|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
Generally you're one of the more enlightened posters (or maybe I'm just biased because you're quite pro-Korea as opposed to any number of dreadfully annoying whiners) so it's a surprise to read you voice an opinion as rubbish as the above.
Alcohol a human tradition? Maybe, then by God so is opium. It's as old as sin. Heroin is from Morphine (a superior drug to Morphine in every respect), Morphine is from Opium, the effects of all three are almost the same (opium being the weakest - that's about the most interesting difference)....thus, people have been doing gear for centuries.
Alcohol - as much as I enjoy a drink myself - is a totally useless substance. It's a rubbish, totally rubbish, painkiller. It's a rubbish sedative. It's AWFUL for your health, it makes you gain weight which is bad for your heart, it's bad for your liver, it's addictive, it's totally destructive, it's responsible for a huge amount of violent behaviour. It's a crappy substance. In fact, ironically, one of the main arguments in favour of heroin prohibition that I accept is that we've enough problems with alcohol as it is - the last thing we need is adding to them by giving people the opportunity to do other things.
However, you've missed the point unfortunately. People rob convenience stores not because of drugs. They rob because of the prohibition and excessive black market expense of those drugs. If people wanna do smack, they're gonna do smack. Nothing we can do to stop them. It's an awful lot cheaper for all concerned if we let them do it legally. |
Well, I'm not saying whether it's the chicken or the egg, but heroin users tend to be scum. Maybe they are scum so they do heroin, maybe the heroin turns them into scum, or maybe it was all started by a few scummy people who got their scummy friends involved. But I don't think legalising it will make them into better people.
People who smoke marijuana in contrast are redeeming at times, and decriminalising pot hasn't changed their lives greatly, but has changed the legal system. I'm against prohibition of alcohol because it's not possible.
There are a few drugs that I don't think offer society anything good. Here are the main three:
-heroin
-crystal meth
-cocaine
If you do or sell any of these three drugs, stay away from me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aldershot

Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| people dying of aids or cancer should be allowed access to heroin. doctors should be the ones administering the heroin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aldershot

Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
and people travelling from barra de navidad to barra de nexpa should be allowed access to coke.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SHANE02

Joined: 04 Jun 2003
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:04 pm Post subject: Re: On why HEROIN should be de-criminalized in the West |
|
|
It is bad for you and is is adddictive
I agree that the body metabolizes the stuff well. Real well. The drug will fit exactly into the receptors that the body has for it's natural chemicals.. So the users brain will stop producing its own chemicals such as serotonin.
THIS IS WHY IT IS HIGHLY ADDICDIVE
So, Most people who use the stuff will love it and want more, and more, and more. THIS WILL LEAD TO HEALTH ISSUES.
No one cares too much about their health when their brain's pleasure centre is being stimulated.
I believe that what one puts into his or her body is up to the individual.
But I think its mis-information to say that heroin is not a cause of long term health problems, or that heroin is not highly addictive.
Remember: You don't have to be having physical withdrawal symptoms for your brain to know what it would like to do again.
Also, There is a major difference in the thought processes of a person who uses a drug recreation ally vs a person who is ill in hospital.
The person who is self medicating will have control over the process and is usually trying to avoid/escape something which is what leads to physiological addiction.
Opiates are given in usually very small dosages in hospitals to treat pain even now because of what the size and action of their molecules have on the human body. The dosage is controlled by a physician. Is there not less of a chance of becoming physiologically then physically addicted in this case?
A person who chooses to use opiates recreationally will maybe start with a very small dose. Very soon they will up that dosage and hence become physically addicted quickly.
Last edited by SHANE02 on Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:07 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
djsmnc

Joined: 20 Jan 2003 Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SPINOZA: Why don't you prove your theories by doing heroin and showing us how you maintain yourself on it over the course of a couple years?
Do the "Super Size Me" thing and document the whole experience. I'd really like to see you come out a winner and set the stage for decriminalization!
Sexy |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Qinella wrote: |
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Some drugs are dangerous. I wouldn't say any good ever came from crystal meth. People should not be allowed to take certain drugs, |
Nothing good ever came from cigarettes or fast food, either. Should these become illegal? Just how far are you willing to extend this logic?
Really, there is no logical argument for keeping drugs illegal. I've seen numerous attempts, but none have ever been internally consistent. |
Well, I wouldn't compare smokers and fatties with met addicts. Never heard of anyone prostituting themselves for a hamburger...well, at least not in real life.
[/img] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Woland
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with legalization, as long as sales are restricted and highly regulated.
For the record, there are highly functioning heroin addicts, but they are rare. The writer Anna Kavan was one:
| Quote: |
She became a heroin addict around 1926. Her addiction has been described as being, rather than recreational, her attempt at self-medication for her clinical depression, a condition barely acknowledged by the medical community at the time. Her intermittent mental illness, and the change of style in her work coincided with the premeditated change in her appearance and life-style after a breakdown. It was also at that time that she adopted the name of Anna Kavan, taken from a character in her novel Let Me Alone with whom she identified.
She went through detoxification many times before her death, but always returned to what she called her "bazooka". She continued to write, even during periods of mental illness/depression which she spent in clinics in Switzerland and in England. Her experiences there provided material for Asylum Piece.
Her life was also haunted by a remote, selfish and glamorous mother, on whom she based several of the mothers in her books. A dedicated writer, she was also a talented painter and interior decorator, and had acclaimed gallery exhibits in London.
She was a difficult personality all her life, but towards the end was even more anti-social and reclusive. She had a small collection of friends whose devotion overlooked her problems and eccentricities. Ironically, after a life of suicide attempts and heroin addiction, she died of natural causes in London on December 5, 1968. |
Here's the link to learn more about her: http://www.redmood.com/kavan/akbio.html
It doesn't sound like it was fun life, even if it was productive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| clandestine782 wrote: |
You guys jump all over me when I ask something about how to meet a Chinese wife and don't you know that not the world will not change if I do end up meeting such a girl.
This jerk starts a post about legalizing heroin and denies that it will do any damage and you can't call a spade a spade. (Or a troll a troll in this case.) What gives?
I could see if he wanted to talk about this topic in terms of cost/ benefit analysis. Milton Friedman (Libertarian/ Conservative Economist has talked about some reasons for the legalization of drugs along these lines in some of his writings).
This guy is just a troll. |
No, he's not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Demophobe

Joined: 17 May 2004
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sorry, but the more Spin lets himself be known, the more he's best avoided, troll or no troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satori

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lets start with pot. There is truly no reason pot should be illegal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Antrugha wrote: |
| Qinella wrote: |
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Some drugs are dangerous. I wouldn't say any good ever came from crystal meth. People should not be allowed to take certain drugs, |
Nothing good ever came from cigarettes or fast food, either. Should these become illegal? Just how far are you willing to extend this logic?
Really, there is no logical argument for keeping drugs illegal. I've seen numerous attempts, but none have ever been internally consistent. |
to take it a step further... alcohol can also be used in this argument |
"Nothing good ever came from alcohol"??? How dare you. Most of my sex life has come from alcohol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005 Location: $eoul
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flotsam wrote: |
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| Quote: |
I'd totally disagee about it not being addictive, about it not being bad for you, and that people can't die from it.
|
I think you've mis-read the OP. I said it is physically addictive (but addiction occurs gradually - not straight away), has numerous adverse effects on the continuous user (lasting physical or mental damage not being one of them, it would seem), and overdose and death are distinct possibilities (if uncommon) and H is a good way to totally **** up your life.
No-one in their right mind would argue that H is not addictive, not bad for your health in ways and doesn't kill. However, it's quite right to argue that public knowledge about heroin and other drugs (but particularly heroin) is full of ignorance and exaggeration. |
| spinoza, out of his mind with hubris wrote: |
| The truth: whilst heroin has numerous adverse effects on the continuous user (constipation, weight loss, reduced libido, others) there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that heroin causes lasting damage, mental or physical. |
I am for the legalisation of ganga, shrooms and a couple of other tittilies.
I am for the illegalisation of fast food, smoking, heroin(among a few others) and guns.
Why? Extrapolate--you're a smart guy when you think hard more than you blow hard.
Don't you think the firearms issue is enough to slaughter the logic of your argument? Give people guns, they kill each other. Give people crack, they *beep* themselves up and ruin the lives of those around them--it's not simply a matter of personal accountability. --Just because there's no secondhand smoke, doesn't mean there's not cancer.
Spinster, you're so enamored with the notion this thesis is cutting you failed to notice you have unwittingly outted yourself as a naif.
Do you still think communism is the way forward?
Communism--Guns--Heroin
There is a parallel. When you see it, let me know.
Funny, I never would have taken you for a sappy idealist... |
Poor stuff, Flotsie, I'm afraid.
Goodness only knows why you think guns are in any way a refutation to my argument. Before I rubbish that view, let me say this: the relative legality of guns simultaneosly coupled with the illegality of highly pleasurable and physically addictive drugs is [the worst possible combination. The black market drug trade in the US is empowered further than elsewhere and it hardly requires genius to understand why America's gun and gang related crime is truly ridiculous and pitiful for what - in almost every other respect - is an extremely successful society. The best possible combination would be the relative legality of heroin (and perhaps other hard drugs) and the strict prohibition of guns. But sadly it's too late for guns in the US. But it�s not too late to save yourselves from heroin, in the same way you saved yourselves from prohibition of alcohol and the pathetic mess that caused in the early 20th century, problems it tried to solve but made worse.....and why? Because folks wanna have a drink! Guns are of course embedded in the Constitution (insert shock emoticon) and the culture. This leads me on to....
Why guns and heroin are not remotely alike and a turn for the worst in the anti-prohibitionist view. One can only dream of a constitution and a culture whereby one has the RIGHT to enjoy opium-derivatives in the privacy of one's home or in a supervised pub-or-bar-like opium den of old. People in the United States are led to believe (and sadly do believe) that relaxed gun laws = greater individual protection. In actual fact, relaxed gun laws lead to monstrously high murder rates and the opposite of general safety. The whole point of the gun is to protect, to empower and to kill. This is wide open for exploitation, since, whilst guns really are a force for good in the hands of the able-minded, the unsavoury element have virtual free access to killing machines and - what's more, since drugs are prohibited and thus the domain of the criminal underworld - these forces in society are an extreme threat to general safety. People don't buy heroin to protect themselves and it's extremely difficult to end the life of another in a split second with a syringe full of diacetylmorphine. Did you take Lennon�s �Happiness is a warm gun� (a metaphor for a syringe full of warm smack) as a view of equivalence? A cheap shot, sorry. In short, lack of gun prohibition inevitably leads to more deaths and totally unacceptable societal mess for a developed country. Lack of heroin prohibition simply cannot be demonstrated to wind up with similar - that is, worse than prohibition - results. Indeed - as I said in my OP - lack of criminalization of heroin is likely (of course I cannot prove this either) to lead to FEWER deaths from overdoses. Read the medical evidence I gave in "Item of crap #3".
Morphine and Heroin are two of the most important discoveries in human history. Can you imagine having cancer, surviving a heart attack, being severely burned, being stabbed, breaking your leg, with no access to either? Unfortunately, these substances aren�t perfect, have a dark side (or a good side, depending on one�s perspective) and are open to exploitation. Why? Because taking either is one of the most pleasurable experiences available to human beings (I�m told). However, comparing the possible decrimininalization of drugs to relaxed gun laws which DO exist � man-made machines designed to empower and kill, they have no other purpose � is intellectual malfeasance unfortunately. Don�t you see? My argument is IRREFUTABLE! Because we�ve no evidence. I don�t have evidence that making heroin freely available for non-medical purposes wouldn�t lead to total chaos, and if that day ever arrives, I shall hold up my hands and admit that I was wrong. The evidence I do have is that the current system is a dreadful shower � it simply doesn�t serve any purpose other than provide an outstanding source of income to some of societies� most dangerous people, waste police time that might be better spent on furthering the pursuit of rapists, serial killers, pedophiles etc etc etc, impoverish people (usually originating from the bottom of society anyway) because of inflated black market prices and directly cause social decay and � in Britain at least � 90% of all reported crime. It's a socioeconomic parasite of immense proportions and it needs sorting out ASAP! Better the devil you know is a stretch IMO.
Last edited by SPINOZA on Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005 Location: $eoul
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
And furthermore!
I dealt with Flotsam seperately because he has at least given the matter genuine thought. I gave Tiger Beer the benefit of the doubt and assumed he mis-read what my argument is (no problem there - I mis-read stuff myself). But some of the other replies.....Jesus, you guys are STUPID! You've completely missed the point and even if I get out flashcards, even if you receive one-lash-per-word I speak, you still won't get it!
Pictures of extreme-case smack fiends? Deary me. Why deary me? Because - are these cases of people hooked on heroin in a non-prohibitionist society? No, you buffoons. That's what prohibition of drugs causes - it means people who become addicted (which is their own fault and nobody else's - you won't find ME disputing that!) cannot afford drugs. The black market controls what is, as I've admitted, an addictive drug, a dangerous drug, that isn't wonderful for one's short-term health. Side-effects, ladies and gentlemen. But there's an obvious difference between mere side-effects and complete personal neglect. That's not heroin usage you see in those crappy photos, it's malnutrition, it's desperate poverty, it's the lowest form of existence, it's criminalization of products that might best be re-examined as to their actual danger in more humane circumstances. It is not merely heroin that causes it - it is also inflated prices for a product that society can never hope to control cost-effectively, unless it changes its ways completely. We need a wholesale change. This lies at the very core of what is crap. What would alcoholics eventually look like if we banned alcohol tomorrow (which is relatively cheap and legal) and it quadrupled in price? Of course, the alcies of the world would just quit right away, huh?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tiger fancini

Joined: 21 Mar 2006 Location: Testicles for Eyes
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| Lets start with pot. There is truly no reason pot should be illegal. |
Dang right! Pass me the rizla...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yo!Chingo

Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Location: Seoul Korea
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that drugs should be legalized, but I also believe that employers should have the option to hire or not hire an individual based upon that use. Sure, go ahead and use but there will be consequences. I also believe that insurance companies should not be required to ensure someone that uses heroin, meth, etc... If you want to fuc# up your life, so be it, but making the rest of society pay in higher rates for insurance and medical care is quite another story.
I see those who use drugs as timebombs and maybe their drug use will weed them out of the gene pool. Oh, anyone who uses drugs and produces offspring b/c of their irresponsiblity should not receive public assistance of anykind. Actually I believe that their should be compulsory birthcontrol for females that use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|