[excon]

I don't understand that comment at all..My addiction needed fed so I robbed,it wasn't prohibition that made me need to rob,it was my need to use.

In the link provided earlier about prohibition this was exactly what they did,,doctors began to prescribe alcohol for medical treatments,,and look where that went.

All that just for stopping weed from being illegal?Somehow I don't think society feels the same way.

YES,ME!

Did I let you have it??:D

Hello again, K:

Nahhh. You didn't lay a glove on me...

What I meant was that prohibition effects the PRICE of drugs. If they were CHEAP, you'd rather go to 7/Eleven to BUY your drugs, and not rob them, wouldn't you?

Nope. That post was about ALL drugs being legal.

YOU'RE chomping at the bit to do drugs again?? I'm not buying it.

excon

[slapshot_oi]

This thread has degenerated from citizens' rights to public safety.

[KBC]

Hello again, K:

Nahhh. You didn't lay a glove on me....

What I meant was that prohibition effects the PRICE of drugs. If they were CHEAP, you'd rather go to 7/Eleven to BUY them there than to rob them, wouldn't you?

Nope. That post was about ALL drugs being legal.

YOU'RE chomping at the bit to do drugs again??? I'm not buying it.

excon

:eek:What?, you don't believe I would do drugs again? ARE YOU OFF YOUR ROCKER??

I am and always will be an addict.

If there were lines in front of me right now, well, there wouldn't be any.

[smoothy]

In cases of accidents with injuries, in Carolina it's every single time.

Wish it was around here (only I wish it was every accident with damage)... I think its at their descretion. I need to remember to ask the next cop I get a chance to chat with, but that may be a while, I get the chance at irregular intervals. Usually when streets are closed due to bomb threats or sometimes grabbing lunch.

[smoothy]

This thread has degenerated from citizens' rights to public safety.

Citizens don't have the right to use illegal drugs.

[excon]

:eek:What??,,you don't believe I would do drugs again??ARE YOU OFF YOUR ROCKER????.

Hello again, KBC:

I don't know whether you will or won't. We each have our personal demons to deal with. I'll say this. The law didn't stop you before from getting high, and I don't believe the law is stopping you now.

If, however, you're telling me that you'll jump right back into the addicts life, IF drugs become legal, I think you should give up being an addiction expert. I HOPE I misunderstand you.

excon

[slapshot_oi]

Citizens don't have the right to use illegal drugs.

Correct, and I am arguing that they should be legal. I'm not arguing how drugs should be used which has been the topic of the past few posts.

We should be allowed the right to choose.

[KBC]

Hello again, KBC:

I dunno whether you will or won't. We each have our personal demons to deal with. I'll say this. The law didn't stop you before from getting high, and I don't believe the law is stopping you now.

If, however, you're telling me that you'll jump right back into the addicts life, IF drugs become legal, I think you should give up being an addiction expert. I HOPE I misunderstand you.

excon

Not even close.

I wouldn't jump back into the addiction life if it stays illegal, or becomes legal.

The LAW has nothing to do with my choice of using or not.It's a conscious decision I have to make daily which stops me from using.

I fight every day to not use,this thread and the other threads I get involved in help my cause,it strengthens my resolve against the want to use.

Just because I chose not to use doesn't mean my desire isn't there.

[excon]

Citizens don't have the right to use illegal drugs.

Correct, and I am arguing that they should be legal.

Hello again, slap:

**greenie**

That IS what this thread is about, no? Thank you for keeping us focused.

excon

[Synnen]

:eek:What??,,you don't believe I would do drugs again??ARE YOU OFF YOUR ROCKER????

I am and always will be an addict.

If there were lines in front of me right now,,well,,there wouldn't be any.

There is a HUGE difference between an addict and a social user.

HUGE.

Just like there is a huge difference between social drinkers and alcoholics.

Not all people who use are addicts.

[KBC]

There is a HUGE difference between an addict and a social user.

HUGE.

Just like there is a huge difference between social drinkers and alcoholics.

Not all people who use are addicts.

I have not ever stated that, you are making a supposition.

[Catsmine]

I have not ever stated that,,you are making a supposition.

I think that was Smoothy in one of those blanket statements implied that one took makes you kill people and kidnap animals, or was it the other way round?

[KBC]

I think that was Smoothy in one of those blanket statements implied that one toke makes you kill people and kidnap animals, or was it the other way round?

I don't know.. I know I would not call a social user an addict, nor would I judge someone as BEING an addict, that is up to the user to decide.

[Catsmine]

I don't know..I know I would not call a social user an addict,,nor would I judge someone as BEING an addict,,that is up to the user to decide.

I certainly had to decide for myself. That's probably why I get so adamant about the militants on both sides of the addiction questions. There is no cookie cutter. A total ban, like with marijuana today, prevents research and leaves us with Smoothy who says it's hardcore and Aurora Bell who says it's nothing and the distinct possibility that under certain circumstances with certain people they're both right and no way to find out what circumstances and which people.

[KBC]

I certainly had to decide for myself. That's probably why I get so adamant about the militants on both sides of the addiction questions. There is no cookie cutter. A total ban, like with marijuana today, prevents research and leaves us with Smoothy who says it's hardcore and Aurora Bell who says it's nothing and the distinct possibility that under certain circumstances with certain people they're both right and no way to find out what circumstances and which people.

But do you think making it available for all to use is a good idea?

If it's testing,then the labs can test,that already happens.If it's for medicinal purposes,that also happens already.

Is the war on drugs a stalemate?Yes, it has been for many a year,but that doesn't make it correct to legalize all drugs.

Work smarter,not harder.

That was a motto an old coworker used all the time.

If something was too tough to handle,think of a better way to handle it.Don't throw in the towel and accept it as impossible.

[Catsmine]

that doesn't make it correct to legalize all drugs

There's one of those blanket stements again. Let me reiterate that I do not advocate legalization of cocaine, opiates, LSD, MDMA, or other "hard" drugs. I do support repeal of the Marijuana Tax Act and redaction of marijuana from other criminal statutes such as the Controlled Substances Act.

[excon]

Is the war on drugs a stalemate ?Yes,,it has been for many a year,but that doesn't make it correct to legalize all drugs. Work smarter,not harder. Don't throw in the towel.

Hello again, KBC:

Is work smarter a euphemism for "cracking down"? I think it is. I said this on the border war thread. But, I thought so highly of what I wrote, I thought I'd repeat it here.

Why do I know that???? I know it, because there are some who actually believe that we can keep drugs out of the country, if we only "cracked down" (build a fence???). The ultimate expression of cracking down on drugs, would be level 5 federal penitentiary. It has a wall, and several fences. It has guard towers. It has guards. Visitors are searched.

There's drugs in there. Lots of 'em.

So, it doesn't take a great leap of faith to assume, that whatever fence you wanna put up, somebody will get around it. Maybe even lots of people.

It's time to try something different. That's not throwing in the towel.

excon

[Synnen]

I certainly had to decide for myself. That's probably why I get so adamant about the militants on both sides of the addiction questions. There is no cookie cutter. A total ban, like with marijuana today, prevents research and leaves us with Smoothy who says it's hardcore and Aurora Bell who says it's nothing and the distinct possibility that under certain circumstances with certain people they're both right and no way to find out what circumstances and which people.

*greenie*

And KBC--that's EXACTLY what I meant: the user has to decide.

When it is illegal, the LAW decides, not the user.

[smoothy]

Correct, and I am arguing that they should be legal. I'm not arguing how drugs should be used which has been the topic of the past few posts.

We should be allowed the right to choose.

Given the large ammounts of idiots that walk the streets in any given city in any given country... thats the last thing they need.

[smoothy]

There is a HUGE difference between an addict and a social user.

HUGE.

Just like there is a huge difference between social drinkers and alcoholics.

Not all people who use are addicts.

How many Addicts started as casual users? Most I would say.

How many casual users end up causing accidents.. Most just like not all alcohol related deaths are caused by alcoholics.