Subject:
|
Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 Jul 2003 22:07:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1052 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
Well, if they are legalized, then we can assume the price would drop
dramatically thus making them affordable, and we could also assume that
availability would be much greater, and we could also assume that drug
companies would be advertising their products. All of that equals increased
usage in my mind.
|
So instead of legalizing something relatively benign like pharmaceutical
grade cocaine or heroin, you have de facto readily available garbage like
crack. Crack is cheap, powerfully addictive, and TRULY ruins people’s lives
quite quickly.
|
I’m not sure I follow you. Would people prefer to use these pharmaceutical
drugs, or would they opt for the more potent and insidious drugs like crack and
ecstasy?
| |
What you are engaging in is chemical snobbery. Your whole life is a series of
bio-chemical responses to stimuli. You are a married man and a father -- all
of which is linked to things like hormones and endorphins. Love may be little
more than a chemical interaction between persons during their stongest mating
years.
|
lol I hope you are being facetious, but I’d bet you’re not! :-)
| |
“Love” seems to last around 4-6 years, interestingly just enough time
to mate, have a child, and bring that child out of its most vulnerable years.
Check the divorce rate for a comparison of the timing involved.
|
It is my experience that love lasts (coming up on my 20th wedding
anniversary). YMMV
| |
What business is it of yours if people want to ruin their lives with drugs? I
don’t wish such a life for people myself -- drugs can indeed swallow up your
life; but I choose not to involve myself in the private decisions of free
persons. Even 12 step programs teach us that you cannot force people out of
their chosen addictions. So be it!
|
I’ll agree with you here, Richard, but isn’t it true that when these folks do
screw up their lives, it is society (specifically the government) that is left
to pay the price in terms of cleaning up the mess these people make of their
lives and others?
| |
You come home at the end of the day, hug your kids, and score an endorphin
rush. You get your high naturally and spend a glowing evening transfixed with
natural body opiates. Another person chooses something different -- crack at
the end of their pipe! They smoke up and spend some time gaga staring at a
blank wall. As long as you both leave me alone -- I don’t care and I don’t
mind.
|
Although I reject your comparison, I agree with your point, but I still contend
that the crack smokers and beer drinkers don’t keep to themselves but rather
take to the hiways and kill people.
| |
Make things illegal and surprise, surprise -- you have also just created a
black market and a whole host of illegal activities surrounding the creation,
procurement, and use of said illegal thing. Prohibition taught us that while
simultaneously saddling society with Capones on the one side and Kennedys on
the other.
I’d rather have everything more out in the open, seeing as how it is readily
available anyway. I’d also like to control its quality (make it less
dangerous in use) and tax it.
|
In a perfect world where folks are responsible, this is a reasonable
proposition. But the world is not perfect and people are not responsible.
| |
You are concerned with the dangers of abuse, but we have that already. You
can argue that it’s a matter of degrees, but you don’t actually know what a
freer society or culture would be like.
|
But don’t you see? That is exactly what I am arguing about! Look at alcohol
abuse in our country today. The death rate due to alcohol abuse in this country
is unacceptable! Or do you think that we don’t have that great a problem in
this area? And if you do, how would you propose to lessen it? How would
suggest we deal with killers ie “high” drivers? Without STIFF penalties I think
the whole idea is way doomed.
| |
The lure of forbidden fruit is
extremely appealing. Make things more acceptable and see if you don’t
actually drive down the coolness factor of drug use.
I don’t really use drugs, but then they don’t really signify anything to me
except what the drug itself might provide. I don’t think heroin is cool. I
have never had the desire to be sedated except when I’m in great pain. I like
being “up” but all cocaine really does is make you feel somewhat euphoric. If
cocaine is keeping you up at night, it’s been cut with something harsher. How
boring...
But again, if someone else loves those varied sensations it’s not my
business.
|
Fine. I can agree with you. But until you address the problem of:
1. What happens to a person who becomes a homeless junkie,
2. What happens to a person when they kill someone while driving “high”?
I would suggest that we begin jailing drunk drivers 1 year MANDATORY with NO
chance of parole, and MANDATORY LIFE sentences for drunk drivers who kill. If
that has a “sobering” effect on alcohol use then I might consider us ready to
legalize the other stuff (with the same penalties in effect).
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
