He's actually a pretty decent guy.
Apparently you have never had to deal with the disgusting nature of a person with an addiction to something like heroine. They will abuse anyone and anything they can if it furthers their chances of obtaining the drug. It ruins their lives and the lives of those around them.
Ron Paul makes sense, on some levels. He apparently hasn't thought some things through to their logical conclusion. He wouldn't garner my vote, if that interview is the extent of his opinion on the topic.
It is an issue of choice, not law. If parents don't instill good habits in their children, then their children develope their own habits.
That's ridiculous. Children will experiment. They push the envelope. It is part of being a kid. I wouldn't vote for any idiot that wanted to legalize and/or decriminalize drugs like heroine. Doing that only makes them look less dangerous to children not mature enough to understand.
But it also limits the criminal aspect of it. Countries that made drugs accessible, had experienced lower crime rates and a drop in usage. Amsterdam has less crime than almost any other city in the world. I think it should be an adult choice and that the drugs be sold over the counter, out of reach to restricted age groups.
That's working out ever so well with cigarettes and alcohol.
Playing big brother took the fathers away, the children became like the father and so on, ad-nauseum. The prison system brings in alot of money, drugs bring in more. Limiting usage, having stations for addicts to recieve limited supply. Like a mathedone clinic or as can be prescribed, they would only recieve small portions of the full prescription or appying safe dosage for users.
American lawmakers have been well aware of what's worked in Britain, France, and the Netherlands. There is just zero support for trying to control heroin addicts in the USA. In fact, last time I talked with a heroin addict she told me her methadone clinic had closed and she'd have to travel twice as far to a different one. So, I'm guessing that already negative public opinion on maintaining heroin addict's addiction is losing, rather than gaining support.
Sorry. I know two heroine addicts. They are disgusting. They had a kid together who is currently being neglected with the blessings of social services. They are useless members of society, living on the rest of us. Stealing, lying and cheating their way to their next fix. I would never support decriminalization. I believe any who support it are either blind, naive or addicted already.
I understand the anger because there's kids involved. A melding of drug addiction and parenting is never pretty.
To be fair, though, all drug addicts are different. Heroin and opiate (pill form) abuse are very similar. Because the problem is so widespread, I think restraint is in order, where applicable to our views.
There are good people that had it rough, and there are bad people that had it easy. Surprisingly, it takes all kinds to make a world populated by drug addicts. The USA has chosen to focus on education and reform, where drug addiction is concerned, instead of maintenance.
Well, I'm sure there has to be a better system. But, this type of addiction appears to be a monkey firmly planted on the back of the addict. From what I've been told by people, and my observation; once addicted to heroin only death or incarceration can make you stop. And methadone is simply keeping them high legally. It has not changed their behavior patterns.
I'd be more than happy to support any attempts at programs to assist these people (if there was any hope that they would work) but I consider the thought of making it easier to obtain the drug for those not already within the grips of addiction ludicrous.
Reform in the US has devolved into prison reform. Most addicts that go to prison use when they get out. That's the bottom line we need to worry about. I think our system is going about it properly, I think there should be accountability for letting one's self become addicted to hard drugs. But there also needs to be positive education. Christian programs have the best success rate, but that doesn't reflect well on a society that has a good portion non-Christian.
To maintain a drug addict's habit is to say, "Go ahead, I hope you'll come around soon and get clean."
Our way in the USA says, "Get clean, however you do it, or there's going to be consequences."
I think ours is perhaps the more adult way of dealing with drug addiction.
I don't know about ours being more adult. But, I think you are right. Christian programs do have a better success rate. I think maybe because they believe someone they've learned to love and respect is watching.
I've had a certain pastor correcting me for years when I try to accentuate the mighty, formidable aspects of God. He's like, "Try to think of Him more as a parent and a teacher."
The personal relationship we hear everybody talking about is real to the person saying it. So, sure, an addict that has this personal relationship with God wouldn't want to let Him down.
Emile I would bet that those two people spend all their money on the drugs, to the point where their children's health and their own suffers. Spend you money on the addiction, and you have virtually nothing left for food, hygiene, enjoyment of life, beyond the next fix. If someone was to help them with the provision of much lower-cost drugs, this would be a great leap forward for the welfare of the kids.
Why is the price of the drugs so high? Because it's illegal. Lots of people make millions out of the illegal marketing. This applies, surely, to all the addictive ilicit drugs.
On top of this, you have do-gooder people who throw up their hands in horror at "these evil people" who become addicted.
There are some good people, not necessarily of a christian persuasion, who work at the grass roots level with addicts. These are in the minority, I suggest. Those holier-than-thou good christian people, in the majority, are the ones preventing enlightened reform of the drug "problem."
My opinions here, open to rebuke, as I am sure will fly in here, but happy to be corrected if there is any well-informed, honest criticism.
Well, the two I know don't bother to work. They simply steal from family. I know of two others, one dead now and the other in jail with no chance of parole. They didn't work either.
You guys are confusing a valid argument for recreational drugs like marijuana with a foolish argument to legalize drugs that truly ruin the lives of those who take them and the lives of everyone that loves them.
Your argument to lower the cost makes no sense at all. Unless, of course, you are arguing that it would make trafficking unattractive. But, then it could easily be argued that the trafficker could make up the difference in volume.
You can pooh pooh the efforts of a good percentage of those attempting to make a difference, but I'd have to raise an eyebrow. One of the most successful programs for young addicts in our area is a Christian half way home that works solely on donations by the public. No government resources solicited.
Obviously, no one has found the cure all answer. But, I just can't see legalization as a viable option.
Why? Because their all inhuman? If it were readily availabe, but one had to work for it and it were controlled, then why not? If it were like that, parents could more easily keep their kids away. There would be no corner pushers and you wouldn't see it in schools. So why would it be a bad thing? I could see certain drugs remaining illegal, but pot, really?
Did you bother to read my post? I don't think pot should be illegal. But, I'll be honest, yours is the argument I might expect from a simpleton. Pot legalized would be used more often, more openly, and more kids would have access to it.
You were initially arguing for the legalization of heroine. Which I consider to be ignorant. That is the subject I was addressing before you became confused.
There are almost always minors hanging out at 7-11, asking strangers to buy them beer or cigarettes. Why not illegalize beer and cigarettes?
First. What the devil is illegalize?
Second, what is your point? That since we can't effectively limit who purchases some controlled substances that it would make sense to legalize heroine? How do you come to that conclusion? Are there drugs involved in your daily regime that might be prohibiting coherent thought?
Alchohol kills more people than drugs and tobacco combined, yet it's legal. Why? How can a government justify the legality of one potentially dangerous substance over another? It should all be legal or not at all.
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. The laws reflect the will of the people. And I can safely predict that the will of the people will not , in our lifetimes, be to legalize heroin.
If it were legal, it would be under control. As long as there are humans, there will be human habits. To keep it in age restricted environments, there would be less access for children. Our states would be able to double the revinue of that of the prison system and rehab clinics would open up where there was once a jail. I don't think it should be sold in 7-11's, maybe bar like environments. Which brings me back to the alcohol thing, if that's legal, so then should be all equally dangerous drugs. Alcohol kills 75,000 people a year, heroin; 5874... Which is the greater public more likely to use? It's not like anyone is being forced to drink or do drugs... There are 2 dials on the radio, you don't have to like the station others are listening to.
You must be joking, though probably not. You guys keep this up and you'll develop a following that might result in the ban of cigarettes and alcohol.. I doubt you'll whip up a support base for the ludicrous idea of selling heroine in bars legally. Well; hard core drug users would, of course, rally behind you. I doubt they make up a majority of the constituency in any demographic.
It's a pipe dream. Literally and figuratively.
Hard drugs are not legalised in Amsterdam, and they do have a major problem with hard drug usage, like other large cities.
Hey mm. Something has been nagging at me since you started this bizarre thread. How do you figure this subject falls into the category of religion and philosophy?
Most of the reason there is a problem in this country, is because of puritanical, christian piety. The government is run by a bunch of southern baptist, old money windbags and their opinion stinks. One of the reason marijuana is ilegal, is because of a southern baptists rantings. He said "The N-words are getting high and raping white women". He was a cotton magnate and knew hemp was a better material, so he did the best thing he knew to stop it. He scapegoated it by attaching morally reprehensible motives to it's users.
Of course, christians demonize everything, including members of their own society. Just because someone uses drugs, does not mean that they are like the few extreme cases. Did you ever stop to think that, if it were legal, addicts wouldn't lose their jobs, adding to their usage, in turn driving them to increasingly criminal behavior? If the christian right were stripped of it's power, this country would change, for the better.
Whatever, man. You do a good job of demonizing others. Sorry you lost your job due to drug addiction. I'm afraid, the industry I work in doesn't want strung out druggies on our job sites. You endanger our employees as well as yourself.
Believe it, or not, you can rid the world of Southern Baptists and their fundamentalist groupies and people with brains in their heads will still oppose ignorant ideas like legalizing heroine.
As to pot, it's already accepted in society. People who take pride in their work and companies who expect to produce a quality product don't expect to have to deal with it at work, anymore than we want a drunk on the jobsites. If this inhibits your freedom, you might rethink your work ethic.
I point out the idiocy of the belief, not the value of the person behind it. Though I tend to think that christianity warps a mind and creates highly insane mindsets. Copy and paste anything I've said that would look like the demonizing of an individual an I'll eat my words.
I didn't say that people should be allowed to use drugs at work, that's you putting words in my mouth. I was stating a simple opinion and you are using misplaced judgements about my character, to prove your argument. I only smoke pot and it doesn't affect my work ethic in the least. Of course I partake in my libation after work, not before or during. Like most responsible adults in this country, I like to separate work and play.
Where did I say that you were demonizing individuals? You appear to be quite adept at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Attempting, being the key word in that sentence. I didn't accuse you of that.
The reason I assumed (and yes, I did assume) that you were quite liberal as to the timing that you smoke a joint is because of your attitude. Very few people are this upset about the laws in America unless they find themselves inhibited by following a few social rules along with safe work practices.
There is nothing standing in the way of anyone responsibly smoking pot. Well, not anywhere I have lived so far. I don't know, do you live in a state where it is a felony to own some pot? Do those places exist anymore?
As I stated previously, you are attempting to take a valid argument (which is the legalization of pot) and strap it to a ridiculous argument that all drugs should be legalized. As long as you do that, you really don't have an intelligent argument.
Let me put my stance up, outright. I believe certain drugs should remain ilegal..., 1)Cocaine 2)Heroine 3)Meth 4)Phenobarbitol and the list would continue. Basically I'm more for the legalization of pot, than any of the others. But it still boils down to personal choice...
Can you think of any reason it shouldn't be? Most of the inmates in jails and prisons, are non-violent users. To legalize pot would free up space for the real criminals; rapists, murderers and gangbangers/thugs.
I am not aware of anyone in jail because they smoked a little pot. Can you provide some statistics?
The BJS study, "Drug Use and Dependence, State and Federal Prisoners, 2004," reports that 12.7 percent of state inmates and 12.4 percent of federal inmates incarcerated for drug violations are serving time for marijuana offenses. Combining these percentages with separate US Department of Justice (DOJ) statistics on the total number of state and federal drug prisoners (BJS October 2005 Bulletin: "Prisoners in 2004" -- NCJ 210677) suggests that there are now approximately 33,655 state inmates and 10,785 federal inmates incarcerated for marijuana offenses.
Now, I need more information. Your initial claim was that the persons incarcerated were non violent users. Is the offense limited to lighting up a joint? If so, then I'm shocked. But, if we are talking about offenses like driving under the influence that resulted in an accident or distributing large quantities, then I don't really have a lot of sympathy for the person involved.
80% of all drug arrests are users, not dealers. If it were sold at venues and had proper marketing labels, street venders would go to prison for interstate commerse violations... A federal crime.
Arrests do not equate to incarcerations. I'm still curious what percentage of the prison population incarcerated on drug charges are casual drug users.
I'd like to see your source. This site http://ronmull.tripod.com/marijuana.html is in dispute of your figures.
An excerpt; marijuana prisoners composed 2.7% of the state prison population and 11.8% of the federal population
It's a moot point, really. I am in agreement that marijuana use should be legalized.
You asked me what percentage were users, not pot smokers.
Emile R4,451 postsJoined: 9 months agoHubs: 21Followers: 98
Posted 20 hours ago
Arrests do not equate to incarcerations. I'm still curious what percentage of the prison population incarcerated on drug charges are casual drug users
Ok. If you can't support your argument, the usual mo is to attempt to muddy the waters by attempting to imply that the question was a different one. Either way, as I said. I agree that pot use should not be illegal, whether I find your arguments valid, or not.
The government can't stop everyone from using one substance or another, the best way to fight it, is to use restraint of law. We encourage the police to invade our privacy and arrest us in our own homes, simply by enjoying our time alone.
Ok. That's incredibly dramatic and not really true, but if that's the way you feel perhaps you've had some unfortunate experiences. I would assume the police force has better things to do than monitor whether or not I choose to light up in the privacy of my own home.
I think it's more about privacy though. It's the prerogative of a nosey neighbor to call the cops, if it were legal, we wouldn't be waisting tax dollars on invasions of privacy.
I'm still curious where you live? No one in this area deals with any of the issues you are using to back your case. Casual marijuana use is, at worst, a ticket. Nosey neighbors can call, but they will be ignored. Is it possible to obtain a search warrant for a misdemeanor violation? They can't invade your home without one.
Emile R, you seem to know a lot about pot. How come???????
I live in Florida and this state has no tollerance. It's mostly old folks and they are not liberally minded.
by Augustine A Zavala 8 years ago
Between drug and alcohol addiction, which one is more destructive?What are the emotional, monetary, and generational cost?
by unfazed4eva 9 years ago
HOW THE GOVERMENT CAN HELP ADDICTS!Im a recovering addict who has spent my fare share of time in the system to find the right rehabilitation.The biggest problem is that you can prescribe methadone till the cows come home,but unless you get to the underlying reason to why people took the drugs in...
by Michael Ward 7 years ago
Why do so many people want to blame drug dealers and not drug addicts?I ask this question because of something I saw yesterday. I saw a police officer taking away a 6 year old child for dealing drugs (obviously not a prison...6 year old kid after all). And I thought to myself, his circumstances put...
by Devika Primić 6 years ago
Do you feel sorry for a Drug Addict?It is never always the same for anyone. A drug addict can be picked on or won't be judged at all. Do you think a drug addict is a weak person for turning to such a bad habit?
by Cheryl 8 years ago
Do you think Heroin addicts should be treated with methadone?I think it's just insane that we treat heroin addicts with a drug that is just as addicting and deadly. So what that says is you will be arrested for heroin but if you go pay a doctor and then the pharmacy slaps on the magic federal label...
by Friendlyword 9 years ago
What should you do with drug addicts that rob their own Mothers? That leave their children alone to buy crack? Blow up their wife and child in a Meth lab? Maybe it's happening so often, we no longer think about it. But, people are being hurt and killed daily by drug addicts and their...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|