This Is How To Stop Drugs.

[CrazyIvan]

I'll make a consideration. Make all 'natural' drugs legal, but keep the highly toxic, mixed chemical drugs illegal.

And on top of it all, tripple the current and make harsher consequences for committing a crime or causing danger to others while under the influence. A year in jail for DUI or DWUI with any drugs or alcohol. A minimum of 3 years in jail for robbery, breaking and entering, etc... if it is found that you were under the influence while doing it, or to support such a habit. Providing drugs and alcohol to minors, etc...

Put those things into effect and I will give you your 'natural' drugs.

I just hope and would think people have better things to do with their life than to smoke away and shoot up.

[ezearln]

Hey dceptiv and Ivan, I wish you fellas wouldn't call it an argument. From what I've read from both you gents I'll call it more a heated debate. And both of you have made valid important points. Thing I'd like you guys to consider is the purpose of a debate in a Free society is to SHARE views, offer personal opinions, suggest courses of action or change in how we do things.
We all have our beliefs based either upon personal observation and experience or upon what we have learned through the media, schools or other sources (admittedly some more forthcomming than others).
Thanks now shake hands and be nice or I'll tell yer Momma's on Yew!
J/K

[ArkansasHunter]

If Drugs were legal wouldnt the user still have to commit crimes to buy them ? Wouldn't a person that continualy use them become waisted and a risk to an employer ? Would there be an increase in traffic accidents ?
I've got a problem I can't understand why people want to fu(k up there heads and lives.
Are people so Fu(king unstable that they got to have illegal drugs to feel good. Any one who takes a mind altering illegal drug has some other kind of problem. It's stupid !!! I can't fathom why people use them and want to legalize them...AH

[dceptiv240]

the only parts i agree with on that point would be severe punishments for "violent" crimes involving drugs or drug use.

loss of license for a year for any dwui, and severe penalties for harm done while dwui would be understandable as well.they've put others at risk at that point!

like i said when they make it our business....they went to far!

and ezearln's right this is just a debate...and i never intended that post as a personal attack. just a valid point.

[CrazyIvan]

Well, personally, I believe when a group of people do something like drugs or alcohol, even when in the privacy of their own home (or cardboard box on the street corner) that they effect other people. They are detracting from a healthy and successfull society. It may be indirect, but it does effect others. They also effect their family, their husbands/wives, their children, their parents, their friends and associates in a negative way. I mean look...I've known people who were alcoholics or drug addicts, and it has effected me to the point of having these opinions, good or bad, it is up to you to decide. But, it effected me.

[dceptiv240]

AH, i don't understand everyones reason for what they do either. but i don't assume to know what's right or wrong for someone else's life or judge them for their choice. what i do assume....is that they will do it responsibly and without harm or involvement of others.

and if the drugs are legalized...what's their crime?

but thats their choice CI! i cant force my other employees to do their fair share and make it a more stable work environment. i can only lead by example and hope they will see a better way!

[CrazyIvan]

I don't want to work with an alcoholic or drug addict who can think of nothing but where they are going to get their next fix...It creates a person with less productivity and a place where I have to pick up the slack for them. It effects others...And, if you start talking about how employers can fire these people...well, then we begin to have a higher unemployment rate and in turn, a higher 'share the wealth' program, which effects us all.

I just don't see how freedom of drug use does not effect anyone...

[dceptiv240]

CI, you refuse to see any points being made and just seem to want validation. no one said that things would be SWELL.

just that it's not your place, or mine, to tell them what they can or cannot do!

[ezearln]

Mmmm Ivan there are currently on the lawbooks today both on State Penal codes and at the Federal level. For additional "Enhancements" to any other sentence imposed when a criminal uses a gun in the commisson of a crime.
Odd thing is if you track the indictments and trials very seldom are these enhancements charged and added. For instance I know at one point the PRK had what I thought was a milestone piece of legislation that might actully reduce the use of firearms in crime!
The "Enhancements":
1) Mere possession of a firearm whether or not it it useed or displayed an additional 1 year.
2) Display of a firearm (ie:showing it to the victim, not brandishing or pointing the weapon at the victim). an additional 2 years.
3) Use of a firearm, brandishing, pointing, or threatening a victim with a firearm an additional 5 years.
4) Use and discharge of a firearm whether or not anyone is actually shot, an additional 10 years
5) Use and discharge of ANY firearm while a felony is being committed that results in any death. Life
The interesting thing about this is as I recall the statute was written so that no matter what the Judge did or decided, if the enhancements were included in the charges and the "defendant(s)" were convicted of them the sentences were mandatory, they could not be suspended, pardoned or paroled. They could get say a 3-5 year suspended sentence for say Burgerlary of a habitation (time served, community service and all the rest of that crap) But they HAD to serve the jail time on the enhancements!
There was no wiggle room in the law as it was written. Problem I saw repeatedly was prosecutors didn't want to add the enhancements cause "Gee that might affect their conviction rates"
Good Law Poorly applied!

My point is do you think it would be any different if we added enhancements to DUI or other crimes where drug influence no matter
what the intoxicant was would be used?

[CrazyIvan]

You said they have gone too far when it effects others. Your point of view is that it wouldn't effect anyone, but I don't see how that is true. All you have said is that it wouldn't. I have given numerous examples of how it does effect others.

I just don't see how giving them the freedom to do it would not effect anyone...tell me how it doesn't effect anyone....cause I don't see how it wouldn't...

[ezearln]

To put a twist on this debate that may unsettle both of you is this: Many years ago I knew my one and only "Functioning" alchoholic, the gentleman was the pressforeman at a major Tidewater Va Newspaper and had worked for them for over thirty years. every morning he went to work sober as an Alderman, every evening though he came home and proceeded to make his way through a 1/2 gal bottle of scotch, however come next mornin he'd be bright eyed and bushy tailed at work. Now if'n he stayed at home doing this and all his form of addiction I could maybe understand , sad fact is MOST don't and therein lies the problem!

[Lng Rng]

I didn't mean to imply all drugs are the epitome of evil, because they are not. All drugs are just that...drugs. Some of them serve a greater purpose than to simply get high off of. I was asked to google the effects of hard drugs, but I truthfully can say I don't have to, I have seen it enough first hand to know SOME drugs are too dangerous to introduce to our society. I really beleive absoloute freedom of every and all drugs would cause problems, and giving 300 million people unlimited use to these drugs would overall be a negative thing.

[cubbieman]

if they could openly do the drugs they wouldn't have to dump the needle in the sandbox as they are running from the cops, they would be better controlled, and they wouldn't have to buy them in rough neighborhoods

[dceptiv240]

i've said more than enough on this subject and so have many others yet you just keep on ignoring it, i don't care if you think it would cause problems ...i don't care if you "think" drugs should be illegal.

you are selfish hypocrites, you want freedom to apply to you and your wants and desires, but everyone else. as long you get the things you want you don't care about others... their opinions, their perspectives, their lives, their wants and needs.

Freedom is for everyone

yes, there would be repercussions just like everything thats introduced into society. just like when they ended prohibition... all the jack were freaking out just like you are now "oh no here goes the downfall of society, what will we ever do" but look what happened once they ended it and started selling alcohol again...things got better. yes there are people killed by irresponsible drunk drivers every day, yes there are people throwing their lives away and getting drunk to escape the problems the see in their lives, but are you arguing to reinstate prohibition...no because it's a stupid idea.

[ArkansasHunter]

Drugs are different...I know, we don't need to legalize mind altering drugs.
Pertaining to this discussion, I honestly don't have any bitterness towards another members oppinion that feels drugs should be legalized.
I will voice, cuss and fuss how I feel about something I'm against.
But I promise when you do it I will respect what you say and I'll still be your friend. I guess I'm different...A.H

[CrazyIvan]

I still have yet to see your argument and proof of how it DOES NOT effect others in a negative way...

[dceptiv240]

i just think certain people are ignoring all the post of others and just wanting their way to be the right way. repeating their rhetoric without regard to the fact that they have already been addressed because they can't see from any perspective but their own. if that was a jab at me it missed. i don't get mad just a little heated in i'm being disrespected by totally ignoring my side of a conversation. everyone against full legalization has yet to respond to the fact that if you tell someone else how to live their life then that isn't freedom. i also agree there will be problems from full legalization of hard drugs. but i will never concede that i, or you, have the right to tell anyone they cannot snort themselves into oblivion inside their own home if they so choose! no matter what any post outside of this thread will be treated as if any other day. i do not judge others for their beliefs. but i will point out when someone is being hypocritical and asking for the right to carry a gun that they are trusted to use responsibly but could use at anytime to harm others! yet not allow others to do drugs or whatever else they so choose, as they please, with the same expectations of responsible use.

i'm sorry ivan, but either you haven't read anything you didn't type in this whole thread, or your just do not understanding the english i am typing!

Originally Posted by dceptiv240

CI, you refuse to see any points being made and just seem to want validation. no one said that things would be SWELL.

just that it's not your place, or mine, to tell them what they can or cannot do!

Originally Posted by dceptiv240

yes, there would be repercussions just like everything thats introduced into society. just like when they ended prohibition... all the jack were freaking out just like you are now "oh no here goes the downfall of society, what will we ever do" but look what happened once they ended it and started selling alcohol again...things got better. yes there are people killed by irresponsible drunk drivers every day, yes there are people throwing their lives away and getting drunk to escape the problems the see in their lives, but are you arguing to reinstate prohibition...no because it's a stupid idea.

Originally Posted by dceptiv240

footing the bill for crackheads and losers that wont go out and earn their keep is a stupid mistake. but that was a mistake that was made at a government level by some idiot that was most likely totally sober! victimless crimes need to be erased from law books immediately and all the prisoners serving time for non violent drug offenses released. you want to step up productivity, release the population of non-violent offenders back into society so they can go back to work and support their family's (meanwhile getting the single mom that he left behind off welfare in the process) most of your groundbreaking technology and innovative thinking came from someone who was on, had done, and/or probably still used one of many different illegal drugs that are harmless in moderate use. use your internet for more than voicing an uneducated opinion and go look up what the true effects of marijuana, ecstasy, lsd, etc... really are. you talk about people blindly calling for gun control yet you blindly judge others for doing things that are no better or worse than the alcohol i'm sure you think is just fine. anything abused can be bad. this country wouldn't be were it is without the influence of mind altering substances. whether or not someone uses to a detriment to their lives should be their choice, their expenditure, their problem!abuse is the problem, not the drugs. the problems lay with the individuals, but you cannot call this a free country while constantly saying what other can or cannot do!

[CrazyIvan]

I read every post everyone has put here, and I still don't see your side of the argument. If someone shoots up in their own home...how does that not damage their family, people who see them, their kids, their marriage?

I still stand that the right to own guns is not the same as the wanted right to 'snort yourself into oblivion.' Weapons are a strength. Substance abuse is a weakness. Weapons aid in saving lives and lowering crime. Substance abuse only ruins lives and increases crime. The right to own weapons is written into the constitution. The right to abuse any substance of your choice is not. A woman who 'safely' uses drugs does hurt her unborn child; a woman who 'safely' uses a gun while pregnant does not. A man who safely uses a gun will more likely produce healthy offspring, a drug user will not. People who use drugs let their home become run down, their yards go to ****. Roach and other infestations take over and eventually it moves to the neighbors house. This is a negative effect on others. It also runs down the neighborhood and lowers home values. This effects the wallets of their neighbors. If the drug user happens to keep their house. Usually they end up on the street, in a shelter that you and I must fund to house their bum-azz. That sucks from our wallets, money I AM NOT WILLING TO SPEND! It also runs down that neighborhood, crime increases, home values fall and it leads to a lot of negative things in the neighborhood.

Look, I am not stating my opinion here, I am reinfocring facts. They all revolve around the fact that drug use DOES effect others in a negative way. I am not willing to give would-be drug users the freedom to ruin the lives around them, directly or indirectly. I wholeheartedly agree with you that if it does not effect someone, then go ahead and do it. But substance abuse DOES effect others in a very negative way. That is wrong and it is wrong to allow them to do it.

You can say that one freedom is and should be the same as another all you want. But the truth is that each wanted freedom is NOT the same. This country is built upon improving our strengths, not feeding and falling to our weaknesses.

[dceptiv240]

Originally Posted by CrazyIvan

I read every post everyone has put here, and I still don't see your side of the argument. If someone shoots up in their own home...how does that not damage their family, people who see them, their kids, their marriage?

I still stand that the right to own guns is not the same as the wanted right to 'snort yourself into oblivion.' Weapons are a strength. Substance abuse is a weakness. Weapons aid in saving lives and lowering crime. Substance abuse only ruins lives and increases crime. The right to own weapons is written into the constitution. The right to abuse any substance of your choice is not. A woman who 'safely' uses drugs does hurt her unborn child; a woman who 'safely' uses a gun while pregnant does not. A man who safely uses a gun will more likely produce healthy offspring, a drug user will not. People who use drugs let their home become run down, their yards go to ****. Roach abnd other infestations take over and eventually it moves to the neighbors house. This is a negative effect on others. It also runs down the neighborhood and lowers home values. This effects the wallets of their neighbors. If the drug user happens to keep their house. Usually they end up on the street, in a shelter that you and I must fund to house their bum-azz. That sucks from our wallets, money I AM NOT WILLING TO SPEND! It also runs down that neighborhood, crime increases, home values fall and it leads to a lot of negative things in the neighborhood.

Look, I am not stating my opinion here, I am reinfocring facts. They all revolve around the fact that drug use DOES effect others in a negative way. I am not willing to give would-be drug users the freedom to ruin the lives around them, directly or indirectly. I wholeheartedly agree with you that if it does not effect someone, then go ahead and do it. But substance abuse DOES effect others in a very negative way. That is wrong and it is wrong to allow them to do it.

Originally Posted by dceptiv240

i just think certain people are ignoring all the post of others and just wanting their way to be the right way. repeating their rhetoric without regard to the fact that they have already been addressed because they can't see from any perspective but their own.

i'm sorry ivan, but either you haven't read anything you didn't type in this whole thread, or your just do not understanding the english i am typing!

Originally Posted by dceptiv240

i will point out when someone is being hypocritical and asking for the right to carry a gun that they are trusted to use responsibly but could use at anytime to harm others! yet not allow others to do drugs or whatever else they so choose, as they please, with the same expectations of responsible use.

Originally Posted by CrazyIvan

to allow them to do it.

maybe you just have control issues?

[CrazyIvan]

Yea, that is right, i love controlling the world...riight. No, I just see the effect on people that are around substance abusers and the whole premise of laws is to protect people from damage. Illegalized drug use protects people who would otherwise be harmed by someone's substance abuse.