Rithrandil
SasqWatch
I'd let them die too. And smokers.
Edit: Well, not die. But not be covered, etc etc etc. I lump cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs all together in a "Why should I have to cover your idiocy"? group.
Interesting cannabis case in the UK
- Thread starter Benedict
- Start date
I'd let them die too. And smokers.
Edit: Well, not die. But not be covered, etc etc etc. I lump cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs all together in a "Why should I have to cover your idiocy"? group.
dteowner
Shoegazer
I'll assume Ubereil was referring to alcohol abusers as opposed to just users, but I'd lean toward a more proactive approach. I suppose "let them die" would have to suffice, though.
I wasn't really asking what you want to do, I was asking what you do in fact do at this very moment. Since it's pretty much the same thing I'd say you should treat them like you treat alcoholics.
Übereil
Übereil
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
Well, we don't have universal health care right now, so I suppose if they have insurance they get treated readily.
P
pibbur
Guest
I don't want to sound holier-than-thou, but this is an issue where we differ considerably in our views. Everyone makes mistakes, even idiotic mistakes, for some the consequences are more severe than others. Who am I to judge them?
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
I don't know, but who are they to make me foot the bill for their mistakes? I wouldn't think it's fair for society to have to cover my medical bills because I eat like crap and don't exercise and am like 80 lbs overweight. People have the right to be stupid, they don't have the right to make me pay for their stupidity (and I don't have the right to make them pay for mine).
dteowner
Shoegazer
Testify, Brother Rith! Amen!
As Rith says, forced distribution of consequence isn't fair/correct either. I don't see that denying such distribution equals judging, either.
As Rith says, forced distribution of consequence isn't fair/correct either. I don't see that denying such distribution equals judging, either.
P
pibbur
Guest
@rithrandil, dteowner: I understand your views.
This is an issue where we'll remain fundamentally disagreed (is that correct English?). Fair enough.
This is an issue where we'll remain fundamentally disagreed (is that correct English?). Fair enough.
Thoth
Sentinel
- Joined
- January 17, 2009
- Messages
- 354
Don't fret! I'm here to offer my expert opinion 
I agree that pot should be legalized, but I also think it's a shame that we get to be legally addicted to something else and before anyone cries about the word "addicted" just keep in mind that people get addicted to reality TV and junk food so I think it's safe to say that they'll be addicted to pot as well.
I've never done pot nor do I ever plan on it. I've had enough friends that have done it to realize how retarded one gets when on it. Besides, alcohol has never steered me wrong and I don't plan on abandoning it for filthy hippy hash
I agree that pot should be legalized, but I also think it's a shame that we get to be legally addicted to something else and before anyone cries about the word "addicted" just keep in mind that people get addicted to reality TV and junk food so I think it's safe to say that they'll be addicted to pot as well.
I've never done pot nor do I ever plan on it. I've had enough friends that have done it to realize how retarded one gets when on it. Besides, alcohol has never steered me wrong and I don't plan on abandoning it for filthy hippy hash
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 354
The problem I have with your statement is that a lot of people who get addicted to substances (legal or illegal) have underlying issues over which they have no, or little, control; messed up childhood, severe anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, family or friends dying etc.
There is also the problem of drawing a line. When is someone addicted? Does food count? TV? Computer games? Should people trying to commit suicide who fail be allowed treatment, since it could be argued that they made a 'stupid' decision? I could keep going but I guess you get my point.
The fear I have with these kinds of pretty arbitrary limitations on who gets what, is how far it could go. It could possibly go so far as to not allowing most poor people health care since they exercise less and eat less healthy, therefore making 'stupid' decisions. Since this is your argument, allow me to punch a hole in it; they have no choice: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5/17/AR2009051702053.html?sid=ST2009051801162.
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
And there are a lot who don't. I was abused as a kid, am bipolar, suffer from various anxiety disorders, etc. I'm not addicted to anything. So I don't have much sympathy for that argument. At what point do people become responsible for their own actions?
Not a medical expert or a psychologist. I'm sure someone here can tell you roughly where that line is.
No, I think it should be legal for someone to do it if they so wish.
I've already read that before. I'm already not really in favor of paying for this in the first place, so if you want to"punch holes in my argument, fine, I'll revise it then: No free health care for anyone.
But if you want to institute some sort of 'fix' to the price of basic necessary foodstuffs for the poor, fine with me. I have no issue with that. But my point remains if we do free healthcare: for people who do things *of their own free will*, why should I have to pay if they make a mistake? I'm 80 lbs overweight, I sure as hell should NOT be covered by any sort of universal plan.
Well, I guess we have different opinions there. I would gladly pay for your health care, no matter what your reasons were. This was a derail anyway 
Edit: To me this is, in a way, a very selfish thing to do: If the people who have a potential effect on my life are well fed, healthy, feel secure and have a decent job, then there is less chance of them becoming criminals and/or addicted to substances, since their lives are more satisfying.
Alcohol steers a lot of people wrong, considering it is involved in a huge part of violent crimes. Ask junkies which drugs they think are the most dangerous ones and they will mention alcohol as one of them. I still don't think it should be illegal though, since I believe it would only lead to more opportunities for organized crime networks.
For me it seems like this: Governments all over the world has tried to control supply and/or demand of drugs through laws. The problem with trying to enforce total prohibition laws is, that to be successful seems to require some pretty extreme actions to be taken, such as create an Orwellian society where everything is monitored. Steps in this direction has already been taken, still without any effect.
To me it feels like a society with more and more direct control over its citizens should be a last resort, not the first. Try some other options first, before going down that road.
Edit: To me this is, in a way, a very selfish thing to do: If the people who have a potential effect on my life are well fed, healthy, feel secure and have a decent job, then there is less chance of them becoming criminals and/or addicted to substances, since their lives are more satisfying.
Alcohol steers a lot of people wrong, considering it is involved in a huge part of violent crimes. Ask junkies which drugs they think are the most dangerous ones and they will mention alcohol as one of them. I still don't think it should be illegal though, since I believe it would only lead to more opportunities for organized crime networks.
For me it seems like this: Governments all over the world has tried to control supply and/or demand of drugs through laws. The problem with trying to enforce total prohibition laws is, that to be successful seems to require some pretty extreme actions to be taken, such as create an Orwellian society where everything is monitored. Steps in this direction has already been taken, still without any effect.
To me it feels like a society with more and more direct control over its citizens should be a last resort, not the first. Try some other options first, before going down that road.
Last edited:
We surely do not need more government control.
In alcohol education classes, you are told that alcohol is the most dangerous drug.
Why? The first thing to leave you is good judgement.
You can watch the nightly news to see were this leads.
But this is not pot versus alcohol.
What is wrong with taking personal responsibility for your actions.
Actions done with a good conscience toward a higher power.
COMPASSION for others is the most important thing!
Followed closely by mercy, for mercy covers a multitude of transgressions.
I am a civil libertarian. Do as you please. Let your actions effect nobody but you.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 50
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
Absolutely agree - so long as your actions harm no one but yourself I am against state intervention.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
Thanx Guys!
I am old, but maybe I have learned not to be such a fool.
I don't care for people or governments that wish to push there ideas or values on others. nuff said.
Much respect to you all that make this site special.
I am old, but maybe I have learned not to be such a fool.
I don't care for people or governments that wish to push there ideas or values on others. nuff said.
Much respect to you all that make this site special.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 50
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
Not sure where to put this. I considered the daily smile, but that may be slightly insensitive, tbh.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/14/cocaine.traces.money/index.html
Best news story ever.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/14/cocaine.traces.money/index.html
Best news story ever.