[quote=mlmpetert;805456]^
Quote:
Was the guy crazy because he was on meth or was he on meth because he was crazy? Like matty said I think its more about not putting people in prison for simple position or making people crimes more severe if committed on a regulated drug (ie armed robbery vs. robbery).
|
Hard drugs like meth and coke have been proven to literally destroy the brain to the point where parts of the brain responsible for basic decisions (like not punching someone because they didn't get your order right at McDonalds) are eroded. Maybe going after the users that have done nothing besides use is the wrong COA however the people that push these drugs need to be sent to jail.
Quote:
So my Grammy and others with arthritis or nerve pain shouldn’t have all treatment possibilities afforded to them?
|
Not saying that. However what the legalize pot movement will try to get people to believe is an effective treatment for all forms of pain and should serve as a replacement for narcotics. To me thats a big jump and an overstatement thats main purpose is to get people to join a cause under false pretenses.
Quote:
And people that receive relief from chiropractors or acupuncturist should be dismissed and put on prescriptions drugs or forced into surgery or some other form of therapy?
|
Maybe I'm biased against chiropractors and acupuncturist but thats because I've heard stories about promises of cures for everything from arthritis to cancer and people being charged more then they would have to pay for legitimate medical procedures backed by science and peer reviewed research. Obviously not every chiropractor and accupuncturist promises to cure cancer. However Chiropractic has been proven to be nothing more then a dangerous form of massage by legitimate medical journals. Accupuncture's benefits have only proven to be therapeutic/placebo and unnecessarily risky.
It shouldn't be illegal to perform chiropractic or acupuncture however more people should be informed of the risk, and it most certainly should be illegal for both types of practitioners to claim to treat diseases for which there is no medical evidence that they can provide treatment.
Quote:
You probably think hackie sacks are overrated too, don’t you brah?
|
Hackie sacks only marginally improve hand-eye coordination. People that use them should be put to death.
Quote:
Do you support making cigarettes illegal because you cant/couldnt control yourself from smoking or because others need to be controlled from marginally harming themselves overtime?
|
Part of it is experience. I ended up very sick in part because of Cigarettes, which is obviously a big part my fault. However the fact of the matter is while pot has some medical benefits, cigarettes have virtually zero. And even though it makes money from sin taxes and the like it also force others to pay inflated health care cost. Still it's a pointless drug that even as a legal substance causes more harm then good.
Then again at this point the only real way to fight against cigarettes is to have it further labeled as a social stigma, more then it already is. Making them illegal would be an ineffective deterrent.
Quote:
I just think your reasons sound selfish.
|
I never said my reasons weren't selfish. And though I didn't clearly state them as such I did infer with my "not in any rush to legalize pot" statement. Granted part of my reasons fall under the "for the good of society" column. However I won't deny that part of my reasons are in fact selfish.
Quote:
Why shouldn’t I be allowed to treat my body the way I want to treat it?
|
You should. However I, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't be allowed to overstate, or even outright lie, to get you to join my cause or undertake a certain form of treatment. In many cases thats what I see from the legalize pot movement, and while we're at it many alternative medicine practitioners (of course the topic of this thread is the war on drugs so I'll digress on said topic until an appropriate thread is created).
Then again simply saying "I want to get high while not destroying my liver" might not be as politically effective as "hey look, a treatment for cancer and glaucoma that big pharma doesn't want you to know about."