What do you think about preventing drug overdoses by legalizing drugs?

What kid of effect do you think legalizing all drugs would have?


  • Total voters
    28

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You showed me charts that say something but not one point about what that blue line did when no money was spent on drug control. How do you know all that money spent isn't the reason the blue line remained the same and did not climb? The other chart showed that you go to jail if you break said law. How conclusive is that? I understand what you showed me but it's not enough to sawy be because it's incomplete.
I don't think you do if you reached that conclusion

The blue line (US drug addiction rates) stays constant - below .5% on the scale until Nixon initiated the war on drugs in 1971, as soon as that happens, the green line (US drug control spending) increases steadily until it skyrockets in 1986, coincidentally I guess, exactly when Nancy Reagan began her "Just Say No" campaign as first lady. Drug addiction rates slightly declined in the follow few years less than 1% on the scale, which is insignificant, and no link between the two has ever been established. According to the data, there is no direct correlation between drug addiction rates and US drug control spending. That's what that chart is telling you.


I showed the quitter how availibility creates swarms and violence while attracting addics but it was ignored, .
Which post?
 

joe macclennan

Well-Known Member
That's a great point and I think it has to do with the way these addicts raise their young. I can show you some sad cases but I'm sure you can relate. I could be wrong but it's enough to convince me. There's some fucked up parents feeding their kids from the dollar store and stretching out three days worth of clothes for each kid and total disregard for their future. I could go on but I think you get the picture.
so buying your kids more stuff = being a better parent? Or paying more for the same chinese goods from a brand store makes you a better person? How does that work exactly?
 

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Very good point. I guess when crime becomes the norm and drugs are free to use it's time to change the level of the war on drugs and start shooting our way back to civilized. We did it before with slavery, at least the North did.
At least the North did?
The KKK target black and white Republicans that wished to abolish slavery...............wait for it..................in the South.
 

corners

Well-Known Member
I dont know but maybe there is data around about alcohol poisening before and after prohibition.

I would think the numbers would go up then dive sharply once the overdosers
died. But along will come one to replace that one.

I just watched a documentary on this. The modern father of foresensics, he was from new york, but prohibition made him famous. He watched so many people die from doctored alcohol. His work eventually helped turn the tide, but he also had tons of other cool cases.He also did the first carbon monoxide work.Pretty much hes the reason we can test anything poisonousness in the blood now a days.

Bernard Spilsbury was his name
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
Why do you have so many toms on that set......not even a ride cymbal?

Sorry to be off topic its making my ocd nuts.
Diversity, don't like all songs to sound the same plus you can't play a drum you don't have. The 20"ride is hanging over the 15 and 16. They're Phonics.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
I don't think you do if you reached that conclusion

The blue line (US drug addiction rates) stays constant - below .5% on the scale until Nixon initiated the war on drugs in 1971, as soon as that happens, the green line (US drug control spending) increases steadily until it skyrockets in 1986, coincidentally I guess, exactly when Nancy Reagan began her "Just Say No" campaign as first lady. Drug addiction rates slightly declined in the follow few years less than 1% on the scale, which is insignificant, and no link between the two has ever been established. According to the data, there is no direct correlation between drug addiction rates and US drug control spending. That's what that chart is telling you.






Which post?
I bet if the same chart showed the no spending data conclusive data couldn't be avoided. Also, keep in mind that for every one addict that is known, there are ten that are not. Other than that the chart suggests misuse of funding. Maybe....Right, could that suggestion have weight to it.? I asked the poster to look up a breaking story on NBC.com from the Bronx cuz I don't know how to link it. It's a few pages back.
 

kinetic

Well-Known Member
OK. So if readily available will reduce od rates why has death from opiate OD rose sharpley from 99-2010 as pain management centers opened up and starting pushing the narcos?

Im serious btw. Im not trying to be attacking.
 

joe macclennan

Well-Known Member
What? Read that post again, then go food shopping at the dollar store .
lol..I read it just fine. and I shop wherever is convenient at the time. and wherever my wallet permits at the moment.

you come off as a snobby elitist.



ahhh I see, boston.....makes sense now.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
You read it, but you definitely didn`t understand it. How much meats and milk you gonna buy at a dollar tree? None. And don`t accuse me of being smart.
 

Rak on Tur'

Active Member
as an ex trooper I would think you would recognize that our current system isn't meant to solve anything. It is simply another form of taxation. A sin tax if you will. Without calling it that.

Around here it all about the money. With probation, drug counseling yada yada. If you have insurance they run you through the ringer. If you are uninsured they'll kick you out after a couple of months.

the entire stance on drugs our government takes has little to do with solving the problem and more to do with keeping hundreds of thousands of government jobs or subcontracted facilities in business. Not to mention all the jobs created for the supporting infrastructure.

it was a money making machine for decades.

not so profitable now that the vast majority of our country is already broke. Can't squeeze blood out of a turnip.
I definetly do agree with you with our current system, and I did see a lot of that nonsense over the years. I lost all respect for the Feds, especially the DEA when the knuckleheads here recriminalized pot and they went around kicking doors in like they were saving the world. They are nothing more than IRS agents with a gun.

Luckily AK has some gray areas the lets people stay out of trouble. I do hope they finally pass some laws to decriminalize personal amounts of harder drugs. Throwing a user in jail is just a waste of time and money.

The ultimate problem is the voters. We keep electing the same bunch of clowns year after year, and somehow we expect things to turn out different. The younger generation is much more rational, they should do a lot of good. My generation is all but gone, they just have to wait out some of the baby boomers.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
I bet if the same chart showed the no spending data conclusive data couldn't be avoided.
I don't know what this means or what you're trying to say, either way it has no bearing on what the chart does conclude; There is no correlation between the US drug prevention budget and addiction rates. If there is, prove it, show me some evidence there is. I've shown you evidence there isn't and just like I said before, you don't value evidence, reason or logic, so you simply dismiss it.

Also, keep in mind that for every one addict that is known, there are ten that are not.
Show me the evidence



Other than that the chart suggests misuse of funding. Maybe....Right, could that suggestion have weight to it.? I asked the poster to look up a breaking story on NBC.com from the Bronx cuz I don't know how to link it. It's a few pages back.
Aah, I'm starting to see a trend; you don't require evidence to support your beliefs. "Maybe" is not good enough reason for someone who values logic to come to a conclusion, it's a word that by definition means "I don't know". If there was a misuse of funding, show me the evidence that shows that.

What do you mean you don't know how to link it? Copy the URL and paste it in the reply box..

..Just in case, the URL is the address of the website on the top that starts with www.
 

joe macclennan

Well-Known Member
You read it, but you definitely didn`t understand it. How much meats and milk you gonna buy at a dollar tree? None. And don`t accuse me of being smart.
actually I just ordered a hind quarter from a friend who raises beef cattle free rangeish. So i'd bet it'll probably be better than you'll get in boston.

I guess there is a benefit to living in the armpit of america.

but milk...Yes sometimes @ dollar general...sure. and it's the same brands available elsewhere.

and I haven't accused you of anything. Yet.
 

joe macclennan

Well-Known Member
I definetly do agree with you with our current system, and I did see a lot of that nonsense over the years. I lost all respect for the Feds, especially the DEA when the knuckleheads here recriminalized pot and they went around kicking doors in like they were saving the world. They are nothing more than IRS agents with a gun.

Luckily AK has some gray areas the lets people stay out of trouble. I do hope they finally pass some laws to decriminalize personal amounts of harder drugs. Throwing a user in jail is just a waste of time and money.

The ultimate problem is the voters. We keep electing the same bunch of clowns year after year, and somehow we expect things to turn out different. The younger generation is much more rational, they should do a lot of good. My generation is all but gone, they just have to wait out some of the baby boomers.

.......like
 
Top