Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52

Thread: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

  1. #41
    Student JakeFromWI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Stevens Point, WI
    Last Seen
    10-13-10 @ 05:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    282

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You forgot War on Poverty. It ranks right up there with the other two
    Yeah we spend tons of money in the fight against poverty. For example if John Smith gets $100 in EBT stamps, that's equivilant to the cost to jail someone for a month. And the court costs. And the policing costs.

    Thank you for your excellent point.
    and so it goes...

  2. #42
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    I think a common issue some people have is two different things get talked about and are routinely seen as similar.

    Decriminalizing and Legalizing.

    Now I'm not talking from a technical stand point of their differences, as I'm not quite sure of all the legal definitions. However in general how people view it.

    When people hear "legalization" of drugs they're generally thinking of people advocating that all illegal drugs currently are made legal and are mass produced and sold in stores.

    When people hear "decriminalizaton" I think it lends more to the thought that having it is not necessarily against the law, but is also no promoting that we start making it legal to sell it.

    I think that that clash in thought on the "pro drug" crowd has to be fought first....is the movement going to push so that all drugs of every kind is legal to have, sell, manufacture, and use....or are we seeking to decrimialize the position and use of it but recognize that some drugs should not be approved for production and sell?

    Once the movement comes to a general agreement on it its getting that message out.

    I think you'll lose a lot of support if its the "everything and every facet legal" route, but I think the second option could legitimately work.

    There are some things, like marijuana, that are barely (if that) worse than alcohol with others, like Ecstacy, that could be argued is no worse than your high proof liquors. Relatively minor common physical side effects from mild use, not EXTREMELY addictive. But there are others, like Meth, that simply are both damaging to the body and are highly addictive in short order that fall on the other end of the scale.

  3. #43
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I think a common issue some people have is two different things get talked about and are routinely seen as similar.

    Decriminalizing and Legalizing.

    Now I'm not talking from a technical stand point of their differences, as I'm not quite sure of all the legal definitions. However in general how people view it.

    When people hear "legalization" of drugs they're generally thinking of people advocating that all illegal drugs currently are made legal and are mass produced and sold in stores.

    When people hear "decriminalizaton" I think it lends more to the thought that having it is not necessarily against the law, but is also no promoting that we start making it legal to sell it.

    I think that that clash in thought on the "pro drug" crowd has to be fought first....is the movement going to push so that all drugs of every kind is legal to have, sell, manufacture, and use....or are we seeking to decrimialize the position and use of it but recognize that some drugs should not be approved for production and sell?

    Once the movement comes to a general agreement on it its getting that message out.

    I think you'll lose a lot of support if its the "everything and every facet legal" route, but I think the second option could legitimately work.

    There are some things, like marijuana, that are barely (if that) worse than alcohol with others, like Ecstacy, that could be argued is no worse than your high proof liquors. Relatively minor common physical side effects from mild use, not EXTREMELY addictive. But there are others, like Meth, that simply are both damaging to the body and are highly addictive in short order that fall on the other end of the scale.
    I think that you will find most are in favor of legalizing, with a difference of opinion on what should be legalized. Unfortunately legalization is a much harder pill for the populace as a whole to swallow, and would require revisiting/reniging on international treaties, or a constitutional amendment, so we are stuck taking baby steps.

    Fortunately these baby steps have already been taken, both on a state level, and internationally, and decrim is being shown not be the harbinger of societal doom and destruction some thought was inevitable.

    decrim does address one of the flaws in the system (treating the average user as a criminal); however the overarching and more significant problem is that control was, is, and will continue to be in the hands of a black market without actual full on legalization.

    You will find many of those who would be satisfied with just decrim just want to satiate their own habits with limited repercussions, and are not beneficial to the cause at all.

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Portugal decriminalized all drug use and possession in 2001. The Cato Institute did a study on it. Here is the report:

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/gr...whitepaper.pdf

    Long story short, none of the doomsday scenarios proposed by opponents came true. Portugal has some of the lowest rates of drug-abuse in the EU, especially when compared to other countries with stringent drug laws. There is no evidence whatsoever that drug prohibition accomplishes anything of value.

  5. #45
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Portugal decriminalized all drug use and possession in 2001. The Cato Institute did a study on it. Here is the report:

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/gr...whitepaper.pdf

    The direct link to the online non-pdf version of the report is available again (it was available only in pdf for the last few weeks)

    Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies | Glenn Greenwald | Cato Institute: White Paper
    Last edited by marduc; 08-26-09 at 04:07 PM.

  6. #46
    Guru
    Binary_Digit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 04:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,539

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    is the movement going to push so that all drugs of every kind is legal to have, sell, manufacture, and use....or are we seeking to decrimialize the position and use of it but recognize that some drugs should not be approved for production and sell?
    I can't speak for the entire "movement," but I personally think the goal should be to minimize the harmful impact drugs have on users and society. (AKA "harm reduction.") So I will argue for what I believe is best to achieve that goal (full legalization, focus on lowering demand through education and deglamorization), and be happy with any incremental changes like decriminalization if they contribute to achieving the goal.

  7. #47
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I think a common issue some people have is two different things get talked about and are routinely seen as similar.

    Decriminalizing and Legalizing.

    Now I'm not talking from a technical stand point of their differences, as I'm not quite sure of all the legal definitions. However in general how people view it.

    When people hear "legalization" of drugs they're generally thinking of people advocating that all illegal drugs currently are made legal and are mass produced and sold in stores.

    When people hear "decriminalizaton" I think it lends more to the thought that having it is not necessarily against the law, but is also no promoting that we start making it legal to sell it.

    I think that that clash in thought on the "pro drug" crowd has to be fought first....is the movement going to push so that all drugs of every kind is legal to have, sell, manufacture, and use....or are we seeking to decrimialize the position and use of it but recognize that some drugs should not be approved for production and sell?

    Once the movement comes to a general agreement on it its getting that message out.

    I think you'll lose a lot of support if its the "everything and every facet legal" route, but I think the second option could legitimately work.

    There are some things, like marijuana, that are barely (if that) worse than alcohol with others, like Ecstacy, that could be argued is no worse than your high proof liquors. Relatively minor common physical side effects from mild use, not EXTREMELY addictive. But there are others, like Meth, that simply are both damaging to the body and are highly addictive in short order that fall on the other end of the scale.
    I think that all drugs should be legal...but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should all be legal to use wherever, whenever you want. For some of the harder drugs (especially those that can cause violent or dangerous behavior), I think a good step would be to legalize the production and sale...but only in controlled environments like health clinics where health professionals and security can keep a close eye on "patients," and where clean needles (for intravenous drug users) are available.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Last Seen
    05-06-11 @ 07:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,082

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by TOJ View Post
    Bottom row looks like a typical mall in Arkansas.
    I've noticed that whenever people here insult other states or other parts of the country it's guaranteed that they don't reveal on their profile their own state of residence.

    If you don't want people knowing where you live then don't insult their state. It's sorta cowardly, don't you think? And I wonder if you've ever been to Arkansas.

  9. #49
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,400

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by sazerac View Post
    And I wonder if you've ever been to Arkansas.
    Obviously she hasn't, its God's Country.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: AP IMPACT: New meth formula avoids anti-drug laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I think that all drugs should be legal...but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should all be legal to use wherever, whenever you want. For some of the harder drugs (especially those that can cause violent or dangerous behavior), I think a good step would be to legalize the production and sale...but only in controlled environments like health clinics where health professionals and security can keep a close eye on "patients," and where clean needles (for intravenous drug users) are available.
    I used to think that was the best solution but I don't think it would work well in practice. Just allow local governments to regulate the commercial aspect of it and a viable framework will emerge on its own.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 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
  •