Hard Drugs Ruining Society

[niviene]

Yeah, you can try to stop him from "falling" off a bridge - but if he wants to jump off the bridge, you can't stop him.

[Roji]

hey thanks, i've have changed my mind on that one!

i guess part of society will just commit social suicide.

[HydrogenBond]

Although this is not a theology forum, one of the first lessons in the bible is that a prohibtion will create temptation. In countries where drugs are legal the social problem is not as acute as in counties where it is prohibited. Countries with moderate laws only have a moderate problem, i.e., Canada.

 

The drug prohibition is not new. It has been around since at least 1920's. Before then a child could buy cocaine based meds from the corner store. Freud prescribed it to his patients. Marijuana use was also around back then but limited to some indians, mexican and african americans. There was no problem until it was prohibited. The strictest laws have come over the past decade or two and has done little to change anything. If anything the stronger prohibition has created a stronger tempation. Back in the sixties there was a fraction of cureent violence, until the government turned up the heat and made things more expensive and profitable. The current system creates a lot of jobs; lawyers, police, prison, justice, rehab, guns, jewelry, etc..

 

One should learn from history; alcohol prohibition. This prohibition created an amplified lifeblood for the mafia monster and amplified excessive behavior. The mafia monster did not reach this high level of organization until the prohibition. If the mafia was pulling the political strings they could not have created a better scenario for themselves.

 

I would approach things rationally. Let us take the worst legal meds, ones that have side effects and have caused injuries or death, etc. This will be our zero point. Any drug legal or illegal with less negative impact should also be legal. The difference is that legal drug manufacturers can give campaign contributions and those who self med are not legally allowed to organize and buy their share of polititions. This may be a case of anti trust violation.

[Tarantism]

Hydrogenbond- weed has been around for much, much longer than that. now, if you are talking about the laws of THIS country, then i see and sorry for that useless comment. haha.

 

anyways, a friend of mine made a really, really good point to me on a bikeride the other nite...if a "god" didnt want us to smoke weed, why did he put it on the earth that HE created. seems silly to me!

 

life sucks, and then you die

so get all your friends and go get high.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

What about it? I have people like this in my family who have been offered help (and who have received help) so many times that it's become a joke to even consider it. It gets to the point where you have to cut your losses, unfortunately. You have to realize that you can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped - if not, are you going to try and force them into it? Tie them up, lock them up, etc etc? Can you lock them up forever? What kind of person does that make you? If you were in their shoes, would you be happy that your rights were being violated? If my brother decides to lay around and smoke crack all day and kill himself, that's his own right. I'll do what I can to help him myself, but if he doesn't want the help, my efforts are useless.

Nicely put. I too have a brother in that situation. Not crack, alcohol. Painful as hell. I remember the little boy that he was and wish I could go back and hold him when he needed it and make everything all right but I can't. That's something that only he can do.

We move forward into the darkness alone. We choose our path by taking steps or allowing ourselves to be blown by the wind, but either way it's our choice. If we love the life we so fleetingly have, we'll embrace the darkness and move into it with our will that is free. We bring light and beauty to all that we understand. And the things that go bump in the night are the folks who have missed the point.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

HydrogenBond:

Although this is not a theology forum, one of the first lessons in the bible is that a prohibtion will create temptation. In countries where drugs are legal the social problem is not as acute as in counties where it is prohibited. Countries with moderate laws only have a moderate problem, i.e., Canada.

Good point. I contend that the drug use is directly related to the frustration of having to spend one's days in a 'chair listening to someone rant about a particular interpretation of history' which is most likely inaccurate anyway. In other words, metaphorically speaking, being subject to arbitrary, insane limitations that some ******* dreamt up for my own good.

[Cedars]

Cedars:I agree. And this shows 3 points that are critical to the discussion: government (DEA) getting involved in health care, the user makes the decision to use, and political (voting - see my list of fallacies) pressure brings it about.

The cause is the user deciding to use. But the moment we attempt to stop the user from making the decision to use, we enter the no-man's land of trying to understand why others do what they do. We become slaves to their mind-games the moment they see that we care about their lives more than they do. If they had a healthy attitude about their relationship with existence they wouldn't be 'using' and they wouldn't end up manipulating the rest of us.

Users use because the world is incomprehensible to them in part or completely and healthy mental activity does not provide them with the pleasure that they need. Sometimes it's just an escape from pain.

 

As I have said, I am not against all drug use. Now back to your post.

 

The user is using because it [drug of choice] makes them feel better in one or many ways. That issue can be presented in any form of human entertainment that one chooses to invest time in. Joggers do it because it makes them feel good. I can not think of any form of entertainment that is chosen by an individual that doesnt involve a spike in their feeling good. One could almost argue that drug use is the cheapest, fastest and most effective way to achieve that, if feeling good is the actual goal. hmmm. Anyways... How we become slaves to a users mind games is by allowing them to manipulate us. But to ignore the ties we feel towards humans we are related to goes against most peoples nature. And goes against our need to make those we care about feel better when they appear to hurt. And why do we do that? Because we can see things could be worse. And we are able to rationalize that idea for a very long time before a person throws in the towel on this deteriorating situation and decides it cannot get any worse than this.

 

A manipulative drug user is not psycologically different from a manipulative mother, brother, salesman, classmate, etc. For this example, the difference is the person can be both a drug user and a mother/brother/salesman, etc.

 

Define "a healthy attitude about their relationship with existence". Many who use drugs make the claim that it "broadens their sense of understanding" in one or another fashion. Some who use meth begin as a weight loss attempt. Is that illogical? No. It seems to cause that effect for most. Others use meth to get more work done, more work done = more cash. It depends on how you judge healthy attitude and relationship with existence. And I think this is one of those things that reflects that there are no absolutes.

 

But the origins of this thread was about hard drugs, specifically meth and its devestating effects on society. There are few drugs I am so against. Meth is one. Crack cocaine is another. PCP is another. Theres probably more, but those are the three that really come to mind. I have seen the arguements about crack just being a refined coke, which is true. But crack seems to result in more rapid deterioration of the basics of humanity and society within the users themselves. Its almost like argueing that meth is just a refined cold tablet. Which is also true but the effects on the user are much more defined.

[Cedars]

Yeah, you can try to stop him from "falling" off a bridge - but if he wants to jump off the bridge, you can't stop him.

 

While there is a truth to this, with suicide it is someone trying to end their existance. With drug use as this topic is presenting, its more like someone burning down the apartment that they live in to try to end their existance and putting all the others who live there at risk.

 

I am sure you have seen the effects of meth on tv in your area. Have you read stories of 'apartment fire caused by illegal meth lab'. Or 'rental unit unfit for people to live in due to illegal meth lab.' Or 'family killed when meth user crashes car in traffic'. How about 'ID theft ring linked to meth use'. This is not simply about someone trying to kill themselves by placing a shotgun in their mouth and pulling the trigger. This is more like someone driving down city streets at high speed and putting people at risk because it makes them feel good.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Cedars:

I am sure you have seen the effects of meth on tv in your area. Have you read stories of 'apartment fire caused by illegal meth lab'. Or 'rental unit unfit for people to live in due to illegal meth lab.' Or 'family killed when meth user crashes car in traffic'. How about 'ID theft ring linked to meth use'. This is not simply about someone trying to kill themselves by placing a shotgun in their mouth and pulling the trigger. This is more like someone driving down city streets at high speed and putting people at risk because it makes them feel good.

Exactly why it should not be illegal to make and distribute those drugs. That would make it cheap enough to get without resorting to theft to get the money.

It would also not fund the gangs nor cause gang warfare over turf. But this has all been stated a million times in the past, still, folks ignore it. The arguments always become complicated, purposely I might add, to maintain the status quo.

This issue illuminates the main problem we have as a society which is our complete lack of respect for or wish to attain the truth of all matters. we've bought into the idea that things are too complicated for our little minds to figure out. Leave it to our 'leaders' and politicians..oh, and of course, religion.

Good God, where did I leave that joint?

[Queso]

hehe, its in the nightdesk, next to the holy bible.

[Cedars]

Cedars: Exactly why it should not be illegal to make and distribute those drugs. That would make it cheap enough to get without resorting to theft to get the money.

It would also not fund the gangs nor cause gang warfare over turf. But this has all been stated a million times in the past, still, folks ignore it. The arguments always become complicated, purposely I might add, to maintain the status quo.

This issue illuminates the main problem we have as a society which is our complete lack of respect for or wish to attain the truth of all matters. we've bought into the idea that things are too complicated for our little minds to figure out. Leave it to our 'leaders' and politicians..oh, and of course, religion.

Good God, where did I leave that joint?

 

How many of your pharmacutical drugs do you purchase from someone named Tweeker? Would you think the same way if some mother went out and purchaced the items needed to make penicillin for the sick kid at home? Or would you think this is irresponsible behavior on the mothers part?

 

How do you feel about all the antibiotic resistant germs that have been created by the misuse of these same antibiotics? Now how is creating methamphetimine at home any different?

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Cedars:

How many of your pharmacutical drugs do you purchase from someone named Tweeker?

lol. None.

Would you think the same way if some mother went out and purchaced the items needed to make penicillin for the sick kid at home? Or would you think this is irresponsible behavior on the mothers part?

That presumes she has a recipe for it and the skills to do it. More power to her. Last night my wife made me a very strong hot beverage with alcohol in it that always works when I feel a cold coming on. Today I feel quite fine.

How do you feel about all the antibiotic resistant germs that have been created by the misuse of these same antibiotics? Now how is creating methamphetimine at home any different?

Well, I feel that they are nasty little critters and I wish there were more people working on the problem. Unfortunately, the cost of research and the process of bringing new drugs to market is so incredibly costly and time consuming (because of regulation put in place to 'protect us') that I doubt that when a new strain hits we'll be able to react in time. Pretty much the regulations will kill millions but when it happens we'll spin it to be the fault of 'free enterprise'. does that pretty much cover it?

[Cedars]

That presumes she has a recipe for it and the skills to do it.

 

You presume Tweeker has a legitimate recipe and the skills to create meth. We have accounts of aforementioned apartment/home fires and explosions, toxic waste dumping, contamination, etc. Are you familiar with the process/chemicals that are used to create meth? How do you verify someone has the skills to create such a concoction? Through government regulations.

 

Last night my wife made me a very strong hot beverage with alcohol in it that always works when I feel a cold coming on. Today I feel quite fine.

 

Tweeker can also make a strong alcohol based home tonic for his significant other so that is a red herring. Would you be as pleased at the thought of Tweeker making your 15 year old this cold remedy from alcohol obtained fromTweekers buddies friend (who has the connection to the guy with the still)? This is not pharmacutical stuff were talking about. Thats more how it works in the meth crowd.

 

Well, I feel that they are nasty little critters and I wish there were more people working on the problem. Unfortunately, the cost of research and the process of bringing new drugs to market is so incredibly costly and time consuming (because of regulation put in place to 'protect us') that I doubt that when a new strain hits we'll be able to react in time. Pretty much the regulations will kill millions but when it happens we'll spin it to be the fault of 'free enterprise'. does that pretty much cover it?

 

You have avoided the question of how creating meth at home is any different. And to add to my analogy:

 

If we give people a 'build yourself an antibiotic dose' kit available at walmart, this would accelerate this kind of antibiotic misuse and further the mutations of bacteria. Human nature being what it is, a significant portion of the people taking meth freely and legally (under what I imagine you propose) would be just like the rats in the labs. More and more meth because "hey its ok now'. And you cannot dismiss the progressive deterioration of the meth users physical and mental health. This has an impact on society whether its some of the previously mentioned negatives or the addition of the parents whos children will be placed into social services by the legal use of meth by their parents *which is what I think you have proposed.

 

And these drugs (amphetamine/methamphetamine) are being distributed under doctors orders to treat clearly defined medical issues. What is going on with the meth crowd is they are taking matters into their own hands and creating additional burdens on society, not unlike the misuse of antibiotics. We just have different effects, neither of which are a benefit to society as a whole.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Cedars:

How do you verify someone has the skills to create such a concoction? Through government regulations.

I don't know where you've been and what your experience with Gov't efficiency and efficacy is, but I'll tell you in a private message about mine.

You can choose to ignore that if you like but the nature of government is not what we make it, it's what it can be. They are two different things. We can wish it to be something it cannot be, and if we act on that wish, blood flows. That's the natural consequence of attempting to have government do something it should not do.

By controlling the development of and distribution of drugs, you have given the government power over a domain it should not be in and you cannot escape the consequences of that. No matter how hard you grunt. Maybe pixie dust would work, but I don't have any.

You simply cannot legislate choice no matter what you believe. You are of course free to ignore that a square peg in a round hole doesn't work. But you are not free of the consequences of it. We could give the government control over every aspect of our lives but I doubt that you agree that that would work. We can pretend and that's what we do.

So continue to wish. Wish harder. And then wish harder still. But it wont change the nature of man and by extension, will not change the role that government can play in our lives. Because it all boils down to what we are and that is built in. We have no control over that.

[Cedars]

Cedars: I don't know where you've been and what your experience with Gov't efficiency and efficacy is, but I'll tell you in a private message about mine.

 

You do not have to PM me about your experience, though I appreicate the offer of that. I have had my own experiences with government both good and bad and I dont want to post them publicly myself.

 

By controlling the development of and distribution of drugs, you have given the government power over a domain it should not be in and you cannot escape the consequences of that.

 

I would never order drugs (pharmacuticals) from a country that doesnt regulate the manufacture of these products. While not perfect in its implimentation, I accept this is the best way to produce consistent quality in this arena of human need.

 

You simply cannot legislate choice no matter what you believe. But you are not free of the consequences of it. We could give the government control over every aspect of our lives but I doubt that you agree that that would work.

But it wont change the nature of man and by extension, will not change the role that government can play in our lives. Because it all boils down to what we are and that is built in. We have no control over that.

 

Choices are legislated. All laws put some type of restriction on a choice. And anarchy does not appeal to me in the least.

 

I have already said I am pro-legalisation of some drugs, but Meth is not one of them. Its not because of government scare tactics that I came to this conclusion, it is by my own real world experiences with meth users themselves, whether personally or via the reality friends and relatives of meth users have relayed as they explained to me and lived through the various problems this particular drug has caused to them personally.

 

I know I am not free of the consequences of meth use. I have paid some dues myself without even being a user of this crap. If one person reads this thread and decides not to even try that crap its done something good for that individual and society.

[Queso]

If one person reads this thread and decides not to even try that crap its done something good for that individual and society.

 

i agree with you that they are doing something good for themselves,

but society needs these tweekers.

the prisons need people to lock up

and who better than possessors, users, distributors, and synthesizers of the Crystal Meth???

 

without tweakers, society wouldnt make as much money

and THATS A BAD THING

thru their eyes

 

going with the flow,

mr. orbsycli+

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Cedars:

I would never order drugs (pharmacuticals) from a country that doesnt regulate the manufacture of these products. While not perfect in its implimentation, I accept this is the best way to produce consistent quality in this arena of human need.

And neither would I unless we had another way to identify quality. EBAY comes to mind. My wife does a lot of buying and selling on EBAY and whenever I need something she goes out there and gets it for me. Both buyers and sellers can provide feedback about their experiences dealing with each other. Sellers go to incredible lengths to make sure their reputations are not tarnished by unhappy buyers. That to me seems like a much more rational way of handling the issue of quality.

Today, licensing implies that someone has been looked at by a government body or on behalf of a governmental body and deemed to be a quality provider of whatever it is that they are providing. Imagine if that had happened in the area of computer hardware!

However, unlike the ability I have on EBAY of filing a complaint and having that complaint stick to a seller like the odor of a litter box, with a licensed entity what recourse do I have? I can file an invisible complaint, I can sue, but the entity in almost all cases continues to do what it does and buyers of whatever that seller is sellling have no idea I have filed a complaint.

Folks are not stupid. Without regulations, the first thing we'd do is set up a way to know the good apples from the bad ones. Honesty and government regulators are almost mutually exclusive terms.

And licensing doesn't do anything except disarm the populace into believing that an oversight committee is doing its job. Which it does, at first. Over time, a criminal element takes control and what was supposed to protect the buyers ends up protecting the sellers from pissed off buyers. After all, the folks doing the licensing could be held accountable if they let a bad apple get into the barrel. so they end up protecting the bad apples. And we're oblivious to it.

Franchised (licensed) monopolies are created when a government steps in and stops competition in the name of the buyer, to protect them from shoddy goods. At least, that's the theory. In my experience, exactly the opposite is true.