TeaFan Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I say again. Pathetic loosers and add loosers that care nothing for anyone else. The drugs trade caused more death and misery that everything else put together. 5000 dead in drug wars in Mexico this last year. Etremist (and very bad) Muslims using drug money to buy weapons to kill soldiers and civillians. Drug gangs in the UK doing all they do to make cash from the pathetic wimps that need their product to have a good time. But the users don't give a rats do they? They just moan on about how rough it is on them that drugs are illegal while casually ignoring the mass murder and so on that allows their drugs to get to their stupid gobs or needles. So I amend my opinion to selfish, pathetic loosers. The ethical consumer argument against drugs is probably the one which carries most weight. Certainly cocaine (environmental destruction, violent gangs) and heroin (funding Taliban, violent gangs) are unethical purchases. Not sure about ecstasy made in a basement lab in Amsterdam, mind. The fact that the drugs trade is the preserve of organised crime does mean that it gets mixed up with all sorts of unsavoury stuff, but if it was legalised then consumers could make their own decisions about what was ethical to buy. I take it you're not an oil user yourself, since the social effects of that (war, environmental destruction, repression by Gulf regimes supported by oil purchasing economies) are worse than those engendered by the drug trade? And anti-capitalist, of course, since it's the capitalist profit motive which drives all these negative consequences in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longone Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I say again. Pathetic loosers and add loosers that care nothing for anyone else. The drugs trade caused more death and misery that everything else put together. 5000 dead in drug wars in Mexico this last year. Etremist (and very bad) Muslims using drug money to buy weapons to kill soldiers and civillians. Drug gangs in the UK doing all they do to make cash from the pathetic wimps that need their product to have a good time. But the users don't give a rats do they? They just moan on about how rough it is on them that drugs are illegal while casually ignoring the mass murder and so on that allows their drugs to get to their stupid gobs or needles. So I amend my opinion to selfish, pathetic loosers. Well sorry upinwath, but no-one is actually going to take your opinion seriously now, not least due to your terrible spelling and grammer. The main problem with your post is that you seem to make up facts to strengthen your arguement. I don't know where you got your firgure of 5000 deaths from, but I can guarantee this is inaccurate. These figures you quote all depend who you want to listen to - BBC estimate the figure at 2500 drugs trade related deaths last year http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7457153.stm, and Wikipedia estimates this figure to be 5630 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War#Effects (is this your source?). Either way, yes that is a large number of deaths. However, you argued that 'The drugs trade caused more death and misery than everything else put together'. I don't know how you quantify misery, but it by no means caused more deaths than everything else put together. Take a look at this table that the World Health Organisation put together detailing global causes of death in 2002 http://www.who.int/entity/whr/2004/annex/topic/en/annex_2_en.pdf You mentioned the 'extremist Muslims' who use cash from the drugs trade to fund the purchase of weapons, so do you also agree that we should legalise and regulate drugs? That way these 'extremist Muslims' would not be able to generate funds through the drugs trade. A bit like how you don't see them generating funds through growing tobacco or brewing alcohol, thanks to these products being legal and regulated. As for the drugs gangs in the UK, what do you know about these gangs apart from what you have heard in the media? Whilst yes, there are some nasty pieces of work who use the proceeds from the sale of drugs to fund more serious crime, a lot of people who supply drugs hold down steady respectable jobs, are university students or could even be your local milkman helping ill pensioners manage symptoms using natural herbs http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/06/cannabis-milkman-burnley-court Again, legalisation and regulation would wipe out the majority of the underground drugs trade overnight (of course, there will always remain a small number of black market operators, as there is with other commodities). Anyway, I have digressed. The point is upinwath, you really have no facts to back up your statements, and your hugely judgemental opinion is one of somebody with no knowledge of the trade at all, nor of the effects of the substances in question, nor of the effect they have on society. In fact your entire opinion is based upon damning reports in the media, most of which will probably have been biased to reflect editorial opinion. Unfortunately, with people as unenlightened as yourself in places of power, the process of deregulation and legalisation of drugs may take a little while... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So give me a good reason to use drugs and why you need them when most do not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeaFan Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So give me a good reason to use drugs and why you need them when most do not? I don't need them. A good reason to use ecstasy is this: when I've had it, I've taken long warm baths in vats of fun, with the houris of gaiety, delight and cheerful abandon licking my balls. So are you an oil user then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longone Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So give me a good reason to use drugs and why you need them when most do not? Again, few people 'need' to use drugs. They choose to because they enjoying doing so. People take drugs for different reasons. For some, it could be to make an evening out more fun, similar to why people drink alcohol. They might take them to relax, and others might take certain drugs to alleviate medical problems. Whatever their reason for taking drugs is, can you give me one good reason as to why they should justify this activity to somebody such as yourself, in order for it to be legal? What do you enjoy doing upinwath? Would you be happy if you had to explain why you partake in every recreational activity to people who it doesn't affect in order for your activity to be legal? Finally, 'why you need them when most do not?'. Please reconsider this statement, you should realise that the majority of people do take drugs, whether legal or illegal for a variety of recreational, medical and practical reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geek_andy Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 One thing I've noticed about this discussion is the fact that the standard of spelling and grammar seems to be a lot lower in the posts by the right-wing 'druggies are bad' posters. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bago Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 The fact that if you need drugs to numb an area of your life, or to find any other ways to substitute your action in dealing with the issue means that you are escaping from reality. Whether this is food, alcohol, drugs, sex, sports... It is all there. I don't think we need drugs. By now, and the increased number of users, I do think that it is time to clamp down. Maybe when I was in my teens and early 20s, I like to think that I am liberal and that each individual can have their own choices in life too. However, maybe I have become more of a cynic, and is so in touch with reality that, I now live and see through other people's experiences, and I definitely do listen to those individuals who caution me not to go down this route too. So I thank them for the warning. I think for those who are on hard drugs already need to get help from the government to wean themselves off the drugs, and stablise back into society. Harsher laws should prevent further drug users from starting the habit. Another clause should exist to help existing users too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 The fact that if you need drugs to numb an area of your life, or to find any other ways to substitute your action in dealing with the issue means that you are escaping from reality. Whether this is food, alcohol, drugs, sex, sports... It is all there. I don't think we need drugs. By now, and the increased number of users, I do think that it is time to clamp down. Maybe when I was in my teens and early 20s, I like to think that I am liberal and that each individual can have their own choices in life too. However, maybe I have become more of a cynic, and is so in touch with reality that, I now live and see through other people's experiences, and I definitely do listen to those individuals who caution me not to go down this route too. So I thank them for the warning. How does a temporary mood enhancer numb an area of your life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 …to numb an area of your life,… means that you are escaping from reality. Whether this is food, alcohol, drugs, sex, sports … I do think that it is time to clamp down. Clamp down on drugs, or all the things you mention? Harsher laws should prevent further drug users from starting the habit. Another clause should exist to help existing users too. They won't and never have done. Laws have been getting harsher & drug use has stayed the same or gone up for the last 200 years. When cannabis was reclassified to C, usage went down Legislative prohibition of substances leads to greater profits for criminals and greater harm for users, but does not affect the number of people using them. Prohibition is stupid, counterproductive and illiberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Matt] Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I say again. Pathetic losers and add losers that care nothing for anyone else. The drugs trade caused more death and misery that everything else put together. 5000 dead in drug wars in Mexico this last year. Extremist (and very bad) Muslims using drug money to buy weapons to kill soldiers and civilians. Drug gangs in the UK doing all they do to make cash from the pathetic wimps that need their product to have a good time. But the users don't give a rats do they? They just moan on about how rough it is on them that drugs are illegal while casually ignoring the mass murder and so on that allows their drugs to get to their stupid gobs or needles. So I amend my opinion to selfish, pathetic losers. All problems associated or even caused by prohibition. If such drugs were legal worldwide and in the hards of legitimate companies with tight legal controls on production and supply then none of those problems would exist now would they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.