Page 117 of 228 FirstFirst ... 1767107115116117118119127167217 ... LastLast
Results 1,161 to 1,170 of 2276

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1161
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Wood View Post
    So cocaine and heroin should be legal? Sorry, I missed a load of the conversation here, so feel free to ignore me if you already covered this.
    Eh, so that's where my opinion is a bit unformed... In both cases a refinement process has to be done. So, I don't really think the plant should be regulated, but possibly the refined substance itself. Those are perfect examples of the types of drugs that are probably best left as schedule 1 in their refined state. So, like P Virdis is one of the plants that 5-meo-dmt is extracted from and it is also commonly used for soaps and stuff... So, I don't really want the government implying my intent at the ingredient level. It's benign in that state similar to poppy. It's a grey area for me. Heroin and cocaine don't have any medical use that I'm aware AND are highly addictive. I suppose you may be right... Opiods are a can of worms. Certain molecules have uses (which even when "controlled" as prescriptions have a high propensity for abuse), but I'm not as clear on where to draw the line.

    Mushrooms should all be legal.
    Toad venom should be legal.
    Peote and mescaline should be legal.
    Cannabis, kratom, salvia and the like should be legal.

    That's a starting point for me.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 11-01-2018 at 08:13 AM.

  2. #1162
    Josh have they done a study on the effectiveness of the program? Always been interested by Portugal?s approach

  3. #1163
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by d0cwho View Post
    Josh have they done a study on the effectiveness of the program? Always been interested by Portugal?s approach
    This is on the wikipedia page:

    Increased uptake of treatment (roughly 60% increase as of 2012.)[12]
    Reduction in new HIV diagnoses amongst drug users by 17%[19] and a general drop of 90% in drug-related HIV infection
    Reduction in drug related deaths, although this reduction has decreased in later years. The number of drug related deaths is now almost on the same level as before the Drug strategy was implemented.[12][19] However, this may be accounted for by improvement in measurement practices, which includes a doubling of toxicological autopsies now being performed, meaning that more drugs related deaths are likely to be recorded.[20]
    Reported lifetime use of "all illicit drugs" increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine use more than doubled, from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy nearly doubled from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin increased from 0.7% to 1.1%[19] It has been proposed[by whom?] that this effect may have been related to the candor of interviewees, who may have been inclined to answer more truthfully due to a reduction in the stigma associated with drug use.[20] However, during the same period, the use of heroin and cannabis also increased in Spain and Italy, where drugs for personal use was decriminalised many years earlier than in Portugal [20][21] while the use of Cannabis and heroin decreased in the rest of Western Europe.[22][23] The increase in drug use observed among adults in Portugal was not greater than that seen in nearby countries that did not change their drug laws.[24]
    Drug use among adolescents (13-15 yrs) and "problematic" users declined.[20]
    Drug-related criminal justice workloads decreased.[20]
    Decreased street value of most illicit drugs, some significantly
    The number of drug related deaths has reduced from 131 in 2001 to 20 in 2008.[25] As of 2012, Portugal's drug death toll sat at 3 per million, in comparison to the EU average of 17.3 per million.
    Homicide rate increased from 1.13 per 100 000 in 2000 to 1.76 in 2007, then decreased to 0.96 in 2015 [26][27][28]
    The fuzzy bit for me is especially regarding synthesized compounds. LSD is probably useful, whereas PCP does not appear to have any usefulness. Meth, gator, probably quaalude, etc should all remain illicit. Funny thing is that sugar is GRAS, yet can be causally linked to more health issues than many of these other molecules. So, where I believe we should relax most of these regulations, I believe sugar should be removed from the GRAS designation.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 11-01-2018 at 09:08 AM.

  4. #1164
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    Josh, thanks for your response. I'll try to read it more in depth over the course of this week.

    Regarding the Portugal solution, that's a plan I support as well. Though I would prefer that we treat tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana all as public concerns that we help people away from. Reducing the harshness of drug consequences for users would also help lower our incarceration costs - I see that as a way to cut government waste. To be fair, having not run the numbers I do not know confidently if the cost of rehab and treatment for drug users would be less than incarceration. I just hope that is the case.

  5. #1165
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    So, the big issue has more to do with how they treat drug use - and instead of punishment as a high crime they treat it as a problem, and assign you treatment. They don't make it legal though.

    I think this is just a far more humane way, and in the basic sense, the smarter way to deal with the problem. If somebody is using and ruining their life the end result is some minor punishments and treatment vs. years in jail that might reinforce the need to use.
    I agree that drug abuse can be problematic. Drug use, in most cases, is not a problem. Used responsibly and in moderation, the use of these compounds can have pretty profound effects.

    That said, I agree with the premise that drug abuse should be treated not punished.

  6. #1166
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Unfated Pt 2:

    I've been in the camp for a few months (years?) now that Josh is hyper-partisan, and that informs his arguments and opinions. It is interesting because Josh seems to portray himself as more moderate in his conversation, and is perhaps the most likely person to bring out "both sides do it" arguments - regardless of whether that argument is effective in the moment or not. I've been far more curious about whether Josh views that he is partisan or moderate in his politics.

    I think this is becoming more common with people who identify politically as libertarians to argue that they are socially liberal and therefore moderate, as well. Which, honestly, is an argument I'm inclined to buy provided their stance does fall moderately.
    I would consider myself Conservative leaning Libertarian. I supported Gary Johnson, I supported Glenn Johnson here for mayor here mostly because he puts economics first and comes from the Austrian School. I would support a JFK democrat, but they don't seem to exist anymore. Blue Dog democrats have gone, and they would be a welcome sight to many I think. If I had a single voting factor it is taxes and related economics, vs any social issue. I am socially ambivalent, and it isn't a voting issue for me. I like Bush because it was Tax Cuts for Everyone, but in the end I strongly disliked the budget increase under his presidency. Obama was no better, but neither were in control of the entitlement program, and those have ballooned far beyond the scope of the programs, and also without control either way by either president. I liked the Clinton/Gingrich budgets the best historically, along with the JFK and Reagan tax cuts. Hence why I would vote for a Blue Dog DNC member if they existed any more.

    I would hardly say I am hyper-partisan. I am really fucking exhausted by the mindless 'everything is racist' crap and SJW bullshit that is all around right now. It is mindless and in the end, wrong. It is the 'what is wrong with our country right now!' in my opinion.

    It is also factually incorrect. When a person repeats "Everyone who disagrees with me is [fascist, racist, xenowhateverist]" well.... I am not the hyper partisan one, nor am I hyper partisan by disagreeing, strongly, with the person is wrong. A lot of it comes down to the, lets say 'The Gordon View' - GOP is racist and Fascists. I hear it from a good portion of my long time liberal friends, he is not unique, only maybe in his level of asshat about the subject.

    But this person is not conservative or even moderately liberal. We are talking the 8% we dealt with before in this discussion. Now, to me this is kinda like a guy trying to tell a pregnant woman how easy childbirth is. It is obvious he has no clue what he is talking about, yet seems to walk around as if he is the expert. Oh, they have some sort of belief they are. But really? Fascists? Have you no fucking clue what a Fascist really is? So when somebody starts talking about a political party they are not part of, as if they understand them, well.... I find myself trying to tell them that they are totally misjudging the other side. Now, a big part of that is because I am a contrarian. And a know-it-all. Most of us here are, lets be honest.

    But mostly I reply and rail against it because it is wrong. I have people tell me almost daily "Liberals are idiots." I nod and smile and I say yes, but people are idiots. We have stupid on our side. I remind people because I remind myself this daily. As much as there is a Gordon View there is someone I know repeating the canard that The Left is Stupid. The problem is the flip is the 'Left thinks the Right is Evil'.

    Now that is really the rub.

    A lot of my friends are conservative. Conservatives are smart, kind, giving people who really want what is best for everyone. They don't want their culture, which is part the stereotype of 'America F yeah' and 'Everyone can succeed!' and Church and volunteering at school and baked pie, to be ruined. The vast, VAST majority are shirt off their back, lets go shooting, I will help you build your house type of people. These are GOOD people. Amazing, welcoming, loving. They also have Moral Values that, as I have linked to various times from *cough* approved websites *cough*, that those on the Left can not see. But good people. Damn good people through and through.

    They are not Evil. A small part are misguided. I have almost daily discussions with one of my smartest friends about Q anon, and I have to tell him I really don't believe it. Same guy came up with a new way for Mitsubishi PID loops to work that their engineers want to buy from us, and we were able to find a solution for reprogramming Y-12 nobody else wants to touch. This guy is hella smart. Still believes Q. He would dive down an solve a problem partially because it is unsolvable. And give you the shirt off his back.

    He is smart, talented, open minded, generous to a fault - and conservative. My boss is a smart guy, Vols fan, sharp and generous. Conservative, church going guy. Also has 2 adopted kids, one Asian, one black. In fact, a large portion of my conservative friends have adopted, and most adopted black kids.

    I can repeat this story over a large sample of my friends. The smartest SI in this area, East Tennessee, is conservative, sharp as a whip, doesn't want illegal immigration. Also is married to a Korean woman, and adopted her kid. He just went down to their embassy to do it last year.

    Small addition: My wife is conservative. Her single voting issue is abortion. She thinks pot should be legal, we have LBGT friends and will go to their weddings, her best friend is black/PR, she has tats and piercings, dated a black guy for 6 years, we serve at church as Captains. She votes the straight republican ticket.

    Yeah, there is stupid. On both sides. But is either side evil? No. If you think that about the other half of america, whither left or right you are wrong. Most people are good, most people want you to be happy. Study after study shows this.

    Portraying these people as motivated by race, sexism, xenophobia is incorrect. It is wrong. Grossly wrong. In fact, it shows such a level of ignorance of the Right that, when you remember the view of Sun Tzu about knowing your enemy, you would understand why they lost the election and also understand why they are at a loss as to why. They blame Russia, racist-ism, well, just ask Gordon. He can tell ya. He is also flat wrong.

    The Left 8% doesn't know the Right at all.

    Clueless.

    So they fall back into stereotypes as to why, due to obvious ignorance.

    Now, I like a decent online argument as much as the next guy. But I also strongly dislike calling people names like racist when they are not. It is a slur, and it comes from complete ignorance and judgement. Might as well just go around calling every one a sinner and condemning them to hell. There is no more truth, and no more moral or virtue difference between the Gordon Way and the Westboro way.

    Both are bad. Both are wrong. We need to stop viewing those who disagree with us as Evil. Until then, I will defend the strong, good middle that the vast majority of people are here in America. As a group in the middle, moderate, we need to stop letting bullshit like Gordon spouts to ruin a great nation full of great people. It is a lie. And repeating it hurts every one.

    Edit: Additionally - I KNOW conservatives. I am married to one. They are among my best friends and co-workers. They are my family. I understand them, and they are not evil. Or motivated by race. Or any of that. To say they are is plain false and ignorant. Somebody who doesn't understand the conservatives, who is ignorant, is the only person who could call them racist or [insert whichever slur is popular that day].
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-01-2018 at 10:22 AM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  7. #1167
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    On a historic note, this week in history:

    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  8. #1168
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    I personally see the period from 1940 to 1990 as a shift where economic Whigs and social Democratic-Republicans left the Republican party and entered the Democratic party while Southern Rural Democratic-Republicans and Northern rural areas coalesced into the Republican party. The world turned upside down and the effective appearance is that Republicans became Democrats and Democrats became Republicans. It's why I think of Jefferson, Madison, Roosevelt, and Lincoln as all from my party, which is really just the Whigs and New York Democratic-Republicans. The current left-right schism is confusing, because neither represent my left libertarian leanings. Obama was the closest to that group in my lifetime, HW Bush probably second.

  9. #1169
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfated33 View Post
    I personally see the period from 1940 to 1990 as a shift where economic Whigs and social Democratic-Republicans left the Republican party and entered the Democratic party while Southern Rural Democratic-Republicans and Northern rural areas coalesced into the Republican party. The world turned upside down and the effective appearance is that Republicans became Democrats and Democrats became Republicans. It's why I think of Jefferson, Madison, Roosevelt, and Lincoln as all from my party, which is really just the Whigs and New York Democratic-Republicans. The current left-right schism is confusing, because neither represent my left libertarian leanings. Obama was the closest to that group in my lifetime, HW Bush probably second.
    I'd suspect that a bulk of those that voted for Trump were only a (hot-button) policy or two away from you. I believe that a majority of American's sit right there, but the chasm created by the regressive leftist smuggling in ideology under the guise of compassion and the troglodytes on on the (actual) alt-right/ white nationalists. That's why the identity politics and sweeping statements are so reprehensible. Philosophically, I see only a few scenarios for America's trajectory 1) our division causes us to crash and burn - this is the path we're on 2) One or both of the parties reject the extremists and move back to the center 3) a new party emerges. What conversations move people from an extreme position to the sensible middle...? I'm not sure, but like I've said --implicit bias (the moderate middle's leanings) can be educated whereas , extremism cannot. Extremism on both sides is a distraction slowing our progress from anything meaningful.

    edit: In having meaningful conversations, I'd say I've found I have more in common with the moderate-left than I do the far-right despite my leanings. That is an anecdotal suggestion that the entire middle/ most America is poorly represented.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 11-01-2018 at 02:54 PM.

  10. #1170
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    It is an interesting time. I would welcome 4-5 parties since I think the left right divide right now is leaving most people un-attached to either party, and both parties trying so hard to identify a hard base that is based on race, religion, economic choices and cutting off a those who don't agree. What party allows a gun toting socialist? Or a pot smoking catholic? Fiscal conservative that is social liberal? Nope.

    Then by grabbing 2-3 parties who, say, like pot usage we can get that through instead of a 50/50 split or 2-3 people across that line. The middle 50% is fairly unaccounted for. Huge potential.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

Posting Permissions

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