View Poll Results: Is it time to legalize/control all illicit drugs?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    52 73.24%
  • No

    14 19.72%
  • Not sure

    5 7.04%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 138 of 138

Thread: Is it time to legalize/control all illicit drugs?

  1. #101

    Default

    Very interesting link....bears out my assertion that many more people do drugs than will admit it, and that anyone may know....

    http://io9.com/5944501/toilet-tappin...our-drug-habit
    Support the mob or mysteriously disappear...

  2. #102
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,363

    Default

    In future people may need to use a bucket and avoid the toilet then dispose of it somewhere. They will likely be tracing right to a house or apt, especially in the US where cops are so hungry for busts. All sewer lines have cleanouts, threaded openings for access.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 21-07-2015 at 06:49 AM.

  3. #103

    Default As a society we are in denial

    Quote Originally Posted by bulliver View Post
    lat got my point. People will hide it from friends/family because of the stigma.
    This is what I think to. For every person you see completely addicted / on the streets / fitting the sterotype for any particular drug, I'm willing to bet there are at least another 50 people who use the drug from time to time, are not addicted, and not on the streets. There is a lot of nonesense out their that one time use of freebase, or ecstacy, or similar is going to make someone an addict for life. The whole Rob Ford thing summed it up to me, there are a lot of Rob Fords out there, people in respectable jobs, who will reach for a crack pipe or similar, "once in a while" - just look at the results of those job applicants in article I posted (22 out of 26 failing). No one "admits it", even to closest family and friends, because of the stigma, but they are doing it. Its no different than how you have social drinkers, and alcoholics, only a very small portion of the population becomes the later, and IMO that has less to do with the drug booze, than it does about other factors in their life. We have just abritrarily decided some drug demand should be supplied by criminals, and some should be supplied by the corporate world.
    Last edited by moahunter; 21-07-2015 at 09:54 AM.

  4. #104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bulliver View Post
    lat got my point. People will hide it from friends/family because of the stigma.
    I fully understand the point. However this is just drug use. There's far less stigma to it than in the past.

    Maybe my case is more unique than I thought. Most of my friends and past coworkers are too busy just trying to have normal productive lives. If anything, they are hooked on sports and travel and family and their hobbies. Now, if I associated with a lot of lawyers, corporate accountants, salespeople, small business owners, law enforcement, etc. then I'd expect considerably more covert illegal drug and alcohol use.

    I really do buy into the prior trauma argument, where such traumas drive people to self medicate. It can be through extreme or atypical behaviour in one form or another. It's also a slippery slope. People with a troubled past shows up in many forms. Anything from trying to be the life of the party, extreme introversion, pursuit of fame or fortune, workaholism, other behavioral issues. Much of which often shows up long before the drug use starts. I'd guess that a lot of those people are also attracted to similar people. Others shy away from people that exhibit any kind of troubling behaviour.

  5. #105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bulliver View Post
    lat got my point. People will hide it from friends/family because of the stigma.
    This is what I think to. For every person you see completely addicted / on the streets / fitting the sterotype for any particular drug, I'm willing to bet there are at least another 50 people who use the drug from time to time, are not addicted, and not on the streets. There is a lot of nonesense out their that one time use of freebase, or ecstacy, or similar is going to make someone an addict for life. The whole Rob Ford thing summed it up to me, there are a lot of Rob Fords out there, people in respectable jobs, who will reach for a crack pipe or similar, "once in a while" - just look at the results of those job applicants in article I posted (22 out of 26 failing). No one "admits it", even to closest family and friends, because of the stigma, but they are doing it. Its no different than how you have social drinkers, and alcoholics, only a very small portion of the population becomes the later, and IMO that has less to do with the drug booze, than it does about other factors in their life. We have just abritrarily decided some drug demand should be supplied by criminals, and some should be supplied by the corporate world.
    Except for the numbers I think you're bang on. (Your 50-to-1 may be too high or too low, I don't know.) I once worked on an epidemiological study that looked at alcohol use and high income and high consumption often went together. Alcohol use and profession was also correlated for some professions. That's the "social drinking" cover.

    In the case of Rob Ford, though, is it surprising? No. Just look at the type of person he is and possibly was. If you're attracted to people like that then I wouldn't be surprised if you have a lot of acquaintances that are drug users. If you're attracted to the type of people that are, say nuns, then odds are that there will be fewer illegal drug users among your associates, though any users that do exist, will work very, very hard to hide it.

    Inconclusive, but interesting...
    Personality Types Attract Different Drugs
    By Jacqueline Detwiler 04/17/12

    "Assuming you’ve got the traits that push you toward drug use in the first place, what else might lead you to one substance over another? Hopson says factors that play a role include what your parents use, what your friends use, and even simply what’s available where you live. Which perhaps explains Hemingway’s situation better than we could have expected: there sure was a lot of rum in Cuba."

    http://www.thefix.com/content/person...n9985?page=all
    Last edited by KC; 21-07-2015 at 10:31 AM.

  6. #106

    Default

    Reducing sentences for drug users and low-level sellers will do exactly nothing to change the overall violence and criminality as gangs fight over turf, and we leave all decisions about purity and potency of drugs and sales to minors in the hands of gangs and cartels. And the trade will generate an endless supply of low-level "non-violent offenders" having their lives ruined by arrest and prosecution even if their sentences are reduced.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/inge-f...b_7829730.html

  7. #107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lat View Post
    Reducing sentences for drug users and low-level sellers will do exactly nothing to change the overall violence and criminality as gangs fight over turf, and we leave all decisions about purity and potency of drugs and sales to minors in the hands of gangs and cartels. And the trade will generate an endless supply of low-level "non-violent offenders" having their lives ruined by arrest and prosecution even if their sentences are reduced.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/inge-f...b_7829730.html
    Maybe lessons from an earlier era..

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_den


    ...and more lessons here...

    "Drug re-legalization calls for a return to the pre-20th century situation in which almost all drugs were legal. This would require ending government-enforced prohibition on the distribution or sale and personal use of specified (or all) currently banned drugs. Proposed ideas range from full legalization which would completely remove all forms of government control, to various forms of regulated legalization, where drugs would be legally available, but under a system of government control which might mean for instance: ... [6]"
    ...
    Portugal abolished all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine. When it was passed, critics said it would open the country to drug tourists and make the drug problem worse. However, once the results were released from a report called "Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies"[9] by Glenn Greenwald, released by the Cato Institute, came out, the impact of Portugal's new legislation became obvious.[10] The report found that in the 5 years after drugs were decriminalized, drug use among teens dropped, rates of new HIV infections from sharing dirty needles dropped, and the number of people seeking treatment for addiction more than doubled. Portugal boasted the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 years of age at 10%. To put that into perspective, America lifetime marijuana use rate in people over 12 is 39.8%. Lifetime use of an illegal drug among 7th to 9th graders fell from 14.1% to 10.6%, drug use in older teens fell, lifetime heroin use in 16-18 year olds fell, new HIV infections in drug users fell 17%, deaths related to hard drugs were cut by more than half, treatment for drug addiction rose, as well as saved money on enforcement while increasing funding for treatment.[11] Portugal’s drug usage rates are now among the lowest in the EU for virtually every substance.[12]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_liberalization
    Last edited by KC; 21-07-2015 at 11:19 AM.

  8. #108
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bulliver View Post
    lat got my point. People will hide it from friends/family because of the stigma.
    I fully understand the point. However this is just drug use. There's far less stigma to it than in the past.

    Maybe my case is more unique than I thought. Most of my friends and past coworkers are too busy just trying to have normal productive lives. If anything, they are hooked on sports and travel and family and their hobbies. Now, if I associated with a lot of lawyers, corporate accountants, salespeople, small business owners, law enforcement, etc. then I'd expect considerably more covert illegal drug and alcohol use.

    I really do buy into the prior trauma argument, where such traumas drive people to self medicate. It can be through extreme or atypical behaviour in one form or another. It's also a slippery slope. People with a troubled past shows up in many forms. Anything from trying to be the life of the party, extreme introversion, pursuit of fame or fortune, workaholism, other behavioral issues. Much of which often shows up long before the drug use starts. I'd guess that a lot of those people are also attracted to similar people. Others shy away from people that exhibit any kind of troubling behaviour.
    Your preconceptions and stereotyping appear to confirm Bulliver's original point rather than undermine it.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, itís not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  9. #109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    In the case of Rob Ford, though, is it surprising? No. Just look at the type of person he is and possibly was. If you're attracted to people like that then I wouldn't be surprised if you have a lot of acquaintances that are drug users.
    You are missing the whole point, it isn't "people like that", its "people like us". Illegal drug use is through all levels of society, all levels of "social class", all types of profession. The only thing that is shocking now, is not that politicians are caught with "hard" drugs sometimes, but rather, that they aren't caught more often, not because politicans are "good" or "bad" but because they are people, and lots of people use drugs.

  10. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    In the case of Rob Ford, though, is it surprising? No. Just look at the type of person he is and possibly was. If you're attracted to people like that then I wouldn't be surprised if you have a lot of acquaintances that are drug users.
    You are missing the whole point, it isn't "people like that", its "people like us". Illegal drug use is through all levels of society, all levels of "social class", all types of profession. The only thing that is shocking now, is not that politicians are caught with "hard" drugs sometimes, but rather, that they aren't caught more often, not because politicans are "good" or "bad" but because they are people, and lots of people use drugs.
    I would say someone like Rob Ford had addiction issues or binge drinking/drug issues. It seems the vices he did have were addictive ones. The first addiction I should imagine was food. Maybe booze followed, either binge drinking or a few beers a night. Maybe then his drug binges. He has three things going on, food/drink/drugs. People with addictive personalities for multiple things face a hard battle to get all that under control. If one vice is taken away they usually exchange it for another.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." ĖMark Twain

  11. #111

    Default House of Lords member - Cocaine off hooker

    Here's another "respectable" person, House of Lords member, deputy speaker, and an old ally of Tony Blair:

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/wo...86/story.html#

    Most people who do hard drugs aren't addicts, just like most people who drink aren't alcholics.

    The deputy speaker of the House of Lords has resigned his position after publication of photos and a video allegedly showing him using cocaine with prostitutes.

    John Sewel’s alleged behaviour is “shocking and unacceptable,” Lords Speaker Baroness D’Souza said Sunday, adding she is calling in police to investigate on an urgent basis.

    “These serious allegations will be referred to the House of Lords commissioner for standards and the Metropolitan Police for investigation as a matter of urgency,” D’Souza said, adding that “the House of Lords will continue to uphold standards in public life.”

    She said Sewel, who is married, has stepped down from his special position in Britain’s upper house. He remains a member of the House of Lords.
    Last edited by moahunter; 27-07-2015 at 11:54 AM.

  12. #112

    Default

    Here's how I would do it.

    I would hold a referendum.

    "Please select which of the following drugs on the banned list you belive should be made legal. Select all that apply (a) (b) ....."


    50% gets it off the list and onto the controlled-like-tobacco list.

    The rest stay on the list.

    The penalty for possession of anything more than one dose is hanging. With a presumption of guilt for everyone caught on the premises.

    I think it's time for society to decide which recreational drugs it can live with.

    The rest... No mercy. None, Zero. Illegal drugs not fully and mercilessly stopped are worse than murder. Because of what it entails, the organized crime, the street f**ckers, etc.

    Which drugs do I believe should be on the list? All. Or none. I could not care less.

    The important thing is not the drug. It is its ban without proper and completely, utterly merciless enforcement.
    Last edited by AShetsen; 27-07-2015 at 06:01 PM.

  13. #113
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    ^the penalty for possession of more than 1 dose should be hanging?

    Dude what in the actual ****! Please seek help.
    be offended! figure out why later...

  14. #114

    Default

    just look at his other posts... obvious attention seeker.

  15. #115
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,274

    Default

    ^^^ wow... Just wow

  16. #116

    Default

    I just hate how our laws and enforcement of illicit drugs are so wishy-washy that they are mostly ineffective. Anyone who has worked in a big hospital knows that every day, people from all walks of life show up needing medical attention for bad reactions or overdoses from illegal drugs. Making select substances illegal has not stopped (nor even slowed) their use. And the half-arsed approach to catching/punishing producers and dealers (and borderline tolerance for some illegal drugs and not others) hasn't helped either. The only people making a profit are the drug dealers and organized crime. The rest of us lose through higher police, court, prison, and medical costs, not to mention the costs of other crimes (theft, prostitution, human trafficking) to pay for drug addictions.

    We need to make a decision - either we allow ourselves to be a free country and let people go about their business and do the drugs they want and take the revenue stream away from the black market dealers (maybe even let dealers and producers go legitimate so they pay taxes and a responsible for assuring quality control, etc.), or we completely crack down like Singapore and have absolute zero tolerance with strict and severe punishment for anybody having anything to do with illegal substances.

    Personally, I am for legalization and control of drugs. In fact, I am against legalizing marijuana unless we legalize and control everything else along with it. Legalizing one illegal drug just because it's the most popular, while keeping all others illegal, makes very little sense.

  17. #117
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,072

    Default

    So basically what Ashetsen said.

  18. #118

    Default Should Pardons be issued on mass?

    For people convicted of possession of weed?

    http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/22...ot-convictions

    I've got mixed feelings on that. Why just weed, and not other drugs as well? There is a pardon system already, and even getting a pardon won't neccesarily help much with travel.

    I'm looking forward to weed being legal, but I hope some common sense is applied and other drugs are looked at after that. Be consistent, get the drug trade profits out of the gangs. Prohibition is stupid policy, just look at all the tax revenues we are losing now re menthol cigarette sales which have gone from legit and taxed to illegit and not taxed on the black market.

  19. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    For people convicted of possession of weed?

    http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/22...ot-convictions

    I've got mixed feelings on that. Why just weed, and not other drugs as well? There is a pardon system already, and even getting a pardon won't neccesarily help much with travel.

    I'm looking forward to weed being legal, but I hope some common sense is applied and other drugs are looked at after that. Be consistent, get the drug trade profits out of the gangs. Prohibition is stupid policy, just look at all the tax revenues we are losing now re menthol cigarette sales which have gone from legit and taxed to illegit and not taxed on the black market.
    I agree on prohibition which in my view enriches those that don't respect the law. It creates corruption within our various law enforcement groups and probably at the highest levels of judiciary and elected government. It also likely causes massive wastes of taxpayer money and resources that could be used for far more critical issues.

    As for a pardon. Well, if you break a law it doesn't say much for your respect for our country and its laws. If it's a law that is proven to be unconstitutional or somehow unjust, I'd say pardons should be near automatic. However, smoking weed? I don't think there's a great moral reason to break that law. Any pardon would be more pragmatic. Giving people a better chance to improve their futures.

  20. #120

    Default

    "
    Marcus Richardson is, in the eyes of the law, a criminal.
    Never mind that a judge ruled the six kilograms of cannabis police found in his car was for severely ill patients at a medical marijuana dispensary.
    Or that the same judge imposed only a minimum sentence because anything more would fail to maintain "a just, peaceful and safe society."" - CBC News

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mari...tion-1.3377056

    Just one example that have criminal records stick with them.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  21. #121

    Default It's not the chemicals it's the cage - answer is connection

    Not often I click on Facebook link filled with annoying advertisements, then find something amazing inside. If you watch one cartoon this year, watch this one, filled win interesting stuff (like that twenty percent of Vietnam soldiers did heroine to kill time):

    http://theunboundedspirit.com/drugs-...drugs-forever/

  22. #122

    Default Fentanyl replacing herorin

    By making drugs illegal, we have distorted the market. Because fentanyl is easier to smuggle, it is replacing brown sugar on the streets:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...ates-1.3596202

  23. #123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    By making drugs illegal, we have distorted the market. Because fentanyl is easier to smuggle, it is replacing brown sugar on the streets:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...ates-1.3596202
    If you legalized / regulated all drugs, those with past criminal records from dealing in drugs (or other offences) wouldn't be able to get jobs selling those now legalized drugs. So they'd have to find other ways to support themselves. (maybe dealing in body parts, Ident. theft, etc.).

    Moreover, the current criminalization likely supports thousands upon thousands of legal, stable jobs (lawyers, judges, police, prison workers, prison builders, social workers, etc.). Changing the system to an efficient, effective, more logical system may not be a desired change. We regularly see policy, legislation and spending decisions that entrench or expand seemingly nonsensical and even counterproductive jobs. One must realize that such grand job creating inefficiencies increase the velocity of money in the economy, keep people off the streets and thus stabilize the economy while reducing reliance on a highly volatile private sector. The digging ditches and filling them in again effect. Or in this case destroying lives and rebuilding some again.

    A compromise might be a new form of non-"criminal" record that wouldn't preclude most holders from ever again obtaining productive self-sustaining employment.
    Last edited by KC; 23-05-2016 at 03:19 PM.

  24. #124
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,204

    Default

    Legalization should include automatic pardons for all non-violent drug related offenses. I'm sure we can find something productive for police to do, like engaging with the community and actually investigating and prosecuting property crime. Surplus prison guards can supervise the petty thieves and vandals doing their community service, or actually try to provide conditions conducive to rehabilitating violent criminals in the now less overcrowded prisons.

  25. #125

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Legalization should include automatic pardons for all non-violent drug related offenses. I'm sure we can find something productive for police to do, like engaging with the community and actually investigating and prosecuting property crime. Surplus prison guards can supervise the petty thieves and vandals doing their community service, or actually try to provide conditions conducive to rehabilitating violent criminals in the now less overcrowded prisons.
    It's not going to happen. Vested interests and set opinions will prevent such legalization.

  26. #126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ...try to provide conditions conducive to rehabilitating violent criminals...
    Rehabilitation never works. Or, rather, criminal rehabilitation works so infrequently and so very rarely, it is a massive waste of resources and time that could go into more constructive endeavors such as crime prevention and enforcement instead.

  27. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    It's not going to happen. Vested interests and set opinions will prevent such legalization.
    I think there might be some truth to that, but on the other hand, after we legalize cannabis, I think we start moving down a new direction. People will start seriously thinking, if weed, which we know has various harmful effects, can be legalized, why not cocaine or heroin? Opiate based drugs also have various health uses, more so than weed does. At the end of the day, none of it makes sense, if we could tax it, and put the money into addiction counseling and education, our society would be a lot better off, there would be less mystery, and a big criminal component would lose their funds, except to the extent they avoid taxes / black market trade (which wouldn't need to be such a serious offense anymore).

  28. #128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    It's not going to happen. Vested interests and set opinions will prevent such legalization.
    I think there might be some truth to that, but on the other hand, after we legalize cannabis, I think we start moving down a new direction. People will start seriously thinking, if weed, which we know has various harmful effects, can be legalized, why not cocaine or heroin? Opiate based drugs also have various health uses, more so than weed does. At the end of the day, none of it makes sense, if we could tax it, and put the money into addiction counseling and education, our society would be a lot better off, there would be less mystery, and a big criminal component would lose their funds, except to the extent they avoid taxes / black market trade (which wouldn't need to be such a serious offense anymore).
    Well at some point, some subset of the population will feel that breaking the law, whatever it is, is wrong or fear of penalty or jail is severe enough that they won't use it, especially if they have decent legal alternatives. The younger the user or the less mentally developed or stable the person though, the less likely they will comprehend the legal aspects.

    Legal mind altering substances like tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, etc though weren't apparently enough to dissuade people from marijuana and a whole group of other drugs. I doubt legalizing marijuana will diminish much of the alternates consumption. I doubt legalizing them would change much in the way of consumption.

    Reducing the number of people having criminal records might create considerable change. Ie the legal profession is renowned for its degree of alcoholism, which is legal, and so they retain their jobs and fill 'productive' roles in society. Suggest locking people up for alcoholism and you'd see a change in attitudes.
    Last edited by KC; 24-05-2016 at 01:45 PM.

  29. #129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Reducing the number of people having criminal records might create considerable change. Ie the legal profession is renowned for its degree of alcoholism, which is legal, and so they retain their jobs and fill 'productive' roles in society. Suggest locking people up for alcoholism and you'd see a change in attitudes.
    I think you are being a bit naÔve here, there are plenty of lawyers, doctors, and other professionals at the moment who use Cocaine or Opiates, certainly plenty who use weed, even though it is illegal. I don't think legality has much to do with demand (the demand is still there for menthol cigarettes for example, hence the black market is booming more than ever since it was banned), but it does have a lot to do with safety and quality.

  30. #130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Reducing the number of people having criminal records might create considerable change. Ie the legal profession is renowned for its degree of alcoholism, which is legal, and so they retain their jobs and fill 'productive' roles in society. Suggest locking people up for alcoholism and you'd see a change in attitudes.
    I think you are being a bit naÔve here, there are plenty of lawyers, doctors, and other professionals at the moment who use Cocaine or Opiates, certainly plenty who use weed, even though it is illegal. I don't think legality has much to do with demand (the demand is still there for menthol cigarettes for example, hence the black market is booming more than ever since it was banned), but it does have a lot to do with safety and quality.
    I wasn't talking about demand but about the impact of criminalizing certain mind altering substances and not others and how the addiction of choice affects the ability to live "label" free. I'll add that being able to avoid criminal records early in life allows career attainment that possibly allows subsequent avoidance of prosecution where others aren't granted similar immunity. I.e. The police either don't pursue the priest, MP, chartered accountant, business owner, etc. for suspected use or they attain better representation to avoid the criminal record, but the repeat offender working as a labourer, waiter, etc end up with the criminal records and possibly enter a downward spiral.
    Last edited by KC; 24-05-2016 at 05:29 PM.

  31. #131
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ...try to provide conditions conducive to rehabilitating violent criminals...
    Rehabilitation never works. Or, rather, criminal rehabilitation works so infrequently and so very rarely, it is a massive waste of resources and time that could go into more constructive endeavors such as crime prevention and enforcement instead.
    For some actual facts: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rs.../index-en.aspx

    Rehabilitation does work. Not for everyone. But it's simple minded and short sighted to just assume that every single person convicted of a crime will remain a criminal for the rest of their lives, and basing policy on such a staggeringly ignorant opinion is folly.

  32. #132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ...try to provide conditions conducive to rehabilitating violent criminals...
    Rehabilitation never works. Or, rather, criminal rehabilitation works so infrequently and so very rarely, it is a massive waste of resources and time that could go into more constructive endeavors such as crime prevention and enforcement instead.
    For some actual facts: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rs.../index-en.aspx
    Wow, you proved nothing. Good job. Those are stats on reconviction rates. I was referring to rehabilitation.

    Criminal rehabilitation has a marginal success rate, and I think our society would get a better value for the cost by spending those resources on crime prevention and enforcement instead of rehabilitation.

  33. #133

    Default

    In some ways this stuff seems closer to anthrax or uranium than pot, alcohol or what I'm used to hearing about.


    RCMP officers to be equipped with naloxone kits to deal with fentanyl exposure

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...anyl-1.3761127
    Last edited by KC; 13-09-2016 at 11:40 PM.

  34. #134
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,204

    Default

    If recreational use of opioids were legal we wouldn't be having this problem. Few users would turn to fentanyl if they had access to morphine and heroin, and if they really wanted fentanyl they could get it pre-diluted and packaged in standardized doses. Pure fentanyl powder would never be seen. Some people would still commit suicide by intentionally overdosing, but there would be far fewer unintentional exposures or ODs.

  35. #135

    Default

    While I would like to see legalization/controls in place for drugs, the social responsibility campaigns that will come with it would be troublesome if you ask me. That is a big hang up with the policy/legislative decisions around pot right now. Do they align it with current alcohol strategies or make it more strict? Doctors are calling for more strict rules than alcohol when it comes to pot. Quite the double standard? Yet, other illicit drugs have greater addictive reactions than their counterparts, too. Tough policy decisions to please proponents of marijuana, but also to please the medical/expert community. Covering all illicit drugs under said policies would take infinitely more time. You can't turn on the pump over night without doing due diligence first.

    The black market would still continue to operate with new drugs coming online or non-diluted offerings. If it can offer said drugs at a cheaper offering than the regulated market, they will most definitely still be in business. That is a key reason addicts jump ship to fentanyl - ease of access, both by price, but also by the strength of the drug. A better high at a cheaper price? I'll sell you premium gasoline 20 cents cheaper than the guy down the block!

  36. #136
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,204

    Default

    Fentanyl is cheaper and easier to get because it is a lot easier to smuggle and distribute a kilo of fentanyl than 100 kg of heroin or a ton of morphine. Drug dealers love it because they can sell product that is 99+% filler and still keep their customers happy. It sucks for users because an upstream dealer who doesn't weigh properly can easily result in product that is only 95% cut and a deadly overdose. It also has a shorter duration of action, making it less desirable for many users.

    Legalization won't eliminate black markets (there is still a certain amount of alcohol and tobacco that goes untaxed), but it will certainly control them. As for user control, dispensing rules are a minor part of a comprehensive approach that needs to include more pubic education about addiction and much better access to addiction treatment as the "carrots" and near-zero tolerance for public intoxication as the "stick".

  37. #137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    If recreational use of opioids were legal we wouldn't be having this problem.

    It would have to be cheap, though. One of the biggest problems with opioids (legal and illegal) is that they are very expensive, and people get desperate to find money in order to get more opioids to treat their addictions.

  38. #138
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    7,900

    Default

    Fentanyl is a game changer. Or should be to any sentient human that cares about life, and living. No more can people discretely snort a line of coke, do some Crack, or Meth (why would anybody, that junk has horrid effects) but with Fentany lacing becoming much more common any one decision to use illicit drugs can result in death, overdose, becoming paraplegic.


    http://globalnews.ca/news/2948781/fe...-sentence-now/

    The case is so sad, as tragedy always is when it impacts impressionable young people with their whole lives ahead of them that make one mistake in judgement. (which honestly we all make) Pay attention to the telltale false reassurances as well. We're scoring off friend, someone we know, what harm can come from it....which ignores that most people have access to only narcotics that have been stepped through various middle men and chains of distribution whereby any nefarious party could decide to cut a drug with something.

    note the other fallacy of the parents allowing kids to party because that keeps the activity under watch and what harm can come from it.

    These are all falsehoods that need to be revisited in the age of Fentanyl.

    Our whole notion of drugs being a recreational aspect probably needs to change immediately UNTIL they are closely and rigidly manufactured as much as controlled pharmaceuticals.

    For a society to allow people to buy contraband like Ecstasy, meth, Coke, Heroin etc and not know whats in it, and what it can do is irresponsible. When does the carnage stop?

    WE shouldn't be providing Fentanyl but drug lacing alone is enough reason to provide legal monitored and controlled substance delivery in a harm reduction approach over what people get on the street that is killing hundreds of Albertans every year.

    This is officially an epidemic now and it isn't going away. Brave decisions, actions, need to be made. Countless lives depend on it.
    Last edited by Replacement; 20-09-2016 at 11:35 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •