nickels from a bracelet so we could get the money for my grandmother’s habit. She died from cancer when I was 19.

In High School some of my friends started to smoke pot and they would often ask me if I would like to join them. From my observations their actions seem quite similar to my grandmothers addiction so I told them that I don’t smoke cigarettes so I don’t see why I need to smoke pot. They were cool with my choice but I soon became an outcast; in my second year I seen very few of them in my third year they dropped out of school.

I really do believe the major reason why people actually give in to such habits is the fear from being rejected and become an outcast. I did felt hurt when my friends started to disassociate with me but I also figure they were no longer the kids I knew.

But I do blame pop culture because drugs is a thrill yet nobody wants to be accountable for their own choices, pop culture gives these addicts a voice so they can point their finger at something else and say they are the victim. Pop culture then make fun of any attempt for doing something right, like Nancy Reagan say no to drugs, because pop culture wants people to believe that society has accepted drugs to be normal and its not normal for people not to try drugs at least once.

I am asking for accountability for your choices. If you do drugs and you get busted by the law its your fault (not mine), so accept your punishment and stop your b!tching!

Skull, I agree with pretty much everything you said. I even agree with your last point that if you get caught, there's no use b***hing. Everyone knows the laws are there. You and I just disagree on one thing: you think the laws should be there and I don't. In any case, you've made your choices, and I've made mine. I don't do drugs either. I used to smoke pot years ago, and I also used to smoke cigarettes for 19 years and quit cold turkey almost 4 years ago and haven't smoked since. Does that affect my opinions? I'm sure it does, because I made the choice to quit one of the most addictive substances there is and succeeded, and so my success influences my views. I accept that, just as I accept that your experiences have influenced yours. What I disagree with is that prison terms for small time users is going to help anyone, including society. A person who smokes a joint and goes to prison, by and large, does not gain anything from the experience, least of all rehabilitation. Prison is a breeding place for criminality, and, despite a very high level of monitoring and vigilance, a place where dangerous drugs make it in and get abused. The reality that drug abuse is epidemic in our prison system is a solid correlation that suggests, if not outright proves, that prohibition, no matter how extreme or vigilant, fails miserably in preventing drug abuse. I personally don't see how a rational person could deny that correlation.

We are clearly equally stubborn in our positions. That's fine. You have your reasons, which appear to be highly founded on personal experience, but I too have some personal resonance in my views. I hold, categorically and without exception, that whatever I do, from owning a gun, to engaging in consentual sex, to smoking a joint at home (which I don't do, by the way), that does not violate another's rights, nor endangers another, IS NOBODY'S BUSINESS, least of all the government's. I will not bend in that conviction in any way, shape, or form, which includes making an exception for substance consumption. You have made the claim that my views are insane. I am not surprised I'm being called insane. Some of my views are very against the grain, and being accused as insane comes with the territory. It could be worse. It could be three hundred years ago where I would probably be labeled a witch and burned at the stake for going against the moral majority. Still, to be considered insane for my views still hurts, but I can't complain or b***h because I suggested you were immature, a reaction that regret because it was neither productive nor nice.

I do, however, appreciate this site more and more every day, especially considering how much we've been able to go back and forth on such a sensitive topic with absolutely no restriction on the part of the site administrators. That is probably the most impressive thing of all, and a big part of why I keep coming back.

 

[Skull]

Skull, I agree with pretty much everything you said. I even agree with your last point that if you get caught, there's no use b***hing. Everyone knows the laws are there.

Everyone should know what the law is…  But I think its much more important that everybody should know the outcome from breaking the law.

You and I just disagree on one thing: you think the laws should be there and I don't.

Sorry but your still not understanding what I’m saying. I believe the law should be enforced because the act of enforcing the law will deter people from such behavior.

In any case, you've made your choices, and I've made mine. I don't do drugs either. I used to smoke pot years ago, and I also used to smoke cigarettes for 19 years and quit cold turkey almost 4 years ago and haven't smoked since. Does that affect my opinions? I'm sure it does, because I made the choice to quit one of the most addictive substances there is and succeeded, and so my success influences my views. I accept that, just as I accept that your experiences have influenced yours.

A personal experience is a very good schoolteacher ~ me.

What I disagree with is that prison terms for small time users is going to help anyone, including society. A person who smokes a joint and goes to prison, by and large, does not gain anything from the experience, least of all rehabilitation. Prison is a breeding place for criminality, and, despite a very high level of monitoring and vigilance, a place where dangerous drugs make it in and get abused. The reality that drug abuse is epidemic in our prison system is a solid correlation that suggests, if not outright proves, that prohibition, no matter how extreme or vigilant, fails miserably in preventing drug abuse.

I do agree that prison is a bad place. I would never wish my worst enemy to go to jail. But I really believe that prison is also necessary. It supposes to keep bad people out of society and deter other people from doing criminal activity. [I really don’t know how many times I need to express this, but I had sad it more then once.]

It is shameful that such criminal activities do happen in prison but many prisoners are already facing 20 to 40 year jail sentences and figure they are already serving life “so what do they have to loose?” This is why I said we need more efficient government. I figured 16,000 per prisoner and that includes 1 guard per 5 prisoners. If government were half or a third as efficient as my bogus numbers then most of the criminal activity would be reduced, although the reduction wouldn’t rehabilitate the prisoner.

Actually, prison will never rehabilitate a prisoner because the whole notion of Prison is to confine a person away from society, as an act of punishment without becoming aggressively abusive to that person rights.



If prison were design to rehabilitate the criminal, then he/she would undergo reeducation and/or brainwashing, although the Eight Amendment protects the criminals from such activities.



Rehabilitation is based upon the individual in prison if they are willing to accept what they did is wrong and if they are willing to change. This isn’t easy (it’s like going cold turkey) and often times it’ll never happen. And you are right, they will move to other criminal activities, although it’ll be based upon their non-acceptance to society (like getting a good paying job based upon their criminal record) then what was learned in prison.

I personally don't see how a rational person could deny that correlation.

You think Prison is an act of Rehabilitation. (Which I explained cannot be done because such an act is against the constitution.)

Prison is supposed to deter criminal activity.

We are clearly equally stubborn in our positions. That's fine. You have your reasons, which appear to be highly founded on personal experience, but I too have some personal resonance in my views.

Besides my personal experience I’m always asking questions and looking towards history for the answer. Like I said before I’m often angry when people bring up the Alcohol Prohibition and they keep overlooking why such a law was passed. America did have a drug addiction problem in the turn of the century and alcohol was subjected for banning based upon its addictive properties.

Its not like government woke up one day and said ‘today we are going to ban alcohol,’ there are reason why that movement was made.
 
I’m also seeing a major problem with Teenage Alcoholism, since the law states that nobody under 21 should consume alcohol then we shouldn’t have such a problem; but we do because our pop culture want us to accept the idea that teens are going to consume alcohol which is natural and they are the victim. Again pushing the blame not on the one breaking the law but on society for its laws.

I hold, categorically and without exception, that whatever I do, from owning a gun, to engaging in consensual sex, to smoking a joint at home (which I don't do, by the way), that does not violate another's rights, nor endangers another, IS NOBODY'S BUSINESS, least of all the government's.

Sure a good idea for an argument but your missing the point… the person smoking the joint most likely needs to buy it from somewhere, again… Supply and demand. Therefore the person smoking the joint is keeping the drug dealers working, even if they smoke in the privacy of their home.

[JaseSF]

I just want to say my lifestyle choice is hardly typical where I live. Aside from the devoutly religious family members I have, I'm the only person I know who does not drink alcohol at all.

In high school, joining the crowd is almost encouraged outright as the correct behaviour (but then I never let anyone else decide what was right or wrong in my eyes) and in said groups, drinking and drug abuse is common especially at teenage house parties and the works. As a teen, I generally avoided these places and gatherings which did make me something of an outcast as well. My love of Sci-Fi, Pro Wrestling and my fascination with space and dinosaurs only added fuel to the fire. When I became an adult, I started to attend some dances but was still awkward until I realized I needed nothing for me to have a good time and I had no vice which would leave me with an hangover or other ill effects. I realized a strong person needs no bottled courage.

That said, I've never thought myself better than anyone else and I do believe people should have the freedom to choose for themselves. Sadly I think too many people are led astray by desire for popularity, acceptance, etc. and end up going down the wrong path. I really think a lot of these choices are made when we are still young, in our formative years, probably a lot during our teenage days.

[Flick James]

 

I'm going to start looking for a part in the constitution that prohibits the government from offering rehabilitation to convicted criminals, unless you actually thought I was implying that rehabilitation be forced on criminals, in which case you would be right. My understanding is that once one is convicted in a court of law, they no longer have full constitutional rights. From my understanding, and you can point me to the part of the contitution that I'm unaware of, but the 8th amendment protects prisoners from cruel and unusual punishment, and the 5th and 14th provide due process and equal protection. Another right convicted prisoners have is the right of access to the parole process, except when given a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. This implies a correctional committment to rehabilitation or else there would be no parole system. Where in the constitution is it against the law to provide rehabilitation to convicted criminals?  If such a thing exists, I've never seen it, but I'm not claiming to know the constitution forwards and backwards.

I doubt my views are typical, but if they are, then that would make me glad. And my views are in no way careless. I spent six years defending our country and I will say whatever the f**k I feel like about what I see that is wrong about what I defended willingly of my own free will and would do so again. My service does not give me any special prerogative to speak my mind, everyone has that, but you are in no position to question my loyalty toward or care for our country. I have never questioned your loyalty to our country or accused you of being careless about that which I hold so dear. In my opinion you have stepped over the line, Skull.  

[Flick James]

I just want to say my lifestyle choice is hardly typical where I live. Aside from the devoutly religious family members I have, I'm the only person I know who does not drink alcohol at all.

In high school, joining the crowd is almost encouraged outright as the correct behaviour (but then I never let anyone else decide what was right or wrong in my eyes) and in said groups, drinking and drug abuse is common especially at teenage house parties and the works. As a teen, I generally avoided these places and gatherings which did make me something of an outcast as well. My love of Sci-Fi, Pro Wrestling and my fascination with space and dinosaurs only added fuel to the fire. When I became an adult, I started to attend some dances but was still awkward until I realized I needed nothing for me to have a good time and I had no vice which would leave me with an hangover or other ill effects. I realized a strong person needs no bottled courage.

That said, I've never thought myself better than anyone else and I do believe people should have the freedom to choose for themselves. Sadly I think too many people are led astray by desire for popularity, acceptance, etc. and end up going down the wrong path. I really think a lot of these choices are made when we are still young, in our formative years, probably a lot during our teenage days.

I think you have chosen the right path for you, sir, and because it was your choice, all that much more admirable.