Is it wrong to use drugs.

Sofaspud

Fremen wrote: »

I think sofaspud's point was that correlation and causation are not the same thing.

Exactly, but I prefer to take the "sarcastic bastard" approach.

Alessandra

I don't care if people use drugs, free will etc. Don't care to mix in circles where hard drugs are acceptable. As long as it doesn't effect me and I don;t have to pay for their medical bills or rehab let them.

JC 2K3

Kernel wrote: »

I'm no fan of corporate capitalism, or it's exploitation of people, but Coca Cola never turned flat complexes into smack complexes dudess!

Neither did MDMA(Ecstasy), Cannabis, Acid, Speed, Magic Mushrooms etc.

I hate the way all illegal drugs are lumped together as one thing.

wordofmouth

Ciaran500 wrote: »

"Cocaine's a hell of a drug"

excellent

Sam Vimes

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Wow. And that is tonghts news. The anti alcohol and anti gateway arguements out the window in 30 seconds of your reading time.

something should be banned if it is bad, not because some of the people do do this thing go on to do something bad.

saying that cannabis should be banned because it's a gateway drug is exactly the same as saying that violent video games should be banned because some of the people who use them go on to shoot up their high schools.

pretty much everyone who has ever done cocaine has also drank coca cola at one time or another. should coca cola be banned?

Dudess wrote: »

Oh god, the gateway drug argument pisses me off. I smoke the odd bit of doob (as in, at a house party every few months) and do you know how much ecstasy, cocaine, speed and/or acid I've ever taken? None!

and even if it did lead on to doing other drugs, doesn't mean it should be banned because that argument says nothing about the goodness or badness of cannabis itself

Sherifu

Dudess wrote: »

Why would something being illegal be enough to turn you against it though?

Medicinal marijuana is illegal, yet it relieves unbearable pain for terminally ill people.

An old woman in England who's campaigning for its legalisation says her life has improved immeasurably thanks to cannabis, following years of physical pain as a result of two car crashes, and decades of emotional and psychological pain following the death of her son.

She goes by her nickname "Cannigran". Not a good nick at all - she really should have picked "Grannibas".

I would support changing the law for medical use.

DeVore wrote: »

I second this question and would add that by making certain drugs illegal, you make criminals of the users of that drug and force them to rub shoulders with other criminals for supply.

It also supports the upper tiers of drug fiefdom, for whom the worst thing that could happen would be de-criminalisation. I'd guess that well over 50% of every drug dealers income is from grass, which could be cut out from under them.

DeV.

I would support decriminalisation of grass.

Ciaran500 wrote: »

So your only problem with illegal drugs is that they are illegal?

funk-you wrote: »

Whats has legality got to do with how right or wrong taking drugs are? I'm not entirely sure but i don't even thing the taking of drugs is illegal just possession and sale . Alchohol is illegal but is classed as a drug in the OP's question. I agree drugs are illegal but why are they wrong?

-Funk

Sam Vimes wrote: »

so are they illegal because they're wrong?

or are they wrong because they're illegal?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

so the only problem is that they're illegal? so why are they illegal?

They are wrong in the eyes of the law. This was my reason for originally saying "Taking illegal drugs is wrong". Personally, I don't judge anyone that takes drugs. That's their own business.

Sam Vimes

Sherifu wrote: »

They are wrong in the eyes of the law. This was my reason for originally saying "Taking illegal drugs is wrong". Personally, I don't judge anyone that takes drugs. That's their own business.

you say at the top of your post that your only problem with drugs is that they are illegal. if they were all made legal tomorrow, would you no longer have a problem with them?

Black Swan

ScumLord wrote: »

Is it wrong to enjoy drugs, is it wrong to like getting drunk, stoned, trip?

I hate drugs, even prescription! As for beer or wine, I like to sip one on occasion with a bite to eat, cause it tastes grand sometimes. Or a beer at a sporting event, or just kicking back with friends after a long week. But I rarely binge drink, cause it's not healthy and I don't like hangovers.

Sherifu

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you say at the top of your post that your only problem with drugs is that they are illegal. if they were all made legal tomorrow, would you no longer have a problem with them?

Why would I?

Ruskie4Rent

Although i choose not to take drugs, I have no problem what people put into their bodies.
I do think however that people should be more cautious of where they are getting their drugs. It takes a certain type of person to not care that they are funding crime.

ScumLord

Kernel wrote: »

The odd bit of doob may be alright for most people, but there's plenty of hard core HIV heroin addicts who started the same way. Not to mention the link between schizophrenia and cannabis. However, I'm actually in favour of decriminalising cannabis - although it's not something I would choose for myself.

Just to point out there's a difference between decriminalisation and legalisation. The fact is in Amsterdam allot of the coffee shops are still supplied by criminal gangs. De-criminalisation just legitimises their work. Full blown legalisation is the best way to deal with cannabis. Or at least licence growers to ensure their respectable people with no ties to other criminal activity.

I don't think the gateway argument really stands up. Cannabis doesn't lead to harder drugs the drug dealer leads people to harder drugs. Theirs nothing in cannabis that will make you want other drugs.

It seems the general consensus is that using drugs for pleasure is not wrong?

Kold

ScumLord wrote: »

It seems the general consensus is that using drugs for pleasure is not wrong?

Drugs are the sodomy of our generation.

ScumLord

Kold wrote: »

Drugs are the sodomy of our generation.

Why our generation? Drugs have been in use for a long time whats different about this generations use?

Earthhorse

Fremen wrote: »

Wow. If that's what you believe, then your world-view and mine are very, very different. I will NEVER obey a law just because it's a law. I will only stick to those which are sensible. For example, I'm happy to pay tax, because tax money is used for a good purpose.

Taxes are a good example. Let's look at that. I currently pay taxes to the tune of a few grand a year. The Irish government collects taxes to the tune of around €45 billion a year. My contribution is so marginal as to be negligent, it really doesn't amount to a hill of beans. I also know that there are huge wastages in government spending; money that has essentially gone up in smoke. I also disagree with some of the laws this money is collected to enforce and object to the often hpyocritical behaviour of those who enforce it (at all levels). Is it wrong for me to stop paying tax?

Bear in mind there is nothing inherently wrong with not paying tax (same way that there is nothing inherently wrong with taking drugs). Many artists don't pay tax in this country. People below a certain income don't pay tax. There are other exceptions too I'm sure. Yet I pay tax despite all this largely because I understand it's important for everyone to pay tax though it becomes insiginificant at an individual level.

Fremen wrote: »

Laws are made by people like you and me, and people are fallible. Laws can be unjust. Rosa Parks broke the law in the United States, and kick-started the black civil rights movement in doing so.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

But look at China, hardcore Muslim countries, a lot of African countries etc. Think of all the unjust regimes that were in place in the world in the past. And even think of examples of countries which embrace human rights and have quite liberal laws, but which fall short in some areas, such as banning gay marriage in Ireland, the restriction of the rights of women and black people in the US in the recent past etc. The law and the social contract on which it relies is never perfect and must be constantly questioned and challenged.

Civil disobedience is a completely valid way of achieving social and legislative changes. Ultimately, what it achieves is often "right". Does that make the behaviour itself right? If I lose my job and don't tell my spouse because I know it will distress her is the deception "right"? See, I would argue the deception itself is wrong but the ultimate goal is right. I don't want to unduly upset my wife when I know I'll be able to get another job pretty easily and there'll be no interruption to my income.

Thankfully, we live in a society where there is little or no need to resort to civil disobedience as a means of effecting such change. We can run for government, engage in civil, informed debate to influence opinions, we can organise information campaigns, we can do lots of things on this subject to bring about change and we won't be rounded up for it. Breaking the law should be a last resort. And if you're suggesting to me that the majority of drug users are conciously engaged in drug taking as act of such disobedience I'm going to suggest you have them all wrong.

An Bhfuil tu sa

The use of drugs is absolutely not wrong if you're not inconveniencing anyone else with the usage. It won't suit everyone and this is something that's never going to change.

Prohibition is a joke in many ways.

Sam Vimes

Sherifu wrote: »

Why would I?

generally things are made illegal because they are wrong, eg murder. you don't have to be told by your government that murder is wrong, you just know. the idea that something is wrong simply because it's illegal is quite odd to me. it leaves me asking why it was made illegal in the first place

if you don't see anything wrong with drugs themselves, would you support their legalisation?

you sound like the perfect citizen of a dictatorship. never question authority and always assume they know what's right

Feelgood

I think Bill Hicks put it best......

"If you don't believe drugs have done good things for us, then go home and burn all your records, all your tapes, and all your CDs because every one of those artists who have made brilliant music and enhanced your lives? RrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrEAL ****ing high on drugs. The Beatles were so ****ing high they let Ringo sing a few songs."

Sherifu

Sam Vimes wrote: »

generally things are made illegal because they are wrong, eg murder. you don't have to be told by your government that murder is wrong, you just know. the idea that something is wrong simply because it's illegal is quite odd to me. it leaves me asking why it was made illegal in the first place

if you don't see anything wrong with drugs themselves, would you support their legalisation?

you sound like the perfect citizen of a dictatorship. never question authority and always assume they know what's right

Is there a point to your ramblings?

TravelJunkie

ScumLord wrote: »

Alcohol included.

Is it wrong to enjoy drugs, is it wrong to like getting drunk, stoned, trip?

Some people like one or two drinks but would stop short of getting drunk. Which I think is ludicrous if your taking a drug the main reason is to experience the altered state IMO.

I look at drug use as an experience, it's not wrong to enjoy that experience.

Unfortunately yes. It's bad for you and highly unattractive socially speaking.

Wertz

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Then grow your own if you are going to use it?

Are you asking us or telling us?

As much as I agree with this sentiment, for the average cannabis user getting their collar felt by the law for having some weed/hash they bought, they get charged with posession for personal use (court appearance, usually small fine)
The same user who has decided to DIY their supply and consequently has more than a personal amount in their dwelling (or wherever), in the event of being caught has to face up to several more serious charges; cultivation, posession with intent of sale or supply and related charges (court appearance, large fine but more likely a conviction and jailtime, possible eviction from home, the backwash from being labelled a dealer in the media, implications for travel to certain countries).
Personally I'll let the dealers take the chances and reward them financially for doing so...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

drug dealers ftmfw

done far more to help Ireland than any man in a dress with magic crackers.

ScumLord

Wertz wrote: »

The same user who has decided to DIY their supply and consequently has more than a personal amount in their dwelling (or wherever), in the event of being caught has to face up to several more serious charges;

I'm not to sure about that I remember reading about some Polish fellas that got caught with 4 plants and got off with a €400 fine.

At the very least getting caught with plants gives you the moral high ground in that your not supporting criminals.

Wertz

Maybe attitudes in the courts are changing to growers nationally (although certainly not in my district court)...but the last guy I heard of got 3 month sentence for about 10 plants.
The moral high ground isn't worth a damn in the eyes of the law...no judge is going to mitigate a sentence because the accused claims that he was growing to avoid funding criminals.

The trouble is who dictates what's a personal posession level and what defines the level at which someone becomes a potential supplier? Until there was something concrete in law, I'd have to avoid growing my own for the above reasons. Having something concrete in law would need legislation changes to the misuse of drugs act, and some softening on cannabis specific laws, which isn't going to happen...

BTW might be an idea to edit out that those guys were Polish...doesn't really have a bearing on their offence or penalty and is inviting trouble...

Tigger

ScumLord wrote: »

I'm not to sure about that I remember reading about some Polish fellas that got caught with 4 plants and got off with a €400 fine.

At the very least getting caught with plants gives you the moral high ground in that your not supporting criminals.

you are a criminal tho right or wrong the law should be inforced or done away with

i've seen dopeheads with dreds get put on manditory monthly pee testing for having a 1/4 and upper middle class bimbos
getting off with a caution for having 7 wraps of speed

its all about who you know and what you look like

personally i think that as lonbg ad you have a job you should be allowed and thing you wanna imbile

ScumLord

Wertz wrote: »

Maybe attitudes in the courts are changing to growers nationally (although certainly not in my district court)...but the last guy I heard of got 3 month sentence for about 10 plants.
The moral high ground isn't worth a damn in the eyes of the law...no judge is going to mitigate a sentence because the accused claims that he was growing to avoid funding criminals.

True but at least I'd have that warm felling of self righteousness while I'm being bumed in prison.

The trouble is who dictates what's a personal posession level and what defines the level at which someone becomes a potential supplier? Until there was something concrete in law, I'd have to avoid growing my own for the above reasons. Having something concrete in law would need legislation changes to the misuse of drugs act, and some softening on cannabis specific laws, which isn't going to happen...

Anything over a quarter is considered possesion with intent to supply. Really if they did tests on soap hash a oz should be considered a quarter because of the actual cannabis content. But it's whatever suits them at the time.

Tigger

ScumLord wrote: »

True but at least I'd have that warm felling of self righteousness while I'm being bumed in prison.

Anything over a quarter is considered possesion with intent to supply. Really if they did tests on soap hash a oz should be considered a quarter because of the actual cannabis content. But it's whatever suits them at the time.

theres no thanks button in here but yes if they wanna bust peeps it should be based on haw the thing is divided ie 5 wraps of coke=bad
a quater in a gold snuff box=rich but not a pusher

Fremen

TravelJunkie wrote: »

Unfortunately yes. It's bad for you and highly unattractive socially speaking.

Many drugs are no worse for you than, say, perscription medication, and are perfectly safe if treated with a degree of respect.

Try this: you eat an XL bacon-double cheeseburger from burger kind every day for the next ten years, I'll smoke a joint every day for the next ten years.
We'll see who dies first.

Tigger

both are excess and greed

if you made healtry shakes out of the dope it'd be a no brainer (sic)

Overheal

I dont think its the drug more than it is the person using it.

For example the gateway argument really doesnt stand; I've smoked cannabis on and off for years. Smoked cigarettes on the odd occassion: still do. Am I addicted to either? No. Am I at risk of trying other things? No: I dont like the thought of try E or Acid or Coke. Last time I had either was Rag Week tbh.

Tigger

Overheal wrote: »

I dont think its the drug more than it is the person using it.

For example the gateway argument really doesnt stand; I've smoked cannabis on and off for years. Smoked cigarettes on the odd occassion: still do. Am I addicted to either? No. Am I at risk of trying other things? No: I dont like the thought of try E or Acid or Coke. Last time I had either was Rag Week tbh.

i'm going to say this slowly so everyone can listen and understand

there are two gateway drugs in this country
alcohol and ciggatettes