Page 19 of 32 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 313

Thread: Teen shot to death during home invasion

  1. #181
    Sage
    kaya'08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    British Turk
    Last Seen
    05-12-14 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,363

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    We are trying to stop drugs for illogical, emotional reasons. Your own comment above belies how illogical your stance is by targetting the emotionally charged "why" of the whole thing.

    Furthermore, we are trying to "stop" drugs because we mistakenly think they CAN be stopped regardless of the mountains of evidence that suggest that the whole venture is retarded.
    No, no. You see the only evidence you have is that the war on drugs hasnt completely stopped the importation of drugs. Do you honestly believe that the people who created this whole "war on drugs" thing we have going on everywhere thought they could/would bring an end to all drug usage? Of course not. Thats impossible, unless we went so far as to ban them in hospitals too and do stop and search for every citizen crossing every state, boarder and continent. The intention was to counteract there importation to a certain extent - in that sense it has worked. Legalizing drugs would be even worse, our war on drugs acts as a barrage against a wave of drug usage (again, to a certain extent).

    Logic requires us to look at the actual evidence and act according to it. Not ignore the evidence in order to pursue an irrational goal.
    What evidence do you have to suggest we will have less fatal drug usage, less life destroying drug usage, by simply legalizing it?

    The evidence is that drugs will never be defeated. They have existed for far longer than any society on the planet, and will outlast any existing society today.

    Let's look at things logically.
    Again, not the goal nor the point on the war on drugs.

    If someone is willing to break the law to sell drugs to a 32 year old, what is the impetus that would prevent them from dealing them to an 8 year old? I doubt morality comes into play.
    Assuming it was legalized? Well, if we legalized it as you said, Tucker, the 32 year old wouldnt have to go out of her way to destroy her life - she can simply go to her local shop instead.

    If the goal is prevention, then actually doing things that have a chance of succeeding is a better approach than wasting mountains of resources on a failed program.
    Its illogical.
    Last edited by kaya'08; 08-03-09 at 04:11 PM.
    "If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world" - Christopher Hitchens
    > Good to be back, but I'm only visiting for a few weeks. <

  2. #182
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Are STD rates higher among drug addicts?
    No clue, I didn't make that statement.

    That said I'd be interested about a few things more than just that.

    Are the STD rates amongst drug users in places where a needle exchange program is in place higher or lower than places where its not?

    What is the difference in STD rates of people who don't do drugs, who do non-needle drugs, and who do needle drugs?

    What is the difference in STD rates between those that are heavy alcohol drinkers and non/light drinkers.

    Furthermore, even if STD rates are higher among drug users than non-drug users that alone proves nothing. Correlation does not equal causation. It would be like saying that the most devestating terrorist attack on this country happened while GWB was in power, so GWB caused the most devestating terrorist attack on this country. If the economy gets better it'd be like automatically saying since it got better after Obama took office that it automatically means Obama is the reason it got better. Just because two things match up does not necessarily mean they're the cause.

    IF STD rates are higher in drug users than in non-users there are MULTIPLE ways to potentially explain it.

    One reason could be because it impares ones judgement. This seems to be the one that the "All drugs can't be legalized because STD rates will sky rocket" is founded on.

    Another reason could be that the needle focused drugs skew the numbers greatly, with non-needled drug users being near identical to non-drug users. If that was the case then it'd be incredibly disingenuous of the "all drugs can't be legalized because of STD" crowd because they're demonizing drugs that have no STD increasing affect, showing they don't care about STD's but simply want to keep drugs illegal.

    Another reason could be that since it IS illegal to use drugs and thus many of those that are currently using it already have poor judgement skills, skills that would not change in the absense of drugs. Those most likely to start doing drugs after they were legalized that don't do it now are likely those with relatively decent judgement to begin with and thus would have minimal impact.

    I could go on and on. My point being that there's nothing stating that even if the statement "Drug users have a higher rate of STD's than non-drug users" means necessarily that the use of the drugs is the reason for it, nor that legalizing drugs would cause this across a great amount of the population.

  3. #183
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    No clue, I didn't make that statement.

    That said I'd be interested about a few things more than just that.

    Are the STD rates amongst drug users in places where a needle exchange program is in place higher or lower than places where its not?

    What is the difference in STD rates of people who don't do drugs, who do non-needle drugs, and who do needle drugs?

    What is the difference in STD rates between those that are heavy alcohol drinkers and non/light drinkers.

    Furthermore, even if STD rates are higher among drug users than non-drug users that alone proves nothing. Correlation does not equal causation. It would be like saying that the most devestating terrorist attack on this country happened while GWB was in power, so GWB caused the most devestating terrorist attack on this country. If the economy gets better it'd be like automatically saying since it got better after Obama took office that it automatically means Obama is the reason it got better. Just because two things match up does not necessarily mean they're the cause.

    IF STD rates are higher in drug users than in non-users there are MULTIPLE ways to potentially explain it.

    One reason could be because it impares ones judgement. This seems to be the one that the "All drugs can't be legalized because STD rates will sky rocket" is founded on.

    Another reason could be that the needle focused drugs skew the numbers greatly, with non-needled drug users being near identical to non-drug users. If that was the case then it'd be incredibly disingenuous of the "all drugs can't be legalized because of STD" crowd because they're demonizing drugs that have no STD increasing affect, showing they don't care about STD's but simply want to keep drugs illegal.

    Another reason could be that since it IS illegal to use drugs and thus many of those that are currently using it already have poor judgement skills, skills that would not change in the absense of drugs. Those most likely to start doing drugs after they were legalized that don't do it now are likely those with relatively decent judgement to begin with and thus would have minimal impact.

    I could go on and on. My point being that there's nothing stating that even if the statement "Drug users have a higher rate of STD's than non-drug users" means necessarily that the use of the drugs is the reason for it, nor that legalizing drugs would cause this across a great amount of the population.
    A suitable compromise might be making clean needles available, no questions asked, from clinics. Giving help information with these needles would be a step in the right direction.

  4. #184
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    No, no. You see the only evidence you have is that the war on drugs hasnt completely stopped the importation of drugs.
    Not really.

    You can look at the mass amount of money we're spending on the war on drugs, both in enforcement and incarceration. We could then compare that to what people percieve as the benefit to society we've recieved by doing such. Similarly we can compare the various effects it has caused. The large underground, untaxed, untraced economy that has...the violence on the border...the financing it provides to illicite groups...etc. Not to mention the belief by some that the loss of freedoms and power vested in the governmnet for this "war" to happen means we as citizens "lose".

    This is non-withstanding the belief that "winning" or not winning the war on drugs is irrelevant because its not a war worth fighting.

  5. #185
    Sage
    kaya'08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    British Turk
    Last Seen
    05-12-14 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,363

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Not really.

    You can look at the mass amount of money we're spending on the war on drugs, both in enforcement and incarceration. We could then compare that to what people percieve as the benefit to society we've recieved by doing such. Similarly we can compare the various effects it has caused. The large underground, untaxed, untraced economy that has...the violence on the border...the financing it provides to illicite groups...etc. Not to mention the belief by some that the loss of freedoms and power vested in the governmnet for this "war" to happen means we as citizens "lose".

    This is non-withstanding the belief that "winning" or not winning the war on drugs is irrelevant because its not a war worth fighting.
    Not a war worth fighting? Do you have any idea what drugs do to people? Do you have any idea why all these Class A's and B's are illegalized in more or less every nation on this planet?

    Id happily give up a small amount of rights to ensure my children (future children) and friends and family are safe from such substances.
    Last edited by kaya'08; 08-03-09 at 04:26 PM.
    "If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world" - Christopher Hitchens
    > Good to be back, but I'm only visiting for a few weeks. <

  6. #186
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    No, no. You see the only evidence you have is that the war on drugs hasnt completely stopped the importation of drugs. Do you honestly believe that the people who created this whole "war on drugs" thing we have going on everywhere thought they could/would bring an end to all drug usage? Of course not. Thats impossible, unless we went so far as to ban them in hospitals too and do stop and search for every citizen crossing every state, boarder and continent. The intention was to counteract there importation to a certain extent - in that sense it has worked. Legalizing drugs would be even worse, our war on drugs acts as a barrage against a wave of drug usage (again, to a certain extent).
    Actually, the war on drugs is counter-productive. right now, the only people who deal drugs must break the law to do so. If we legalized and regulated drugs, as we do with liqour, it will actually lead to a decrease in underage usage.

    Having strict penalties for underage sale of drugs while being permissive for sales towards those in the majority will make it so that those who distribute drugs will be less likely to risk their livelihood in order to make a single sale, when there are plenty of people who would be willing to purchase their wares without it placing a risk on their livelihood.

    Right now, there exists no impetus that prevents any sale of drugs to minors. Legally speaking, it is just as "wrong" to sell drugs to a 30 year old as it is to sell drugs to a 13 year old. Either way, the person takes the same risks for the same rewards (monetary).

    But if a sale to a 30 year old was risk free while a sale to a 13 year old carried stiff penalties, they would not risk their freedom and livelihood over minimal benefit.

    What evidence do you have to suggest we will have less fatal drug usage, less life destroying drug usage, by simply legalizing it?
    A large proportion of overdoses are caused by the fact that the "purity" of the drugs are not uniformly regulated and fluctuates: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...2206837b7329d2

    This is caused because the user tries ot use the same dose that got them high with a less pure cut with a more pure cut and they overdose.

    By maintaining certain regulations of the dosage, you can decrease overdoses caused by purity fluctuations.



    Again, not the goal nor the point on the war on drugs.
    But they haven't even dented the total drug use in this country. Over 50% of people have tried drugs at some point.



    Assuming it was legalized? Well, if we legalized it as you said, Tucker, the 32 year old wouldnt have to go out of her way to destroy her life - she can simply go to her local shop instead.
    Again, that's an emotional argument. The 32 year old has already decided to destroy her life. Instead of spending the money on prohibition and such, spend a 1/4 of it on programs that have a chance to help this person such as rehabilitation treatments and education.

    What the majority of the money goes towards is fighting against the sale of drugs. What it should be going towards is helping those who are affected and trying to keep young people off of drugs. Legalization would be a smart step in decreasing youth drug use as well as well as freeing up money to be used in assisting those who are already addicted.


    Its illogical.
    Actually doing things that have a chance of succeeding instead of wasting more money on a failed program is illogical?!?!??! Please, explain.

  7. #187
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    No, no. You see the only evidence you have is that the war on drugs hasnt completely stopped the importation of drugs. Do you honestly believe that the people who created this whole "war on drugs" thing we have going on everywhere thought they could/would bring an end to all drug usage? Of course not. Thats impossible, unless we went so far as to ban them in hospitals too and do stop and search for every citizen crossing every state, boarder and continent. The intention was to counteract there importation to a certain extent - in that sense it has worked. Legalizing drugs would be even worse, our war on drugs acts as a barrage against a wave of drug usage (again, to a certain extent).

    What evidence do you have to suggest we will have less fatal drug usage, less life destroying drug usage, by simply legalizing it?

    Again, not the goal nor the point on the war on drugs.

    Assuming it was legalized? Well, if we legalized it as you said, Tucker, the 32 year old wouldnt have to go out of her way to destroy her life - she can simply go to her local shop instead.

    Its illogical.
    Combating drugs is like erecting a dam. The point is not to stop the water, but to control it.

    Tucker is basically claiming that the dam has failed because it doesn't hold 100% of the water back, and we should therefore demolish the dam.

    If anything, we simply need a better dam.

  8. #188
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Combating drugs is like erecting a dam. The point is not to stop the water, but to control it.

    Tucker is basically claiming that the dam has failed because it doesn't hold 100% of the water back, and we should therefore demolish the dam.

    If anything, we simply need a better dam.
    I'm actually saying that if a dam doesn't hold back any percentage of the water, it's not worth tossing more money into that dam. It's better off trying to figure out a different approach to holding back the water since the ground will not hold a dam.

  9. #189
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I'm actually saying that if a dam doesn't hold back any percentage of the water, it's not worth tossing more money into that dam. It's better off trying to figure out a different approach to holding back the water since the ground will not hold a dam.
    That's not the case we're dealing with today, so we don't need to consider that opinion at all.

    IMO a better way to combat drugs is the same way we combat illegal immigration: go after the enablers.

    As with illegal immigration, a ban is tool, not the total solution. When people can't get a hold of their drugs, the won't be able to use them. This is where community outreach needs to be ready for these people to turn to as an alternative.

    Eliminating the ban is not a viable option.

  10. #190
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Teen shot to death during home invasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    That's not the case we're dealing with today, so we don't need to consider that opinion at all.
    What percentage is prevented by prohibition?

    IMO a better way to combat drugs is the same way we combat illegal immigration: go after the enablers.
    But that's the method that is currently not working.

    As with illegal immigration, a ban is tool, not the total solution. When people can't get a hold of their drugs, the won't be able to use them. This is where community outreach needs to be ready for these people to turn to as an alternative.

    Eliminating the ban is not a viable option.
    But there is no way to keep people from getting the drugs. Therefore they will never be unable to use them. It's a noble goal, but just impossible to achieve.

Page 19 of 32 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •