Nothing to do with arcanum

Just posted somethin over in the arcanum 2 forum that made me think of this. Why would someone do drugs? What, it gives you a good time? Yeah, for a little bit. Then you have to buy more. Not only would it end up very expensive but if you get caught it could ruin your plans for the future depending on what they were. I just always thought drugs were stupid. If you have to use drugs to have good time, you are extremely boring person. If you do drugs because your life sucks, CHANGE YOUR LIFE!! I'd never touch the stuff. I know people that do but I have no desire whatsoever to try them. Well, I'll get off my soap box now. That's my rant for the day

 

Drugs are bad Mm'kay?

 

So you don't drink then? It's the most common drug in the world and virtually everybody imbibes it when they go out to have fun.

 

Phoenix. You sure are naive. Did youn learn all those questions from a Saturday morning special T.V show?

 

Actually, I agree with Phoenix. Apart from caffeine and alcohol I avoid drugs like the plague. They're generally a VERY BAD IDEA. As a biologist I know what a fair number of these things do to you (won't explain here because I can't be arsed) and in some cases it scares the shit out of me as to what they actually do. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who involves themself in drugs (even cannibis, which is still rather harmful when smoked, despite it's benificial effects) is either stupid or ignorant AND stupid. :/

 

I am glad Ferret agrees with me, but I am curious as to how you think of me as naive campos.

 

I'm with the small furry one. I like to drink from time to time, and I certainly enjoy my morning cup of joe, but I've never seen the allure of the more "hard" drugs. It just doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Maybe I'm more level-headed than I let on. As for marijuana, I think it's ridiculous that it's illegal and tobacco is not, but that doesn't mean I smoke either. I just find it funny that people are so anti-marijuana in the states, but it's okay to drink.
How many people have ever known a violent drunk?
Okay, now how many people have ever known a violent stoner?
"Hey, man, I'm gonna kick your ass as soon as I feel like getting off this sofa."

 

Yeah, I don't see anything wrong with drinking as long as you can keep it and yourself under control. Know your limits.

:lol: I like that :lol:

 

Phoenix, sorry but I dont feel like explaining the obvious. Mabey your just really young. Sorry if I made it sound like a personal negative attack. There isnt enough room for me to type why, what reasons and for what effects people do drugs. But suffice it to say, your reasons are common peak of the moutain cliched Mr. Rogers sterotypes. I know alot of people who do drugs and alot of people who dont. Some in each category are stupid and ignorant as a cow or brilliant and wise beyond comparison. From out of work Mormons, to pot head mediators for multi-million dollar companies. Thats as much as I want to elaborate on that subject. Persefone, its not as anit-marijuana as you think. In recent polls more people are for legalization then against and I am talking nationaly. In Santa Cruz the city handed out medicinal marijuana to people on the steps of City Hall and told the Feds who busted to local Medical Cannibus office to Fuck off. ATM you can grow up to 3lbs per year for personal medicinal use here in Cali. Who is against marijuana? Big business, government for the usual money reasons. It will be legal in 15 to 20 years imo. Booze. shit .. thats the "I need to have a good time" item. I dont even want to go into that socially acceptable killer. If someone drinks to catch a "buzz" then STFU about drugs. Booze in moderation can be alot harder to handle then some drugs. But i totally agree that moderation is key. Abuse can happen with anything. Snowmane, did you see the word "stupid" pertaining to his opinion? I dont think so. Never said the reasons were "stupid". And I never said he was "wrong" Read again.

 

First off, that's Mr. Rogers. Secondly, a lot of his reasons aren't stupid. Drugs are a waste of money, they are dangerous, and they can ruin your life. Shooting up and sharing a needle and you could get AIDS. I certainly consider that a life-ruining thing. Although I don't personally consider pot to be an extremely harmful drug, it can lead to doing harder drugs, which are very harmful. I guess that it's a personal choice though, and if you want to do it, and fuck yourself up, then go ahead. It's not for me to play the almighty hand of justice or whatever. Just don't hurt others.

Lastly, I think that it's very obnoxious to dissagree with some one or tell them that their wrong, then not explain why. If you're going to say something, you better be prepared to explain yourself.

 

Campos, you're a fuckwit. You've edited that post of yours 5 times, and it's still rife with mistakes and general fuck-ups.

Yeah, some people can control pot, and others can't. Marijuana is illegal, alcohol is not. Nor is tobacco (although it should be), but that's all beside the point - they're all drugs of some sort, they all affect the body, and there are problems with all of them. Don't try and paint pot as some sort of ugly duckling either.

What's with the unsupported statistics as well? I really doubt more people are for legalisation than not - how many people took the poll, where do they live etc etc etc? The poll might support what you say, but that doesn't make the poll accurate.

Now shut the fuck up.

 

No I have edited it 10 times. Most of that was my modem freaking out. I think. Go look up the stats on what I have said yourself you know how to browse on the internet. Shut the fuck up? Name calling? :lol: go take some Valium. Yet another edit.

 

Let's upgrade that to 10 edits, and it's still rife with mistakes and general fuck-ups.

I do believe that qualifies him for the coveted "ultra fuckwit" award.




Campos, I'm just yanking your chain. No offense intended.

 

So Iam not the greatest typer. Doesnt bother me Fuck ups, what ever they are, aside what I wrote is easy to understand.

 

Well, if you ignore all my reasons, there is at least one that surely you could agree with. If you get caught taking drugs, then later in life an employer is looking at hiring someone new and you have applied for the job, and he has to decide between you and someone else with equal talents, he will more than likely choose the one who does not have a history with drugs. The other person actually probably wouldn't have to have quite equal talents, they could be below yours with some employers and they would still go for the one with no drug history. BTW, did Mr. Rogers ever talk about drugs?

 

I never disagreed with your reasons. If you get busted and convicted for FELONY drug possesion/trafficing. It probably would hurt your chances. Unless your a actor or sports star. Depends on the felon ( excluding violent) vs the type of job to some extent. If the felony was for fraud then no way would that person get a job with a financial institution. If it was to say sell cars and the felon drug guy didnt get it and he/she was very qualified and someone else got it who was not as qualified. Then the employer better come up with a reason other then drug felony if contested. Which the employer probably would. After 7 years from conviction you dont have to list any felonies. But yea having a Felony drug conviction wouldnt' help.

 

Now now folks...
I can see how, from living in Cali, Campos might think the country in general is fairly pro-legalization, I actually did know about that medical growing law. HOwever, there are still far too many republicans in the country who associate pot with dirty useless hippies for it to become legalized, and the same republicans get way too many campaign contributions from big tobacco for it to be illegal. So I don't really see much changing. I do know that in Maryland the state did a buyout program of tobacco farmers to encourage them to grow other products. It worked well enough that there are only a lone few left down in the south part of the state (and this was as of 2 years ago... they may be finished now too).
Pot is no more of a gateway drug than alcohol. I think you either have an addictive personality or you don't. And if you DO have one, you should be smart enough to steer well clear of any severely mind-altering substances. Tobacco included.
"Do not call up that which you can not put down"
Anyway, my support for the potheads just goes back to my vaguely libertarian leanings.. which is that I think you should be able to do whatever you want to your own body as long as you're not affecting others. Ie, drink yourself into oblivion if you want, but the minute you get behind the wheel of a car, or pick a fight, or something like that, THEN you're breaking the law. I think darwinism is severely underrated in our society, and the fact that we no longer allow for survival of the fittest may very well be the death of the human race. Or maybe I'm just tired and crabby.
You don't wanna wear your seatbelt? Fine with me man, but you damn well better teach your kids to. And don't expect my taxes to pay for your hospital bills when you go flying through your windshield.
So it comes down to.. I'm glad we have such optimistic and intelligent young-uns on this forum. It gives me hope for the future. Of course it's stupid to take drugs. Any argument to the contrary is ludicrous. I'm just saying I don't think it should be "the man" who tells us what we can drink, smoke, or fuck.
:hippy:
peace out, Yo.
'seph'

 

Persephone, Living in Cali DOES NOT make me think diffrently about the rest of the country. Well at least not about marijuana. I know what I am talking about. Sorry. Howerver, I was mistaken. It was 80% of people polled in a NATIONAL poll wanted legalization for medical reasons and 40% for full legalization and this poll took place in 2002 by Time/Cnn. Needed to look through my files. Many polls out there all the numbers rising for legalization each year. Hell, in a poll 50% of Canada wanted leglization. Legalization will happen no doubt about it. In some ways its already legal is certain places. We will see some issue reguarding legalization on state ballots from now on. The states will force the federal governmemt to finally accept it as each state will slowly but surley legalize marijuana. Not that California should be a templet for the rest of the country on this matter, but some counties refuse to help the F.B.I with investigations,information, arrests, or servalence pertaining to passed state laws reguarding marijuana that federal laws dont reconize. Sorry about the bad typing, for those of you with issues

 

Things I have been saying for a long time:

If it involves needles, it is not recreational. And if it is medicine, why aren't you getting better?

I have tested a lot of drugs in my time, but I never thought it should be manditory.

Seriously, there are a lot of points being raised here.

Drug dependency. I have a good friend who is drug dependent. About $40 US a day. They are immunosupersent drugs. He had a liver transplant. Oh, that's his co-pay, he has a good medical plan. Another drug dependent friend is a clinical depresive. 5 drugs a day. 2 for depresion, 3 for side efects. The taxpayer picks up the tab, because the drugs give him the shakes. He had been a factory certified VW mechanic.

O. K. then there is addiction. Most adictive drugs run on the dopamine cycle. The most adictive drug is nicotine. Hands down. Tightest bond to the dopamine receptors, yet easily flushed. Cocane, heroin, & alchohol all run on the dopamine link.

Next there is recreation. Many of these drugs are on the seritonin cycle, including LSD, MDA, XTC & a lot of other TLDs. These have a self limiting quality. Abuse them, & they ain't fun no more. Still, there are some that do abuse these drugs. They mostly get to the emergency room in time.

Then there is marijuana & other canibus products. You don't have to smoke it, & unlike nicotine, these are not harmful to the body if not contained in smoke & inhaled. Of course, the research into canibus products has been at a standstill for years due to lack of funding & test product.

Then there is the law. There didn't used to be a heroin problem in Brittan, but sometime in the '60s we got the brits to copy our drug laws. Now they do have a problen, & we have a new industry supressing that problem. Of course, just recently, the brits have reevaluated the way they will handle soft drugs, the canibus products. The problem is the laws. If they could buy needles, they wouldn't have to share. If the drugs were legal, they would be cheap & the crime would be down. The would be pure & overdoses would go down. There is a CURE for heroin addiction. But they can't get it. They get Methodne. Read William Bouroghs, his early, coherent, stuff. (A productive, healthy, & long lived junkie BTW.)

I could sing in this key for a looooong time, but if anyone wants to do something destructive and/or fun to his or her body, what busness is it of yours? And the only thing the government should have to do with it is to insure weight, measure, & purity. A traditional role.

We thould it would be legalized in 5 - 10 years back in the '60s. A lot of progress on that one. Yeah.

Recomended reading, "The Emporer Wears No Clothes" Jack Herrer. (Spelling?)

 

A search on CNN.com for "marijuana legalization poll" came up with the MOST recent article having been in October of 2002. At that time:

So Campos is only fudging his numbers a teensy bit in his most recent post
Here 'tis
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/28/timep.politics.pot.tm/index.html

EDIT: Bill Bennet, btw, is the guy who was recently arrested on charges of gambling, I'm pretty sure.