Depending on the state you live in, there are often government supplied rehab services that are usually funded through taxes on alcohol.Pug wrote:
Ok, then you are absolutely right. No one pays for AA right now, and I don't think alcoholism is a legitimate health expense covered by insurance... So rehab isn't currently covered, is someone saying it should be?
Sorry. I haven't read much in this thread.
Uh... no. I smoked a lot of pot in college. I don't smoke now. There was never a point in my life where I was smoking and I couldn't choose to stop.Shahter wrote:
ok, let me make it quite plain for you:ruisleipa wrote:
I think you should be more specific as to which drugs you're talking about, cos if you're talking about all drugs that are currently illegal, then your statement is as nonsense as lowing's arguments.Shahter wrote:
people who take drugs regularly are ether already "drugs and nothing else in their lives" or on the way there. nobody on this plabet is capable of controlling their addictions - not without completely giving up the source of it. and since there's no reliable and easy way to tell a "hardcore" drug user from "casual" they should all be treated equally as the criminals they are - and the drugs kept illegal.
people get addicted to a lot of things. some eat themselves to 200+ kilos, some go base jumping, some watch porn 24/7, and some shoot heroin - the addiction mechanism is basically the same and all these things affect the lives of those addicted to them. all addictions also progress with time, and the only way to get them under control is giving up the source. there's NO other way.
now, drugs and other things people get addicted to also differ in the ways of the potentioal danger to the society. so, the question is - which is dangerous enough to be illegal? looking at it from this perspective i'd say that all drugs that are currently illegal should be kept that way, and some that aren't should be made illegal.
I controlled it. It did not control me.
To assume that everyone has an addictive personality is utterly ridiculous.
Now, it is true that some drugs are much more addictive than others.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-14 20:37:19)
Without rehabs, you'll have a lot more crime with drugs being legalized. You can't have one without the other.lowing wrote:
Well according to the DST brain trust here, we should legalize drugs then spend the money collected in taxes not to improve infrastructure, or run the functions of govt., we should spend it rehabbing all of those that chose to do their legalized drugs... I am leaning toward disagreeing with that postition.Pug wrote:
Ok, then you are absolutely right. No one pays for AA right now, and I don't think alcoholism is a legitimate health expense covered by insurance... So rehab isn't currently covered, is someone saying it should be?
Sorry. I haven't read much in this thread.
If you're against public funding for rehabs, then you might as well just support the current laws in place, because legalization without these rehabs is actually worse than keeping up the War on Drugs.
no I support freedom. People should have the freedom to choose. I also support personal responsibility... You can not have one without the other.Turquoise wrote:
Without rehabs, you'll have a lot more crime with drugs being legalized. You can't have one without the other.lowing wrote:
Well according to the DST brain trust here, we should legalize drugs then spend the money collected in taxes not to improve infrastructure, or run the functions of govt., we should spend it rehabbing all of those that chose to do their legalized drugs... I am leaning toward disagreeing with that postition.Pug wrote:
Ok, then you are absolutely right. No one pays for AA right now, and I don't think alcoholism is a legitimate health expense covered by insurance... So rehab isn't currently covered, is someone saying it should be?
Sorry. I haven't read much in this thread.
If you're against public funding for rehabs, then you might as well just support the current laws in place, because legalization without these rehabs is actually worse than keeping up the War on Drugs.
and yes I am agaisnt subsidizing drug abuse. friends family and chairities are free to give all they want. I should not be forced to cover the cause of individual stupidity
I support freedom, personal responsibility, and the government lacing recreational drugs with cyanide.
I think that pretty much covers all the bases.
I think that pretty much covers all the bases.
ya know what, I think you are on to something thereFlaming_Maniac wrote:
I support freedom, personal responsibility, and the government lacing recreational drugs with cyanide.
I think that pretty much covers all the bases.
Rehabilitation is meant to BREAK their addiction. Not subsidize it.lowing wrote:
no I support freedom. People should have the freedom to choose. I also support personal responsibility... You can not have one without the other.Turquoise wrote:
Without rehabs, you'll have a lot more crime with drugs being legalized. You can't have one without the other.lowing wrote:
Well according to the DST brain trust here, we should legalize drugs then spend the money collected in taxes not to improve infrastructure, or run the functions of govt., we should spend it rehabbing all of those that chose to do their legalized drugs... I am leaning toward disagreeing with that postition.
If you're against public funding for rehabs, then you might as well just support the current laws in place, because legalization without these rehabs is actually worse than keeping up the War on Drugs.
and yes I am agaisnt subsidizing drug abuse. friends family and chairities are free to give all they want. I should not be forced to cover the cause of individual stupidity
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
lol an addiction that was self induced in the first place....sorry it is subsidizing It isn't like the word isn't out on drug use/abuse.Spark wrote:
Rehabilitation is meant to BREAK their addiction. Not subsidize it.lowing wrote:
no I support freedom. People should have the freedom to choose. I also support personal responsibility... You can not have one without the other.Turquoise wrote:
Without rehabs, you'll have a lot more crime with drugs being legalized. You can't have one without the other.
If you're against public funding for rehabs, then you might as well just support the current laws in place, because legalization without these rehabs is actually worse than keeping up the War on Drugs.
and yes I am agaisnt subsidizing drug abuse. friends family and chairities are free to give all they want. I should not be forced to cover the cause of individual stupidity
this only means you didn't take the drug long enough.Turquoise wrote:
Uh... no. I smoked a lot of pot in college. I don't smoke now. There was never a point in my life where I was smoking and I couldn't choose to stop.
it would have, but you were smart enough not to allow it. or you just had to give it up for other reasons.Turquoise wrote:
I controlled it. It did not control me.
it - addiction mechanism that is - has nothing to do with personality. if you have brain you are prone to get addicted to stuff that highjacks its delicate chemistry and gives that rewarding "feel good" sensation which normally gets you a long time and a lot of effort to accuire. human brain is the laziest motherfucking thing that ever existed in nature: once it forms the connection and knows a shortcut - bam! you are hooked.Turquoise wrote:
To assume that everyone has an addictive personality is utterly ridiculous.
now, strong personality, if anything, is the only protection against this crap that we have. humans have ways of enjoying stuff that do not involve triggering your normal "get a banana - feel good" mechanisms in the brain, because otherwise opiates, which, unlike most other drugs, directly stimulate endorphine receptors in human brain, would have a hundred percent addiction rates after single use. all cats, for example, are addicted to valerian - have you ever seen one which could withstand its craving for it? humans have ways of counteracting this, so you might say that the lack of developed personality is what makes some people, especially children, prone to get addicted to stuff. but still, nobody's able to withstand it forever, because there's simply no way of knowing when you've gone too far. the only way to be sure you won't get hooked is never to take the shit at all. end of story.
never said otherwise. the problem with the idiots who keep saying pot's not addictive is that they confuse addiction with abstinentia. they think that if it doesn't give you hangovers and withdrawal pains then it's not addictive at all. the fact of the matter is that those metabolism disorders are the least problematic of all the shit associated with drugs.Turquoise wrote:
Now, it is true that some drugs are much more addictive than others.
anyway,
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I support freedom, personal responsibility, and the government lacing recreational drugs with cyanide.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
A lot of people respond very positively (i.e. stop smoking/injecting) to these rehab programs.lowing wrote:
lol an addiction that was self induced in the first place....sorry it is subsidizing It isn't like the word isn't out on drug use/abuse.Spark wrote:
Rehabilitation is meant to BREAK their addiction. Not subsidize it.lowing wrote:
no I support freedom. People should have the freedom to choose. I also support personal responsibility... You can not have one without the other.
and yes I am agaisnt subsidizing drug abuse. friends family and chairities are free to give all they want. I should not be forced to cover the cause of individual stupidity
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
What does that have to do with me being forced to pay for it?....If they can afford drugs in the first place, they can surely afford to pay to stop doing drugs.Spark wrote:
A lot of people respond very positively (i.e. stop smoking/injecting) to these rehab programs.lowing wrote:
lol an addiction that was self induced in the first place....sorry it is subsidizing It isn't like the word isn't out on drug use/abuse.Spark wrote:
Rehabilitation is meant to BREAK their addiction. Not subsidize it.
Hell I can't afford to do drugs or even smoke.
What the fuck is the matter with people on this forum with your ideology that someone should only be held responsible for their actions as a last resort? First we must blame, society, the schools, the environment, the parents ( barely), and yes fucking history. When is it exactly, that you all decide a person is responsible for their actions and their decisions, when there is no else left to blame?
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-15 05:10:29)
Only the stagecoach thing.Turquoise wrote:
I really hope you're being sarcastic.Dilbert_X wrote:
The current people in prison for drug crimes are OK with committing crimes, legalising one drug is unlikely to change their fundamental behaviour - they'll still be sloping brow stagecoach-tilters.
Really, pot is illegal, users decide to commit a crime and use it, that marks them different from people who do follow the law.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
You already do though... You live in a society, so you will inevitably always pay at least a small amount towards the cost of stupidity on the part of others.lowing wrote:
no I support freedom. People should have the freedom to choose. I also support personal responsibility... You can not have one without the other.Turquoise wrote:
Without rehabs, you'll have a lot more crime with drugs being legalized. You can't have one without the other.lowing wrote:
Well according to the DST brain trust here, we should legalize drugs then spend the money collected in taxes not to improve infrastructure, or run the functions of govt., we should spend it rehabbing all of those that chose to do their legalized drugs... I am leaning toward disagreeing with that postition.
If you're against public funding for rehabs, then you might as well just support the current laws in place, because legalization without these rehabs is actually worse than keeping up the War on Drugs.
and yes I am agaisnt subsidizing drug abuse. friends family and chairities are free to give all they want. I should not be forced to cover the cause of individual stupidity
It's not about blame. It's about keeping people from doing desperate things that affect the lives of others and finding more affordable ways to deal with addicts than waiting until they do something that lands them in jail.lowing wrote:
What does that have to do with me being forced to pay for it?....If they can afford drugs in the first place, they can surely afford to pay to stop doing drugs.Spark wrote:
A lot of people respond very positively (i.e. stop smoking/injecting) to these rehab programs.lowing wrote:
lol an addiction that was self induced in the first place....sorry it is subsidizing It isn't like the word isn't out on drug use/abuse.
Hell I can't afford to do drugs or even smoke.
What the fuck is the matter with people on this forum with your ideology that someone should only be held responsible for their actions as a last resort? First we must blame, society, the schools, the environment, the parents ( barely), and yes fucking history. When is it exactly, that you all decide a person is responsible for their actions and their decisions, when there is no else left to blame?
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-15 16:44:48)
By your logic, you should never drink either.Shahter wrote:
it - addiction mechanism that is - has nothing to do with personality. if you have brain you are prone to get addicted to stuff that highjacks its delicate chemistry and gives that rewarding "feel good" sensation which normally gets you a long time and a lot of effort to accuire. human brain is the laziest motherfucking thing that ever existed in nature: once it forms the connection and knows a shortcut - bam! you are hooked.Turquoise wrote:
To assume that everyone has an addictive personality is utterly ridiculous.
now, strong personality, if anything, is the only protection against this crap that we have. humans have ways of enjoying stuff that do not involve triggering your normal "get a banana - feel good" mechanisms in the brain, because otherwise opiates, which, unlike most other drugs, directly stimulate endorphine receptors in human brain, would have a hundred percent addiction rates after single use. all cats, for example, are addicted to valerian - have you ever seen one which could withstand its craving for it? humans have ways of counteracting this, so you might say that the lack of developed personality is what makes some people, especially children, prone to get addicted to stuff. but still, nobody's able to withstand it forever, because there's simply no way of knowing when you've gone too far. the only way to be sure you won't get hooked is never to take the shit at all. end of story.
Really?... So, back during Prohibition, someone who still drank alcohol was equally as likely to do opium? Or rob someone? Or kill them?Dilbert_X wrote:
Only the stagecoach thing.Turquoise wrote:
I really hope you're being sarcastic.Dilbert_X wrote:
The current people in prison for drug crimes are OK with committing crimes, legalising one drug is unlikely to change their fundamental behaviour - they'll still be sloping brow stagecoach-tilters.
Really, pot is illegal, users decide to commit a crime and use it, that marks them different from people who do follow the law.
Because I did pot back in college, I'm now "marked" as being a possible heroin user?
Your logic is rather strange....
Because in the long run it saves you money...?lowing wrote:
What does that have to do with me being forced to pay for it?....If they can afford drugs in the first place, they can surely afford to pay to stop doing drugs.Spark wrote:
A lot of people respond very positively (i.e. stop smoking/injecting) to these rehab programs.lowing wrote:
lol an addiction that was self induced in the first place....sorry it is subsidizing It isn't like the word isn't out on drug use/abuse.
Hell I can't afford to do drugs or even smoke.
What the fuck is the matter with people on this forum with your ideology that someone should only be held responsible for their actions as a last resort? First we must blame, society, the schools, the environment, the parents ( barely), and yes fucking history. When is it exactly, that you all decide a person is responsible for their actions and their decisions, when there is no else left to blame?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
alcohol? - of course, it's a drug and you should never drink it.Turquoise wrote:
By your logic, you should never drink either.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
or caffeine?Shahter wrote:
alcohol? - of course, it's a drug and you should never drink it.Turquoise wrote:
By your logic, you should never drink either.
or caffeine.ruisleipa wrote:
or caffeine?Shahter wrote:
alcohol? - of course, it's a drug and you should never drink it.Turquoise wrote:
By your logic, you should never drink either.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
So, basically, you're saying we should convert to Mormonism.Shahter wrote:
or caffeine.ruisleipa wrote:
or caffeine?Shahter wrote:
alcohol? - of course, it's a drug and you should never drink it.
But seriously... You must be one of the few people in Russia who doesn't drink.
While I'll agree that it's healthier to avoid alcohol, caffeine, etc., you gotta live a little bit. Being a social drinker isn't a bad thing IMHO.
Spending money on things I should not spend money on in the first place does not save me money.Spark wrote:
Because in the long run it saves you money...?lowing wrote:
What does that have to do with me being forced to pay for it?....If they can afford drugs in the first place, they can surely afford to pay to stop doing drugs.Spark wrote:
A lot of people respond very positively (i.e. stop smoking/injecting) to these rehab programs.
Hell I can't afford to do drugs or even smoke.
What the fuck is the matter with people on this forum with your ideology that someone should only be held responsible for their actions as a last resort? First we must blame, society, the schools, the environment, the parents ( barely), and yes fucking history. When is it exactly, that you all decide a person is responsible for their actions and their decisions, when there is no else left to blame?
...even if it decreases the overall amount you pay in taxes?...lowing wrote:
Spending money on things I should not spend money on in the first place does not save me money.Spark wrote:
Because in the long run it saves you money...?lowing wrote:
What does that have to do with me being forced to pay for it?....If they can afford drugs in the first place, they can surely afford to pay to stop doing drugs.
Hell I can't afford to do drugs or even smoke.
What the fuck is the matter with people on this forum with your ideology that someone should only be held responsible for their actions as a last resort? First we must blame, society, the schools, the environment, the parents ( barely), and yes fucking history. When is it exactly, that you all decide a person is responsible for their actions and their decisions, when there is no else left to blame?
For example, you wouldn't consider it a net benefit to yourself, if we set up a functional rehab system that decreased prison spending overall and led to lower taxes?
You seem to be forgetting that if drugs were legal, no one would be going to prison for doing drugs....So actually prisons would be less crowded.Turquoise wrote:
...even if it decreases the overall amount you pay in taxes?...lowing wrote:
Spending money on things I should not spend money on in the first place does not save me money.Spark wrote:
Because in the long run it saves you money...?
For example, you wouldn't consider it a net benefit to yourself, if we set up a functional rehab system that decreased prison spending overall and led to lower taxes?
Now, having said that, there will be room in prison for people who commit crimes BECAUSE they are on drugs....but then again, they deserve to be in prison for punishment for their crimes don't they?, leave rehab for charities, friends and family to pay for. NOT those of use that have nothing to do with someone elses drug problem and irresponsibility.
right, so since you couldn't throw them in prison what would you do with them, all these druggies? Let em roam the streets bein' all homeless n shit yeah?lowing wrote:
You seem to be forgetting that if drugs were legal, no one would be going to prison for doing drugs....So actually prisons would be less crowded.
I thought you were the one saying they could be productive members of society? Now you are saying they are gunna be "ALL homeless"?, I do not give a fuck if they sleep under a highway overpass. their choice, their decision, their consequence. If they don't give a shit, I can promise you with great certainty, I do not.ruisleipa wrote:
right, so since you couldn't throw them in prison what would you do with them, all these druggies? Let em roam the streets bein' all homeless n shit yeah?lowing wrote:
You seem to be forgetting that if drugs were legal, no one would be going to prison for doing drugs....So actually prisons would be less crowded.