Afghanistan.
Heroin greater killer than guns in 2015?
- Thread starter cawacko
- Start date
Afghanistan.
cawacko
Well-known member
Opiates like Oxycotin and the pain medication people are addicted to
It is hard to fathom that anyone with a modicum of intelligence needs to ask this question. But alas, you're an idiot on steroids.
You really are a stupid fuck. Do something different for once. Pull your head out of your ass and try to educate yourself on the spike in heroin use.
You're also a sociopathic liar. Anyone who supports gun restrictions on legal; ownership is not about less regulation. Hell, anyone who has supported the Obama Presidency is a lying moron suggesting that they are for less regulation. It defined the last 8 years.
Dunce.
heroin has ruined a lot of cities..Baltimore i'm familiar with has dealers everywhere
(called "corner boys" in that they stake out turf on the best street corners).
There ain't no way out but to de-criminalize and find better ways to medicate.
The violence around drugs is caused by the money involved
(called "corner boys" in that they stake out turf on the best street corners).
There ain't no way out but to de-criminalize and find better ways to medicate.
The violence around drugs is caused by the money involved
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Yep.
Here's why we DON'T legalize drugs which should be OBVIOUS to anyone with HALF a brain:
Argument 1: "But taking drugs is an individual's choice...."
First, we don't have the right to do anything we want with our body. Can I walk down the street naked? Can I say what I want anywhere I want? (if you said "yes" to the last question, try yelling "hijack" on a plane and get back to me.) The point is, we can't do anything we want with our body. If drugs ever become legal, be prepared to see me walk around topless - after all, men can do it. Which is more harmful - me walking around with no shirt or me shooting up with crack? I'll be damned if people are allowed to shoot up with drugs and I have to wear a top on a blazing hot day in the summer!
People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that drugs only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that drugs have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them. For instance, according to a 1994 Newsweek report on child abuse, "Drugs now suffuse 80 percent of the caseload; sexual and physical assaults that once taxed the imagination are now common." It is also estimated that 100,000 babies a year are born addicted to cocaine. I don't think these babies chose to take these drugs.
Don't tell me that drugs only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is raped by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is raped by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for drug rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of drug related offenses.
Argument 2: "Legalizing Drugs will Mean Less Government."
Strangely enough, people think that somehow the government will step aside and not be involved in the drug issue if they were legal - but that is a fantasy world. Government is all over the tobacco and alcohol industry - do people really think they won't be involved in drug regulation?
Legal drugs will be regulated by the government, just as alcohol is, and thus, this government controlled item will have lots of OUR TAX dollars poured into it. Even proponents of drug legalization, such as Nobel economist Milton Freedman and the conservative William F. Buckley admit that the government will play a significant role in legal drug regulation. Legalizing will not make us free. Instead, it will make us drones dependent on government largeness for property and happiness.
Argument 3: "The Drug War isn't Working..We need to try something else."
Well, the Drug War was working....and then we elected Bill Clinton as President. We can win the drug war without resorting to legalization, as shown by the consistent decrease in drug use from 1979 and 1992. However, under Bill Clinton, the drug use rate among youth aged 12-17 has increased 106 percent and marijuana use among young people has increased 141 percent. ("Preliminary Estimates from the 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse," U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 8/96)
Argument 4: "Legalizing Drugs Will Reduce Crime.."
Crime will also not be reduced by drug legalization. Studies show a correlation between drug use and crime - violent crimes such as homicides, assaults and domestic violence. Why is this? It's quite simple - drugs cause violent behavior.
Has anyone considered that the reason that people committed a crime was because they were ON drugs in the first place - legal or not? That they weren't necessarily committing a crime to get illegal drugs, but the drugs themselves caused a violent behavior (which would not magically go away if the drugs were legal) which lead them to committing a crime - something that would not have happened if they had not TAKEN drugs? In actuality, crime will rise when drugs are legal because more people will be taking drugs.
Argument 5: "Legalizing Drugs will take the thrill out of Drugs and people won't use them."
Past experience shows that this isn't true. Did alcohol use decrease when it was legalized? No. When abortion became legal, did abortions decrease? No. When an action becomes legal, the number of people carrying out that action increases. Drugs are not different.
In addition, unless the most harmful and addictive drugs such as crack and heroin are made legal, people will still be drawn to these "black market" drugs.
How about young children and teenagers? They won't be able to purchase drugs, just as they can't purchase alcohol. Pushers would then concentrate on young people, and how will they learn to say no to pushers when they see their parents getting high with the consent of the government? Legalization would create a large group of new drug users - children.
http://www.gargaro.com/drugs.html
Argument 1: "But taking drugs is an individual's choice...."
First, we don't have the right to do anything we want with our body. Can I walk down the street naked? Can I say what I want anywhere I want? (if you said "yes" to the last question, try yelling "hijack" on a plane and get back to me.) The point is, we can't do anything we want with our body. If drugs ever become legal, be prepared to see me walk around topless - after all, men can do it. Which is more harmful - me walking around with no shirt or me shooting up with crack? I'll be damned if people are allowed to shoot up with drugs and I have to wear a top on a blazing hot day in the summer!
People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that drugs only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that drugs have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them. For instance, according to a 1994 Newsweek report on child abuse, "Drugs now suffuse 80 percent of the caseload; sexual and physical assaults that once taxed the imagination are now common." It is also estimated that 100,000 babies a year are born addicted to cocaine. I don't think these babies chose to take these drugs.
Don't tell me that drugs only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is raped by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is raped by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for drug rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of drug related offenses.
Argument 2: "Legalizing Drugs will Mean Less Government."
Strangely enough, people think that somehow the government will step aside and not be involved in the drug issue if they were legal - but that is a fantasy world. Government is all over the tobacco and alcohol industry - do people really think they won't be involved in drug regulation?
Legal drugs will be regulated by the government, just as alcohol is, and thus, this government controlled item will have lots of OUR TAX dollars poured into it. Even proponents of drug legalization, such as Nobel economist Milton Freedman and the conservative William F. Buckley admit that the government will play a significant role in legal drug regulation. Legalizing will not make us free. Instead, it will make us drones dependent on government largeness for property and happiness.
Argument 3: "The Drug War isn't Working..We need to try something else."
Well, the Drug War was working....and then we elected Bill Clinton as President. We can win the drug war without resorting to legalization, as shown by the consistent decrease in drug use from 1979 and 1992. However, under Bill Clinton, the drug use rate among youth aged 12-17 has increased 106 percent and marijuana use among young people has increased 141 percent. ("Preliminary Estimates from the 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse," U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 8/96)
Argument 4: "Legalizing Drugs Will Reduce Crime.."
Crime will also not be reduced by drug legalization. Studies show a correlation between drug use and crime - violent crimes such as homicides, assaults and domestic violence. Why is this? It's quite simple - drugs cause violent behavior.
Has anyone considered that the reason that people committed a crime was because they were ON drugs in the first place - legal or not? That they weren't necessarily committing a crime to get illegal drugs, but the drugs themselves caused a violent behavior (which would not magically go away if the drugs were legal) which lead them to committing a crime - something that would not have happened if they had not TAKEN drugs? In actuality, crime will rise when drugs are legal because more people will be taking drugs.
Argument 5: "Legalizing Drugs will take the thrill out of Drugs and people won't use them."
Past experience shows that this isn't true. Did alcohol use decrease when it was legalized? No. When abortion became legal, did abortions decrease? No. When an action becomes legal, the number of people carrying out that action increases. Drugs are not different.
In addition, unless the most harmful and addictive drugs such as crack and heroin are made legal, people will still be drawn to these "black market" drugs.
How about young children and teenagers? They won't be able to purchase drugs, just as they can't purchase alcohol. Pushers would then concentrate on young people, and how will they learn to say no to pushers when they see their parents getting high with the consent of the government? Legalization would create a large group of new drug users - children.
http://www.gargaro.com/drugs.html
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Legalize. You're an idiot if you don't back it.
You're an idiot period.
Nothing says moron better than idiots who think legalizing dangerous drugs will lead to lower use and less societal harm.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
You're an idiot period.
Nothing says moron better than idiots who think legalizing dangerous drugs will lead to lower use and less societal harm.
It's not use I'm concerned about...an addict doesn't care how much it costs.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
there wouldn't be a heroin problem here if there wasn't a demand for it. that is neither trumps or obamas fault, it just is
SmarterthanYou
rebel
bullshit propaganda, none of which is true in the slightest
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
are you still using or have you quit.......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
we should distribute massive quantities of drugs to addicts free of charge.......convert old prisons into free dormitory housing......and build a crematorium next to each one......we would have no drug problem and no gang problem within five years.......crime would drop by 80%........