"I disagree with cities banning handguns."
"I know a guy that got shot with a handgun. "
"OK, I changed my mind. I agree with handgun bans. I simply never realized handguns can hurt people when I formed this opinion."
- Status
"I disagree with cities banning handguns."
"I know a guy that got shot with a handgun. "
"OK, I changed my mind. I agree with handgun bans. I simply never realized handguns can hurt people when I formed this opinion."
Obviously you don't believe it, but there IS INDEED a good-sized segment of the population who would use these drugs to a dangerous degree, even to the point of death, were they available over the counter in any quantities they wanted. If you don't believe that, then I'd invite you to come work with me for a while. You can call it anecdotes if you like, but those anecdotes are repeated hundreds and thousands of times over by others in my profession. In every city, in every state in this country. Not even major cities... small towns, rural areas, all ages and walks of life.
I understand people should have the right to choose many or most things... but the fact of the matter is, some substances are indeed dangerous enough (in my opinion) to warrant control. If you don't agree with that, that's fine. Vote for, lobby for, and be an activist for whatever you want.
It's not a small problem, it's not an insignificant part of the population, and it's not a "non-problem". People aren't looking for these things just because they're banned and/or controlled.
And for the record, I never said ending drug prohibition would be the downfall of society... but I think we have enough factors already contributing to that, add in a few million more addicts/overdoses, a few hundred billion or trillion more in healthcare costs to combat the consequences and I think it would be a serious problem in this country (as if it weren't already). I think our society is sliding headlong into the abyss without the legalization of drugs. If you want to talk about the ineffectiveness of the drug war, the cost on society, etc., that's a different story. I am talking about direct consequences of drug abuse and overdoses, death, etc. I'm not an economist or a macro-statistician. I'm a realist who works on the street every day and knows and understands addiction, both from professional and personal experience. You can take my experience with a grain of salt, accept it at face value, or discount it because it doesn't jive with your political views. Whichever you choose.
But I'm the one who has to deal with the problem and it's outcomes, both short- and long-term. I think I'm qualified to speak on the matter.
I understand people should have the right to choose many or most things... but the fact of the matter is, some substances are indeed dangerous enough (in my opinion) to warrant control. If you don't agree with that, that's fine. Vote for, lobby for, and be an activist for whatever you want.
It's not a small problem, it's not an insignificant part of the population, and it's not a "non-problem". People aren't looking for these things just because they're banned and/or controlled.
And for the record, I never said ending drug prohibition would be the downfall of society... but I think we have enough factors already contributing to that, add in a few million more addicts/overdoses, a few hundred billion or trillion more in healthcare costs to combat the consequences and I think it would be a serious problem in this country (as if it weren't already). I think our society is sliding headlong into the abyss without the legalization of drugs. If you want to talk about the ineffectiveness of the drug war, the cost on society, etc., that's a different story. I am talking about direct consequences of drug abuse and overdoses, death, etc. I'm not an economist or a macro-statistician. I'm a realist who works on the street every day and knows and understands addiction, both from professional and personal experience. You can take my experience with a grain of salt, accept it at face value, or discount it because it doesn't jive with your political views. Whichever you choose.
But I'm the one who has to deal with the problem and it's outcomes, both short- and long-term. I think I'm qualified to speak on the matter.
That's a good point.
But none of those problems are even remotely the same. Guns aren't involved in nearly as many deaths. Cars, while involved in NEARLY as many deaths as drug overdoses, are used by nearly every single person in this country... something that is not even remotely close to true with drugs. Yet the drug deaths have lately eclipsed auto deaths. Alcohol has similar numbers.
There is no simple answer.
I'd give anything for one of those super duper pills right now. My skin is itching like crazy (and some other less pleasant symptoms I'll leave out) that indicate I'm not reacting well the to the meds I've been taking. So I haven't taken any yesterday and today and I am paying for it. Too bad because they really worked well. I finally broke down and took some tonight but I'll be calling the doc tomorrow. Dammit!!
It's not anything super-duper. It's the same as regular old Lortab, in a long-acting form without the Tylenol in it.
Tylenol is some BAD stuff. I have some death and liver failure cases.
Why not ban all refined sugar?
Refined sugar is more addictive than cocaine.
Depending on the study, refined sugar accounts for 5-15MM deaths per year - equal or up to 3 times as many as cigarettes.
But refined sugar is a $100B industry.
Or sprinkle some crack on it.
Oggoly-boogoly ... the dentist gave me that stuff one time ... NO THANK YOU! Creepy, creepy nightmares ...
- Status
Similar threads
