Drugs?

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 21 2003 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheZeroOne
Ok we're gonna stop this right now. First thing is first you (Idiots) ever heard of amsterdam? Yeah they had this crazy idea that all drugs should be legal. I know several people myself who not only have visited, but lived there and you know what this unseen consequence that (you NARROW minded little bastards said would happen didn't in fact their crime rate is negligible and that deals with those who have a natural tendencies to steal uh.... whats.....that......called....duh oh yeah it's kleptomaniacs.

now wheres your fight venus? that will show you narrow minded. i'll bet you go to church every sunday don't you?


Even though you aren't worth my time...I'll humor you!
Amsterdam tolerates the use of soft drugs in small quantities, which centers coffee shops. Contrary to what many people believe, selling drugs is illegal in Holland.

PLEASE DIRECT ME TO WHERE YOU FOUND YOUR FACTS. I AM VERY INTERESTED IN READING ABOUT HOW DRUG USE IN AMSTERDAM HELPS THE CRIME RATE TO DECREASE.

My concern is not with cannibus but with hard drugs. I only speak from my own experience and I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I do not blame my addiction on anyone but myself and I know that not everyone becomes addicted. After spending countless hours in NA meetings I have met more people than you can imagine that are just like me and more people then I ever wanted to... that are just like you. I know what would happen to the city I live in if drugs were legal. I don't want my children to be exposed to the kaos that drug abuse causes, therefore I will stand my ground and argue this point to the end. What you do to your body is your own business and I do respect that. But for the people I actually care about.....and that are worth my time...I do want what is best for them and by keeping these drugs illegal and as hard to obtain as possible....I am doing what I think is right. Until you walk in a drug addicts shoes.....don't judge them.

[Edited on 8/21/2003 by Venus]




posted on Aug, 21 2003 @ 05:17 PM
link   
press, information and public relations

amstel 1
1011 PN amsterdam
telephone (020) 552.9111
fax (020) 624 55 50



AMSTERDAM: FACTS AND FIGURES

13. Drugs

The Amsterdam policy on drugs is a purely pragmatic one. The capital has a population of more than 700,000, including approximately 6,200 hard drug users. The policy is mainly focused on discouraging the use of hard drugs and combating the drug trade. In addition, every effort is made to restrict the risks run by addicts themselves and the drug-related problems they confront
the rest of society with. In the Amsterdam policy on drugs, a distinction is drawn between hard drugs and soft drugs. About 1,500 of the 6,200 hard drug
users are from Surinam, the Netherlands Antilles and Morocco, and about 2,000 are from other countries in Europe, mainly Germany, Italy and England. The
number of drug addicts is now on the decrease. The average age of the addicts has risen in recent years from 26.8 in 1981 to 32.3 in 1990. In the same
period, the percentage of drug addicts under the age of 22 fell from 14.4 to 2.5%.

Policy of Discouragement With respect to the use of drugs, Amsterdam adheres to a policy of discouragement. Active efforts are made to combat the drug trade. The Narcotics Brigade of the Amsterdam Police has doubled its staff in the past few years. This discouragement also takes place by way of an
intensive information campaign on the effects and risks of drug use. The policy of discouragement means that the police take an extremely intensive line of action in dealing with drug addicts who commit crimes. In recent
years, there has been a sharp rise in the number of policemen assigned to combat drug-related crime. The attitude of the Amsterdam authorities to drug addicts from abroad has been part of the discouragement policy. Foreigners do not have access to the assistance programmes Amsterdam has set up for its own
drug addicts.

Hard Drugs and Soft Drugs

The Dutch policy on drugs differs in a number of ways from the policies of other countries. One of these differences is the distinction drawn here between hard and soft drugs. Ever since 1978, this difference has been
stipulated by law: the possession of hard drugs is a felony and the possession of a small quantity of soft drugs is a misdemeanour. "A small quantity of soft
drugs" means a maximum of thirty grams. Amsterdam has approximately a hundred coffee shops and other public places where soft drugs are - illegally - bought
and sold. Soft drug prevention does not have a high priority, but if there is a quantity of more than thirty grams of soft drugs in a coffee shop or some other public place, or if hard drugs are sold or there are disturbances of the peace, the police will immediately have the premises closed down.



posted on Aug, 21 2003 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I give Amsterdam 10 more yrs before it completly implodes. As drug abuseis on the rise.
www.cedro-uva.org...
This is the kind of place I don't want America to become.



posted on Aug, 22 2003 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I haven't heard anyone bring up the fact that "drugs" are legal.......as long as you have a perscription! Its OK if your doctor gives it to you isn't it?Look around at work today and think to yourself how many of these people take some form of drug? Answer MOST now of that number how many are on some type of mind altering drug? More than you might think! A good number of them are self medicating but a good number are on persciption drugs whats the difference? Is there any more danger in taking a Vicadin or smoking a joint? Why is it better if you get a doctors permission? Why is it that so called "illicit" drugs evil but persciption drugs are benificial?
Go back and look at the history of the drug laws and you will see that they have nothing to do with the small number of addicts who cant control there use and more to do with one group or another trying to use the government to stiffle competition! Pot was made illegal to crub imigration in the southwest cocain and harder drugs were made illegal in order to secure a monopoly for drug makers!
People who are addicts are just that addicts they dont need drugs to exhibit destructive behavior although some drugs do have a tendency to create addiction it can not be said that the risks are not known.
Fact of the matter is good parenting will keep your kids from becoming dependent on drugs and having a good family will make it easier to inact an intervention.
You cant control what people do to themselves nor should you try nor should you expect the government to do it for you. It all comes down to personal responsibility. You have a responsibility to yourself to control your actions and a responsibility to your family to attempt to help a wayward family member but in the end a line must be drawn and consequences must be faced.
Also why are you guys so addamant about taxing? Why is this seen as a good thing?



.



posted on Aug, 22 2003 @ 04:50 PM
link   
If this is the case:

My concern is not with cannibus but with hard drugs.

Why the hell did you attack me? I feel the same way and repeated it I don't know how many times!
As far as The Netherlands goes, everything Venus posted is correct. The coffee shops are tolerated by the police. The 30 gram thing is (well was, back in 1990) a joke.
The "menu"(a photo album with bags in it) alone in Cafe Ruska had well over 2 ounces of "samples" in it (over 100 varieties of Marijuana and Hashish). The hard drugs were essentially banned from the same coffee shops. One thing you don't want to do is hang out in the parks in Amsterdam. The needle use is out of control there and you have a good chance of stepping on or sitting on a used one, it was gross.
The main difference I saw there compared to here is this:
The cops all do the same thing EXCEPT Here, they send a user to court and jail. There, they send users to the hospital or rehab. I think the dutch system makes more sence.



posted on Aug, 22 2003 @ 05:36 PM
link   
FRY2 -
I owe you an apology. I did go back and re-read this thread. On most of your posts that refer to me, you start out agreeing (not that that is what I was looking for) but then you thrash me

When it comes to talking about drugs and addiction I'm a little sensitive
I AM SORRY



posted on Aug, 23 2003 @ 12:17 AM
link   
My concern is not with cannibus but with hard drugs. - Venus.



I hear ya!



posted on Aug, 23 2003 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Ah...........grenadier..........where have you been?

Its ok for drug companies to prescribe toxic medications to treat aliments, but somehow, hard drugs are wrong? can we say hypocrite?

Have you ever seen the sude effects of medications used to treat minor complaints, like allergies? they are worse than the diseases or symptoms they cure! i can name several drugs that are toxic and cause long term problems for people that are legal. predisone is one, its an antiinflamitory drug that causes heart, liver, and weight problems, as well as kidney damage. Hm...and you think this stuff should be legal? The side effects are worse than the problems it supposedly treats, mainly glaucoma. (blindness or boated liver and heart damage, plus hair on lips for women, and weight gain to obesity).

Lets look at anti depressants. Drugs you have to take to feel happy again. drugs that are required for long term use to jkeep up thier effects thus, paralelling addiction. People who have sevre medical depression have to take these drugs for life. And thier side effects arent pleasant either. Hmmmmmmmmtaking smack to feel happy, or taking govornment sanctioned dope to be happy, again, i fail to see the diff.

Lets not forget prescription painkillers, sedatives, ect that have higher rates of abuse than street drugs. Morphine, vicodin, Oxycontin.....hmmm.........

again I ask

WHATS THE #ING DIFFERENCE?

Venus, thanks for the link, youre still proving my point. Drug abuse is down in Amsterdan, compared to elsewhere, and most of the dope addicts are from other coutnries. the dutch govornment has very light policies regarding dope, they even have places where addicts can go shoot up safely, watched by medical personell. they dont throw addicts in prison, and offer services to help people get off dope and teach them dope id bad.

BUT ITS NOT NEARLY AS ILLEGAL LIKE IT IS IN THE US, WHERE WE IMPRISON PEOPLE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET HIGH.



posted on Aug, 23 2003 @ 11:57 AM
link   
You ever met someone who you didn't know was a crack-head until they stole everything they could get their hands on from you,and sold it to buy crack?.

You think something that is this addictive,and disabling,would make them go out and get a job to get it if it were legal?.

Legalisation would just make more problems,you would have people who are addicted to drugs,who do not want to earn the money to get the drugs they are addicted to,breaking into houses,carsetc., all over the place while people are at work,to sell it on the streets or use it themselves.

And if it were legal,there would be more houses to choose from.



posted on Aug, 24 2003 @ 09:38 PM
link   
it would be a bad idea to legalize drugs



posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by GRENADIER
!
People who are addicts are just that addicts they dont need drugs to exhibit destructive behavior although some drugs do have a tendency to create addiction it can not be said that the risks are not known.

****************************************
I never did anything destructive to myself or anyone else before I became addicted.
*****************************************
Fact of the matter is good parenting will keep your kids from becoming dependent on drugs and having a good family will make it easier to inact an intervention.
****************************************
These are those famous last words I was talking about...

Do you have children of your own? Does anyone on this thread have grown children, lets say over 25 years old? Do you think you did the best job you could do raising them up to know right from wrong? Did they ever make a really bad decision or mistake even though YOU were an outstanding parent? Aren't we all born with free will? When my children are grown I hope they look back on me (us) as being great parents and I hope that is enough to keep them from taking that first hit. Sometimes I lay in bed and cry myself to sleep thinking about it. I have beautiful, caring, supportive parents who, ultimately drug me into rehab.
********************************************
You cant control what people do to themselves nor should you try nor should you expect the government to do it for you. It all comes down to personal responsibility. You have a responsibility to yourself to control your actions and a responsibility to your family to attempt to help a wayward family member
********************************************
This I totally agree with...BUT...when you are in active addiction...it's the furthest thing from your mind.
********************************************

but in the end a line must be drawn and consequences must be faced.
********************************************
Ya...it's called DEATH / HEP C / HIV / TB/ and the list goes on....





posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


again I ask

WHATS THE #ING DIFFERENCE?

Venus, thanks for the link, youre still proving my point. Drug abuse is down in Amsterdan, compared to elsewhere, and most of the dope addicts are from other coutnries. the dutch govornment has very light policies regarding dope, they even have places where addicts can go shoot up safely, watched by medical personell. they dont throw addicts in prison, and offer services to help people get off dope and teach them dope id bad.

BUT ITS NOT NEARLY AS ILLEGAL LIKE IT IS IN THE US, WHERE WE IMPRISON PEOPLE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET HIGH.


Oh Skadi - someone wasn't paying attention to the story, were they???? I'm not sure what you read but it certainly didn't come from the info I posted. Please reread while sober

... and for God's sake calm down woman...you're gonna blow a gasket



posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Cool, I'm glad we could settle this.

Peace



posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 06:26 PM
link   
marijuana, a plant that is comparable to some teas, should not be against the law. mescaline and peyote should be protected under the same laws as plants and animals that live in natural federal reserves are (and maybe peyote is protected, i just dont know about it). mushrooms should be legal, but then again, i don't really care if they are or not. same with acid. it would be nice, though, maybe they would be a little safer. and as for hard drugs, people who use those don't care wether they are against the law, they will just go to their dealer and plop down the dough. my view on this is : would you rather have the money that is being spent on drugs go into the hands of murdering drug lords, or the govrnment and businesses? and what is the big difference between methamphetamine and metabolife? the guy that invented metabolife is an ex-tweeker! they both have the same key ingredient : ephedrine. and as far as heroin etc goes, that is not something that anyone should be using recreationally. heroin should not be legal, nor should crack or tweek, or metabolife for that matter. but whatever...



posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Only because the fines that are taken will never find their way to anyone who needs the money,and the sentences imposed for drug use and so on will only serve to build a bigger prison industrial complex....Doed that make sense?.



posted on Aug, 25 2003 @ 10:40 PM
link   
IMO, all drugs should be legalized.

You can't legalize some drugs and not legalize all. That's just as stupid as alcohol being legal, and not marijuana...which is a much less dangerous drug. As for the effects of harder drugs, it's my opinion that hardcore heroin and/or coc aine addicts only become secluded, antisocial, or thieves because they're forced to go underground for fear of arrest. Also, anything on the black market is expensive, just because of the risk involved. The cost could easily be lowered. Many overdoses are caused by bad drugs. That too could be practically done away with. If it wasn't a crime, many of the illegal dealings and happenings would cease to exist. Not all, of course. One only needs to see what havoc alcohol can cause to see that. No illegal drug will cause any more pain and suffering (in society, or families) than alcohol can and does. Most intelligent people only need to take a look at Amsterdam to see that we're doing the wrong thing here in America. Their drug system works much better than ours. They don't have half the violence (per populace) associated with drugs, since they're not illegal.(or not really enforced, at least)

Ok, so I hear some of you saying, "Oh, I think you can just legalize pot."

Sure, you can, and I agree. But I'm talking more about a solution to this problem. The people who use drugs aren't the ones with the problem, from their perspective. It's those that want to stop them who are creating war, and it's only those that want to change them that are their enemies. Drug users aren't trying to change the way people live their lives.(most anyway) Our illustrious leaders are, however. When you try to change someone against their will they tend to get a tad irate and say, "fu*k you!" Therein lies the problem.
At the very least, marijuana should be legal, but without legalizing all of them, society will still have the same drug problems. Legalizing only one will only decriminalize one type of drug user. There are many more. To end a war, you have to either kill your opponent, or make peace with them. Since we really don't want to kill a large portion of our own citizens(I hope), the latter would be my suggestion. Drug users will never just surrender, and say, "Ok, you win." Why should they? It's their bodies, and they truly believe they have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. It's not a matter of addiction either, although this is what our gov't wants you to believe. It's a matter of morality, principles, and personal freedom.

We don't really want to arrest drug users. We want to arrest irresponsible people who are harmful to others, regardless of whether they choose to do drugs or not. That's always been the bottom line, and should continue to be. Somewhere along the line, they lost sight of that simple perspective.


[Edited on 26-8-2003 by Satyr]



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Legalize Nature. If it occurs naturally how can we outlaw a "creation of God". Synthetic drugs are much more harmful than natural substances.



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 12:16 AM
link   
There's no such thing as synthetic, really. Anything made on Earth is nature. We're natural, therefore anything we can possibly invent is also nature. Any "synthetic" substance created is still created with the materials of Earth, by natural inhabitants of Earth.



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I didnt make myself clear when I said addicts dont need drugs to be addicts. Let me clear things up.
Setting aside some drugs like Heroin which can create a psycological dependency most addicts already have an addictive personality. Someone who picks up a beer in there teens and becomes an alcoholic is just as likely to become addicted to gambling, There is something wrong with the way their brains are wired which miss-assigns the pleasure response to an activity like drinking or gambling or even sex for that matter. Everyone has this wiring in their head but for most it is associated with the activities we call hobbies!

My point was that we are always going to have addicts but they are a small number. Most people will never try recreational drug use those that do will most likely never go beyond Pot. We have legal use of alcohol because the vast majority of users can handle the use. Those who can not (and violate the life liberty or property of others thru force or fraud) are put in jail where they belong.
I just think that those of you who are the exception or deal with the exception must see that we can not make law based on the few "bad apples" ( I hate to use that term but I am at a loss for another way to put it).
History has taught us that when we address the few who abuse and miss-use by banning the activity alltogether all we succeed in doing is creating a new class of administrative criminal in other words one who has broken the law only because it was writen down not because it is immoral as well!



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 01:56 AM
link   
That's exactly what I was saying. The drug war has only created new criminals, which may or may not be criminals otherwise. From my experience, the majority of drug users would not be criminals, if it weren't for the simple fact that drugs themselves are illegal.





new topics




 
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join