Decriminalize meth?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-12-2013, 11:54 PM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(21-12-2013 12:55 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(21-12-2013 12:30 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Meth can also cause the recipient to act out with extreme violence towards others,

So can alcohol.
Are you suggesting a return to prohibition perhaps?
Sure work on alcoholic problems sensibly by all means, while keeping the relatively newcomers well at bay,...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2013, 12:19 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(21-12-2013 11:54 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(21-12-2013 12:55 AM)Chippy Wrote:  So can alcohol.
Are you suggesting a return to prohibition perhaps?
Sure work on alcoholic problems sensibly by all means, while keeping the relatively newcomers well at bay,...

No stupid I am not suggesting a return to prohibition. I am suggesting that public policy should be evidence-based and not on the opinions of idiots like you.

Current public policy--because of idiots like you--is irrational, unfair and arbitrary.

Since alcohol is highly unlikely to to be prohibited and it alone causes more harm than all of the other recreational drugs combined it is egregiously unjust to make criminals of those that happen to choose to use another recreaional drug.

All other recreational drugs should be treated just as alcohol is currently treated under law. There is no scientific or otherwise evidentiary reason to privilege alcohol users.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2013, 12:47 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(22-12-2013 12:19 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(21-12-2013 11:54 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Are you suggesting a return to prohibition perhaps?
Sure work on alcoholic problems sensibly by all means, while keeping the relatively newcomers well at bay,...

No stupid I am not suggesting a return to prohibition. I am suggesting that public policy should be evidence-based and not on the opinions of idiots like you.

Current public policy--because of idiots like you--is irrational, unfair and arbitrary.

Since alcohol is highly unlikely to to be prohibited and it alone causes more harm than all of the other recreational drugs combined it is egregiously unjust to make criminals of those that happen to choose to use another recreaional drug.

All other recreational drugs should be treated just as alcohol is currently treated under law. There is no scientific or otherwise evidentiary reason to privilege alcohol users.

You get the Muffs ad hominem medal for that little diatribe!

Your faith in evidenced based research may hold a somewhat unjustified slant relevant to human nature. Alcohol comes across as a social fait accompli historically, while the new kids on the block, are yet another social problem. Many people seem to handle alcohol reasonably well. To argue that new drugs, such as meth, need to be viewed more leniently is to exacerbate the essential problem in my opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2013, 01:16 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(22-12-2013 12:47 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Your faith in evidenced based research may hold a somewhat unjustified slant relevant to human nature.

What does that mean? I am unable to parse it.

Quote: Alcohol comes across as a social fait accompli historically, while the new kids on the block, are yet another social problem.

No, there is nothing special about alcohol. In many cultures where alcohol is not the normative recreational drug people use opium, Khat, Kava etc in the same way that we use alcohol.

Quote: Many people seem to handle alcohol reasonably well.

Many people handle all drugs reasonably well.

US Airforce pilots on long-haul flights are prescribed methamphetamine as are the members of special operations groups when they need to stay awake. Most people that use methamphetamine don't commit violent crimes and that pilots can use methemphetaime without any impairment of their piloting ability suggests that it is safer to use methamphetamine and operate a vehicle than it is to use alcohol and operate a vehicle.

Quote: To argue that new drugs, such as meth, need to be viewed more leniently is to exacerbate the essential problem in my opinion.

There is nothing new about cannabis, heroin, cocaine, amphetamine and methamphetamine. The problem with your opinion is just that, it is just an opinion that is uninformed by by any evidence.

One of the reasons we can't get any sanity in drug-related public policy in Australia is because of ignoramuses like you. A person that is intoxicated with alcohol is just as dangerous as a person that is intoxcicated with cannabis when they are driving a car; similarly a person that is intoxiicated with cannabis that stays home is just as harmless as a person that is intoxicated with alcholol that stays home.

Can you even cite one reason why the house-bound methamphetamine user should be treated differently in law to the house-bound alcohol user?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chippy's post
22-12-2013, 02:59 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
Take whatever you like.
But medical expenses occured as a result of taking it are all yours.

Aspiring optimist
Eternal Pragmatist.
With the uncanny ability to see all sides in every argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2013, 06:16 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
Common sense can't be googled.

Comparing alcohol and meth is stupid.
There is distinctive difference between use and abuse.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
22-12-2013, 07:38 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
I am torn over this subject as I feel that anybody should be free to do what they want with regards to drugs, however it clashes with what I deem as a "recreational" drug.

They should legalise weed and then have a smoke and decide upon what else to legalise Smokin

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
22-12-2013, 07:54 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(22-12-2013 01:16 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(22-12-2013 12:47 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Your faith in evidenced based research may hold a somewhat unjustified slant relevant to human nature.

What does that mean? I am unable to parse it.

Quote: Alcohol comes across as a social fait accompli historically, while the new kids on the block, are yet another social problem.

No, there is nothing special about alcohol. In many cultures where alcohol is not the normative recreational drug people use opium, Khat, Kava etc in the same way that we use alcohol.

Quote: Many people seem to handle alcohol reasonably well.

Many people handle all drugs reasonably well.

US Airforce pilots on long-haul flights are prescribed methamphetamine as are the members of special operations groups when they need to stay awake. Most people that use methamphetamine don't commit violent crimes and that pilots can use methemphetaime without any impairment of their piloting ability suggests that it is safer to use methamphetamine and operate a vehicle than it is to use alcohol and operate a vehicle.

Quote: To argue that new drugs, such as meth, need to be viewed more leniently is to exacerbate the essential problem in my opinion.

There is nothing new about cannabis, heroin, cocaine, amphetamine and methamphetamine. The problem with your opinion is just that, it is just an opinion that is uninformed by by any evidence.

One of the reasons we can't get any sanity in drug-related public policy in Australia is because of ignoramuses like you. A person that is intoxicated with alcohol is just as dangerous as a person that is intoxcicated with cannabis when they are driving a car; similarly a person that is intoxiicated with cannabis that stays home is just as harmless as a person that is intoxicated with alcholol that stays home.

Can you even cite one reason why the house-bound methamphetamine user should be treated differently in law to the house-bound alcohol user?

You are a bombastic, rude, and egocentric pseudo intellectual.

Evidence based rationales are not instant panaceas. It is not enough to google information relating to your preferences without any elaboration. Even without considering the ethical issues relevant to any "findings" there are the issues of fudged science serving vested interests to be considered.

As for the house bound addict, being justified any drug of his choice, such thinking, from the particular to the general, fails to consider the social ramifications.
By elevating the needs of addicted people, far from solving the intrinsic problems , you simply provide ad hoc alleviation.Perhaps there is better help!

Big Pharma has received some bad (researched) press, over staples such as anxiolictics and anti depressants, not to mention their prescription to children, and may not be the best of arbiters for hard drug cleansing.

I would prefer a passive opinion any day to thoughtless dogma allowed to run riot.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2013, 01:46 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(22-12-2013 06:16 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  Common sense can't be googled.

Science exists because "common sense" is inadequate.

Quote:Comparing alcohol and meth is stupid.

No it isn't.

[Image: f1cyty.png]

Note: The category Amphetamine includes methamphetamine.

(From Nutt et al (2007))

Further, alcohol ingestion has no medical value and it has been conclusively demonstrated to impair cognition and reaction time. Methamphetamine on the other hand has several medical applications and it has been demonstrated to maintain cognitive ability and reaction time where fatigue would have otherwise occurred.

Quote:There is distinctive difference between use and abuse.

Yes there is and methamphetamine just like alcohol can be used and abused. Chronic alcohol abuse leads to chronic illness and sometimes liver failure but that has not been deemed grounds for prohibiting the supply and usage of alcohol let alone criminalising its users merely on the grounds of its use.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chippy's post
23-12-2013, 01:57 AM
RE: Decriminalize meth?
(22-12-2013 07:54 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  You are a bombastic, rude, and egocentric pseudo intellectual.

You are an ignorant old fool that couldn't present an argument if your old and worthless hide depended on it.

Quote:Evidence based rationales are not instant panaceas.

So now you are questioning the concept of evidence.

Quote:It is not enough to google information relating to your preferences without any elaboration.

You should take your own advice.

Quote: Even without considering the ethical issues relevant to any "findings" there are the issues of fudged science serving vested interests to be considered.

So all evidence that doesn't support your arbitrary opinion is fraudulent?

Quote:As for the house bound addict, being justified any drug of his choice, such thinking, from the particular to the general, fails to consider the social ramifications.

How are those "social ramifications" different from those that result from alcohol abuse?

Quote:By elevating the needs of addicted people, far from solving the intrinsic problems , you simply provide ad hoc alleviation.Perhaps there is better help!

The only "needs" that are being "elevated" are those of alcohol abusers. There is no good reason to automatically criminalise a methamphetamine users versus leave alcohol abusers free to do as they like (and only intervene when they break other laws).

Quote:Big Pharma has received some bad (researched) press, over staples such as anxiolictics and anti depressants, not to mention their prescription to children, and may not be the best of arbiters for hard drug cleansing.

Mandatory conspiracy theory.

Quote:I would prefer a passive opinion any day to thoughtless dogma allowed to run riot.

Policy not based on evidence is dogma.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: