Opinions?

[Perkchiro]

It's the activity that infringes on your and my rights that should be prohibited, not the use of drugs or alcohol. You say that it's OK with you if alcohol were prohibited. My point was that Prohibition didn't work. It didn't keep anyone from using alcohol. It just drove it underground. Just as the "war on drugs" isn't working. Perhaps we should try something different.

I have seen more than my share of devastation caused by drug abuse. I have caused some of it myself. I know the evils of drugs firsthand. None of that changes the fact that criminalization of drugs doesn't work.

If I were to follow your logic, and legislate control for those who can't control themselves, we would have government in every facet of our lives. That isn't what I want. And I don't really think it's what you want either.

So is it Okay with you for someone to have a Chemical weapon, as long as he doesn't use it? Okay to have nukes pointed at you as long as no one pushes the big red button? Okay for Anthrax to be in your neighbors fridge? The potential for harm in those situations are great and grave. I don't want goverment in my business either. But I want to live in a free and SAFE society. Mind altering drugs have a potential that's great and grave. Ask a cop about restraining a dude on Meth. Then think about that low life busting down your door and violating your home. Don't you want to prevent that?

 

[nfrntau]

There is no instance where alcohol was needed or helped anyone in any way.

Rhonda this is not the case. Alcohol is being used successfully for the treatment of Essential Tremor. My mother calls it her medicine.
There is quite a bit of research to develop a alcohol substitute that does not turn folks into alcoholics.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000762.htm

"Alcoholic beverages in small quantities may markedly decrease tremors but can lead to alcohol dependence if used in excess. The mechanism by which alcohol decreases an essential tremor is unknown."

 

[Mustanglvr]

So is it Okay with you for someone to have a Chemical weapon, as long as he doesn't use it? Okay to have nukes pointed at you as long as no one pushes the big red button? Okay for Anthrax to be in your neighbors fridge? The potential for harm in those situations are great and grave. I don't want goverment in my business either. But I want to live in a free and SAFE society. Mind altering drugs have a potential that's great and grave. Ask a cop about restraining a dude on Meth. Then think about that low life busting down your door and violating your home. Don't you want to prevent that?

This thread is about medical marijuana, not about chemical weapons, nukes or anthrax. Thats a whole different thread and I don`t think anybody wants to go there again.

About the guy on meth? Yeah, he should have had it prescribed.

Oh and by the way, in my experience, its the cops that are busting down the doors for no reason and waving their guns in the childrens faces. Who`s the victim there?

 

[joedls]

So is it Okay with you for someone to have a Chemical weapon, as long as he doesn't use it? Okay to have nukes pointed at you as long as no one pushes the big red button? Okay for Anthrax to be in your neighbors fridge? The potential for harm in those situations are great and grave. I don't want goverment in my business either. But I want to live in a free and SAFE society. Mind altering drugs have a potential that's great and grave. Ask a cop about restraining a dude on Meth. Then think about that low life busting down your door and violating your home. Don't you want to prevent that?

You have a great knack for obfuscation, Steve. I never said that it was OK to posess chemical waepons, nukes, or Anthrax. These have no intended use, other than to cause others harm. Drugs are not the same. People can use drugs recreationally and responsibly (and many do) and not abuse them. Should we take away their right to do so. Guns can cause great and grave harm, but I don't believe in the government's right to take those away either. What about cars? They can cause great and grave harm. Should the government take those away, too. I don't believe that it's the government's role to prevent every harm that can come to us.

You still have never addressed my point that what we are currently doing does not work.

To answer your question about preventing a "low life busting down your door and violating your home", absolutely I want to prevent that. I don't believe what we do now prevents it. I believe decriminalization of drugs would prevent it more than what we currently do.

 

[Mustanglvr]

Rhonda this is not the case. Alcohol is being used successfully for the treatment of Essential Tremor. My mother calls it her medicine.
There is quite a bit of research to develop a alcohol substitute that does not turn folks into alcoholics.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000762.htm

"Alcoholic beverages in small quantities may markedly decrease tremors but can lead to alcohol dependence if used in excess. The mechanism by which alcohol decreases an essential tremor is unknown."

Sorry, I did`nt know that. That helps me make my point, that if drugs are prescribed and monitored they can be very beneficial to society.

 

[Perkchiro]

I think we get along better when we talk about cars. I'm conservative and I love America. I appreciate the diversity of thought that keeps us communicating. Sometimes however, it just doesn't do any good to try to change someones opinion, especially if your highly opinionated like me. Rhonda where do you live? Cops are breaking down doors and waving guns in kids faces? An isolated incident or common policing behavior? What's that about? And I'm not advocating Anthrax, nukes and chemical weapons as part of the discussion. I just used that example to make a point. Apparently that was missed.

 

[Mustanglvr]

I think we get along better when we talk about cars. I'm conservative and I love America. I appreciate the diversity of thought that keeps us communicating. Sometimes however, it just doesn't do any good to try to change someones opinion, especially if your highly opinionated like me. Rhonda where do you live? Cops are breaking down doors and waving guns in kids faces? An isolated incident or common policing behavior? What's that about? And I'm not advocating Anthrax, nukes and chemical weapons as part of the discussion. I just used that example to make a point. Apparently that was missed.

I live in frickin Mayberry RFD.

I feel we can give our opinions, but lets never try to change others opinions. We can only leave each other with what we`ve said and hope that it made a difference. We know where each other stands and that we all are very opinionated. I know if we all agreed on something important and needed to stand up for it, you guys would be the first to call.

 

[Perkchiro]

Andy Taylor and Barney Fife huh? Real hard lined law enforcement types.

 

[Perkchiro]

You have a great knack for obfuscation, Steve. I never said that it was OK to posess chemical waepons, nukes, or Anthrax. These have no intended use, other than to cause others harm. Drugs are not the same. People can use drugs recreationally and responsibly (and many do) and not abuse them. Should we take away their right to do so. Guns can cause great and grave harm, but I don't believe in the government's right to take those away either. What about cars? They can cause great and grave harm. Should the government take those away, too. I don't believe that it's the government's role to prevent every harm that can come to us.

You still have never addressed my point that what we are currently doing does not work.

To answer your question about preventing a "low life busting down your door and violating your home", absolutely I want to prevent that. I don't believe what we do now prevents it. I believe decriminalization of drugs would prevent it more than what we currently do.

Sorry that I've confused you. I don't possess a "Knack for obfuscation" as you say. As for my never addressing your point, I didn't know that I was expected or obligated to do so. A gun and a car are inanimate objects unless controlled by a human. They are harmless without human control. The person is responsible for it's action, not the object. Same is true of a baseball bat or a rock. The difference, as I see it, is that drugs and alcohol change the behavior of the human so that inhibition is gone and physical control and use of the car and the gun becomes grave and dangerous. Responsible use of drugs and alcohol are what you wish for. That's a pipe dream.

Is that confusing?

 

[joedls]

Sorry that I've confused you. I don't possess a "Knack for obfuscation" as you say. As for my never addressing your point, I didn't know that I was expected or obligated to do so. A gun and a car are inanimate objects unless controlled by a human. They are harmless without human control. The person is responsible for it's action, not the object. Same is true of a baseball bat or a rock. The difference, as I see it, is that drugs and alcohol change the behavior of the human so that inhibition is gone and physical control and use of the car and the gun becomes grave and dangerous. Responsible use of drugs and alcohol are what you wish for. That's a pipe dream.

Is that confusing?

First of all, you didn't confuse me. My use of the word "obfuscation" was meant in regards to you attempting to make my points unclear by your introduction of extraneous information. I am all too clear what you are thinking. Except for maybe one thing. Are drugs also not inanimate? If you don't think people's behavior changes when they have a gun in their hand or get behind a car, you are deluding yourself or just plain naive. Granted, they usually only hurt someone when they are being irresponsible, but the same is true with drugs. I don't have any pipe dreams of all people using drugs responsibly. I know I can't. That's why I no longer use drugs or alcohol. I just pointed out that some people can and do. And that they should have the right to do so. Just as some people use guns and cars responsibly and should have the right to do so.

 

[Perkchiro]

Excuse me, but I am not naive. Maybe when I was 16, but I'm way beyond that and I do have some experience and education under my belt. I own a gun and drive a car. I have a carry permit and if you think my behavior changes just because I have a car and a gun, you would be naive.
I congratulate you for your personal choice to abandon drugs and alcohol. I'm sure is wasn't an easy road for you. I've chaired the board of an alcohol and drug rehab ministry and I've seen what low depths people reach when gripped by addiction to drugs and alcohol. Women sell themselves, steal from their friends and family to just get drugs. If you make it legal, what do you do with the addiction problem? Throw another social program and more money at it? I know that doesn't work.

Yes, drugs are also inanimate. But surely you the the difference in it's effect of altering behavior patterns and the danger to others by their use. Drug use and responsible behavior do not coexist. When that behavior affects someone other than the drug user, that's when I have a problem.

This has been a supercharged topic. It was thrown out there to get a rise from some of us who are passionate in our beliefs. Good to hear the debate. Sorry if I hacked off some liberals, but I had to get my quota for the day.

 

[Mustanglvr]

Don`t treatment programs only work if the person truly wants to quit? They are making a conscious choice there, just like they did before they took drugs. It is a choice that a person makes before hand, whether to use a gun to kill, to drive a car intoxicated, or to use drugs to the point of it being abused.

Oh yeah, and women are`nt the only ones that sell themselves by the way.

 

[joedls]

Excuse me, but I am not naive. Maybe when I was 16, but I'm way beyond that and I do have some experience and education under my belt. I own a gun and drive a car. I have a carry permit and if you think my behavior changes just because I have a car and a gun, you would be naive.
I congratulate you for your personal choice to abandon drugs and alcohol. I'm sure is wasn't an easy road for you. I've chaired the board of an alcohol and drug rehab ministry and I've seen what low depths people reach when gripped by addiction to drugs and alcohol. Women sell themselves, steal from their friends and family to just get drugs. If you make it legal, what do you do with the addiction problem? Throw another social program and more money at it? I know that doesn't work.

Yes, drugs are also inanimate. But surely you the the difference in it's effect of altering behavior patterns and the danger to others by their use. Drug use and responsible behavior do not coexist. When that behavior affects someone other than the drug user, that's when I have a problem.

This has been a supercharged topic. It was thrown out there to get a rise from some of us who are passionate in our beliefs. Good to hear the debate. Sorry if I hacked off some liberals, but I had to get my quota for the day.

I apologize if you thought I was referring to you when I said people's behavior changes when they have a gun or are behind the wheel of a car. I don't know enough about you to say that. I may have not made myself clear, but the assertion I was trying to make was that irresponsible people's behavior can change when they have a gun in hand or are behind the wheel of a car. I have seen it many times. As a matter of fact, I have been guilty of reckless behavior with both in the past. I believe that your assertion that drug use and responsible behavior cannot coexist is wrong. I know of instances where they do coexist, except for the fact that it is illegal (thus making it irresponsible).

You state, "When that behavior affects someone other than the drug user, that's when I have a problem." How many lives have been taken from irresponsible gun use or irresponsible driving? Yet you don't advocate getting rid of either. Your argument is inconsistent.

I don't advocate social programs for addiction. If drugs were decriminalized, we would save alot of money from imprisoning all these criminals that would not otherwise be. I would hope that would translate into less taxes and more money available to people for rehabilitation.

I, too, am pretty passionate about this subject. I'm glad I am able to discuss this with someone who is obviously intelligent and has a different opinion. What I don't get though, is why someone of your obvious intelligence is so quick to patronize and label anyone with opposing views. Were you under the mistaken opinion that I am a liberal? My wife (who truly is) would laugh at that opinion.

 

[Perkchiro]

Yeah Rhonda, I didn't mean to discriminate against women. I just happen to have been involved in a womens treatment program. You are right, they aren't the only ones unfortunately. And yes, you gotta wanna quit. However, many of the ladies were given a choice of jail or the program. some people can and do change, but the road is long for most. Many don't make it. The point you make about choice is valid and a good one. I agree to a certain degree that we should be able to control our own destiny and do what we want to ourselves. Good judgement and choices are altered when you're influenced by drugs. People who make a choice to drive intoxicated or kill with a gun while intoxicated are making that choice "under the influence". Why would we want to enable people to take drugs when that has a potential to alter behavior and cause wreckless havoc on others? I don't want to enable a mental incompetent to carry a gun because he has an inherent right to do so. That's idiotic thinking. That's my point. I don't want to legalize drugs to enable someone to make a bad choice that would harm others. Does that make sense to you at all? Again, this is a great discussion and I'm fascinated by all the opinions.

 

[Mustanglvr]

Thanks Steve, I was hoping you did`nt think women were the only ones.
Also, I see the point you are trying to make but there are alot of people that can do drugs and alot of other things responsibly. Just like there are responsible prostitutes out there who go to work every day and support their families without relying on welfare.

Mayberry RFD is a dangerous place to be. Remember Barney Fife and his gun? Well, thats what the cops are like here where I live.

 

[CALIF GIRL]

Oh and by the way, in my experience, its the cops that are busting down the doors for no reason and waving their guns in the childrens faces. Who`s the victim there?

In my experiences of about 20 years of police work, if the police are busting down the doors and waving guns around it is because the parents have done something illegal to cause the police to become involved and the children were victims way before the police became involved.

Too bad people do not have to have licenses to become parents.

 

[Mustanglvr]

In my experiences of about 20 years of police work, if the police are busting down the doors and waving guns around it is because the parents have done something illegal to cause the police to become involved and the children were victims way before the police became involved.

Too bad people do not have to have licenses to become parents.

They had the wrong house.

 

[Perkchiro]

I believe that your assertion that drug use and responsible behavior cannot coexist is wrong. I know of instances where they do coexist, except for the fact that it is illegal (thus making it irresponsible).

Sorry, but I'll never buy that assumption. Heroin, Meth or Cocaine addition do not exist within a healthy lifestyle or behavior. Your line of reasoning is juxtaposed to the thinking and beliefs of most Americans. That's why drugs are still illegal and will remain that way until we elect a liberal government like Hollands. And you may claim to be a libertarian rather than a liberal, but if you advocate legalization of these drugs, I personally wouldn't know what else you could be but a liberal. Sorry if I addressed you improperly but if the shoe fits.. . . . . . . . .

 

[joedls]

Sorry, but I'll never buy that assumption. Heroin, Meth or Cocaine addition do not exist within a healthy lifestyle or behavior. Your line of reasoning is juxtaposed to the thinking and beliefs of most Americans. That's why drugs are still illegal and will remain that way until we elect a liberal government like Hollands. And you may claim to be a libertarian rather than a liberal, but if you advocate legalization of these drugs, I personally wouldn't know what else you could be but a liberal. Sorry if I addressed you improperly but if the shoe fits.. . . . . . . . .

Once again, you either don't understand what I wrote or choose to ignore it. I never said addiction could "...exist within a healthy lifestyle or behavior." I said that people could use drugs responsibly. Not everyone, but some people can. I know people who do. I also never claimed to be a libertarian. I wrote that my thinking on this subject was more in line with libertarian thinking than liberal thinking. I would not consider myself liberal or conservative. I would consider myself a thinker. I don't follow anyone's party line. I think for myself. You should try it sometime.

 

[Perkchiro]

Once again, you either don't understand what I wrote or choose to ignore it. I never said addiction could "...exist within a healthy lifestyle or behavior." I said that people could use drugs responsibly. Not everyone, but some people can. I know people who do. I also never claimed to be a libertarian. I wrote that my thinking on this subject was more in line with libertarian thinking than liberal thinking. I would not consider myself liberal or conservative. I would consider myself a thinker. I don't follow anyone's party line. I think for myself. You should try it sometime.

Yeah, I'm a doctor and I do think independently, everyday, all day. No need for the snipe Joe. I wouldn't be doing what I do today if I "followed" an aberrant line of thinking. I do understand your view perfectly, you just can't accept the idea that I don't agree with you. The idea of legalized drugs and their supposed "responsible" use without consideration of their life changing consequences is a ridiculous premise and I think you know that. Let's agree to disagree on this one. I'm certainly not going to change your mind and I'm not attempting to change yours. I think we've exhausted this subject so let's end it here and agree to disagree in an agreeable manner. You can have the last word.