Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a hot proposition. I want to wipe out all the gray areas in chemical dependency -- is it a crime? is it a disease? should it be illegal or should it be treated? how far should we go in helping these people?
Let's legalize ALL the illegal mind-altering substances out there. make them available over the counter in any drugstore, in any strength. Hear me out. It is now up to you whether you are going to get yourself in trouble using. If you use anything in such a way that allows or causes someone else to get hurt, there's no dinkweeding around with court-ordered treatment or declaring you the victim of a disease. You'll be cooling your heels in the nearest prison, as if you had pulled a gun on a cop in front of witnesses while stone sober. Stop treating drunk drivers as victims of a chemical imbalance and slam them in prison the very first time they get caught driving under the influence. They can never own a car or drive a vehicle again. Period. Meanwhile, if you want to drink yourself to death, go right ahead. Nobody will have the right to stop you. Just don't hurt anyone else. And no, you will not be given a new liver if you destroy the old one.
You want substance abuse treatment? It's out there, and it's free for everyone. No matter how long you stay in treatment, and actually work towards the goal of being clean and sober, you will not lose your job (unless you were caught using on the job) or your insurance benefits (ditto). There will be NO court-ordered treatment, and if the intake screening reveals that you're checking yourself in somewhere just to get your mom or your boss off your back, you'll be refused service. If you don't really want to be clean, you can go hang.
Protection of the rights of criminal defendants? Not any more. If you kill someone driving drunk, or rape someone because booze impaired your judgement, or give someone AIDS by sharing a dirty needle with them, the victims and/or their families have the right to kill you any way they want. Germproof suits and fancy weapons will be provided free to these people upon request.
This is radical, I know, but it will save BILLIONS of wasted treatment dollars currently going to court-ordered scofflaws who plan to go out and get blasted again the first chance they get. People will be forced to take responsibility for their own behavior for the first time in decades.
I'm basing this on a statistic I read once, about what happened on Long Island when the ambulance drivers went on strike: medical emergencies dropped by 80%.
while I do not support this, there is one major advantage to this; drug violence in Mexico would be obliterated, stabilizing the country. Other than that and some of what he said, it is too drastic for right now.
I only disagree on Heroin...simply because it causes pretty permanent damage right off the bat to the brain requiring methadone or replacement. No real second chances.
Honestly I don't care if they are legal otherwise. If some one is doing drugs and looses everything, that's it...their life is pretty much a waster. Put in help if they quit, but if they are using I hope they like going freegan for their food and bridges for their shelter. They chose it, there is no blame to put else where really (you can say some people who were forced to take it, but after that situation they can quit), and it's not my job to donate my resources when I made the right choices.
Here's a hot proposition. I want to wipe out all the gray areas in chemical dependency -- is it a crime? is it a disease? should it be illegal or should it be treated? how far should we go in helping these people?
Let's legalize ALL the illegal mind-altering substances out there. make them available over the counter in any drugstore, in any strength. Hear me out. It is now up to you whether you are going to get yourself in trouble using. If you use anything in such a way that allows or causes someone else to get hurt, there's no dinkweeding around with court-ordered treatment or declaring you the victim of a disease. You'll be cooling your heels in the nearest prison, as if you had pulled a gun on a cop in front of witnesses while stone sober. Stop treating drunk drivers as victims of a chemical imbalance and slam them in prison the very first time they get caught driving under the influence. They can never own a car or drive a vehicle again. Period. Meanwhile, if you want to drink yourself to death, go right ahead. Nobody will have the right to stop you. Just don't hurt anyone else. And no, you will not be given a new liver if you destroy the old one.
You want substance abuse treatment? It's out there, and it's free for everyone. No matter how long you stay in treatment, and actually work towards the goal of being clean and sober, you will not lose your job (unless you were caught using on the job) or your insurance benefits (ditto). There will be NO court-ordered treatment, and if the intake screening reveals that you're checking yourself in somewhere just to get your mom or your boss off your back, you'll be refused service. If you don't really want to be clean, you can go hang.
Protection of the rights of criminal defendants? Not any more. If you kill someone driving drunk, or rape someone because booze impaired your judgement, or give someone AIDS by sharing a dirty needle with them, the victims and/or their families have the right to kill you any way they want. Germproof suits and fancy weapons will be provided free to these people upon request.
This is radical, I know, but it will save BILLIONS of wasted treatment dollars currently going to court-ordered scofflaws who plan to go out and get blasted again the first chance they get. People will be forced to take responsibility for their own behavior for the first time in decades.
I'm basing this on a statistic I read once, about what happened on Long Island when the ambulance drivers went on strike: medical emergencies dropped by 80%.
Discussion?
I think it's time to pull the plug on this forum if this is what we're being reduced to.
In response to Cliffie I give you a quote from Billy Madison that seems to fit quite well here: "what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
In response to Cliffie I give you a quote from Billy Madison that seems to fit quite well here: "what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
I didn't read it once I saw how long it was all I read was the title. So I guess I am not the dumbest in the room.
It think drugs and people's 'need' to use them is absolute b**ls**t. However, I'm a firm believer in something you said in your post: unless a person is somehow adversely affecting the rights of others, there should be no regulation from anyone pertaining to his/her actions. We all should have the right to our own destiny and/or doom. If one wants to kill oneself, there should be no restriction against it.
So yeah, you (I'm using 'you' in a general sense) want to blow your brains out with drugs, have at it. There should be no law against being a moron. But you are also responsible for the consequences of your behavior. That's called free agency. Most people in our modern world don't understand or condone the idea. Basically it means butt-out. People have a real hard time doing that.
The only thing I can't agree with you on is the 'killing you any way they want' thing. Seems rather like a step back to the Inquisition. Our founding fathers outlawed 'cruel and unusual punishment,' presumably to avoid sanctioned sociopathic behavior such as the Inquisition or burning 'witches' at the stake. If someone deserves to die for a crime, just get it over with. Sadism should have no part in it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
disagree, but...
