| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dani
Status: Offline
Joined: 06 Aug 2008
Posts: 1197
$poons: 698.00
Location: Adelaide
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
Smoke - No
Drink - Yes
Anything else - Does paracetamol count?
I personally cannot stand smoking. My mother does and I hope to god she stops one day before it takes its toll - assuming she's not beyond *too much* irreversable damage already. She's been smoking since she was 8.
I've never even taken a drag of a cig - why bother when I smoked passively (with good old CO2 combined!) for 10 years of my life? It was horrible enough without making the choice to inhale willingly.
Never touched any (of those types of) drugs either. It never appealed to me and I've always been strong-minded when it comes to peer pressure.
I drink socially every now and then and a glass of wine with a meal sometimes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mclinton92
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Posts: 1524
$poons: 80.60
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| döppelgangbang wrote: |
Weed for special gaming powers. When you start losing its time for more! I'm quite partial to it while hanging around home or chilling with friends. After a long day it makes everything better. I abstain in social situations
|
now how do you think i got my top score in geometry wars 2 
_________________
Its the absent minded fool who's afraid to think.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sinthesys
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 2968
$poons: 58.00
Location: Perth
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Windburn wrote: |
Fact is, I wouldn't be surprised really. I know how much of it goes on. But if it's so natural and so harmless, why do people still have to hide their use of it? Why is it criminalised? This isn't something to be tossed around lightly- having a criminal record WILL impinge on your ability to gain employment or a better position.
Because the fact remains that "most" people still disprove of it.
Yes, that IS relaxing as the more recent generations of people have grown up with it, but to the extent that people will eventually want the laws relaxed too? No, I don't think so. The laws are not in place to protect people from themselves, but to protect society as a whole.
Like I said, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I really do take offence to being called condescending, or being told to "get over myself", because I have never really been a judgmental person at heart. But I have researched and studied in-depth drug use and their effects in Australia and overseas, and so I have rather strong convictions about common arguments for and against it (and the many holes in these arguments), and how best to deal with it in society. |
Well, I believe that the majority of the population are misinformed about drugs, and therefore a social stigma exists.
| Quote: | | But drugs should not be the answer to life's problems like that. These people need psychological help, they need to better learn to manage a work-life balance. |
I'd say this is the mentality of the majority of the populace, and if people are using drugs are crutches, I agree with you. However, not all drug users are using to escape, and I think its pretty presumptuous of you to comment on a Lawyer's ability to deal with stress. My brother is a lawyer and I can tell you its not as simple as just 'buck up and learn how to cope'. And yes, he uses the occasional drug.
People use to have fun and relax, same as drinking (which the government also tried to ban, probably because its just as 'dangerous' as all the currently illegal drugs). You give the impression that you think beer drinking is social and harmless, but as soon as someone does something illegal its destructive escapism.
Ok, maybe the 'get over yourself' was out of line, but by telling people their drug use is linked to immaturity and they will grow out of it, you are being condescending. You have shown a profound misunderstanding of the reasons behind drug use and the effects on the individual. Also, weed has been decriminalised in W.A, so if I'm carrying a stick, or have 2 plants growing, I'll get a fine and no criminal record. But anyway, downloading movies and music is law breaking, but I'm sure a large portion of the non-drug taking population partakes in it near daily. I guess its ok to choose what laws you break if they don't involve drugs...
_________________
GT: Da Herbalist - Keep on Choppin'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Infested Jibbs
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 5969
$poons: 1307.90
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| DancesInUnderwear wrote: | | Jibbs wrote: | | Anyone who uses illicit drugs, even weed, have more to answer.It is not a simple case of 'my body and i'll cry if i want too', look deeper guys, follow the rabbit down the rabbit hole... etc |
So, indirectly, when you go out and buy an apple, you're funding drug lords. That is a stupid statement, I know,
|
Well ok, just as long as you know.
The point can't be argued, if you purchase the illicit drugs off a dealer who is part of a larger drug ring you are contributing in part towards one of modern societies biggest problems.Your individual contribution is a very small part yes, no arguments, but every grain of sand on a beach makes that beach so.No sand, no beach.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ObsoletE
Status: Offline
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 20357
$poons: 34.20
Location: Perth, WA :: Jubei'Thos
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Jibbs wrote: | | No sand, no beach. |
i thought it was the presence of the ocean, more than sand, that made the beach.
i mean, look at those rocky beaches in England.
or shell beaches in north-west WA.
(yeah, just being facetious.)
_________________
My Play-Asia Affiliate Link.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Infested Jibbs
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 5969
$poons: 1307.90
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
No one cares about those beaches because they are crap.
Especially the W.A. ones.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
döppelgangbang
Status: Offline
Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 2092
$poons: 1110.40
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
True but...
No man is an island. Every thing we do affects others. Even in the case of legal drugs. Smokers, alcoholics and fatties etc make the public health system more expensive for all of us. Chop Chop or illegally home grown tobacco carries punishment far in excess of that for growing weed. Its not about the drug, but the law. Imagine how the cartels would fall if suddenly all the drugs people wanted were legalised! We all pay for the actions of the few, legal OR illegal.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mclinton92
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Posts: 1524
$poons: 80.60
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Jibbs wrote: | No one cares about those beaches because they are crap.
Especially the W.A. ones. |
are you serious? W.A has some of the best waves in oz, mainly down margaret river way
excuse my spelling today, still on anasthetic and using mybros computer which is IE, im used to firefox, spellcheck ftw
_________________
Its the absent minded fool who's afraid to think.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
So you won't buy any chocolate that is made using slave labour in Africa to pick coco beans?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Infested Jibbs
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 5969
$poons: 1307.90
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Not ones that advertise the fact.
Unlike most chocolate, ALL proceeds for illicit drugs go towards ilicit purposes.Sure, on a personal level the dealer maybe supporting a family on his takings but from an overall perspective illicit drug money goes towards benefiting the illicit drug trade.
Hey, at least slave chocolate(is their such a thing?Good ol benza) pays their fair share of taxes.By all means continue arguing the point.So far a fruit shop and chocolate has become involved, let's try aiming for less desert themed foods and more savoury goods.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Additives
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 30
$poons: 1.00
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
To all the people who are mentioning escapisim, i know dozens of people who will use alchahol to do just that.
I know, personally, none that use drugs.
and past that, i have had parties with friends drinking and partys with friends smoking weed, and in the former we wake up with briken shit, and in the latter everything is all fine.
Also, in the latter, we dont get as many people sleeping arround.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ObsoletE
Status: Offline
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 20357
$poons: 34.20
Location: Perth, WA :: Jubei'Thos
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Jibbs wrote: | | slave chocolate(is their such a thing?Good ol benza) |
yes
_________________
My Play-Asia Affiliate Link.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sinthesys wrote: | | I think its pretty presumptuous of you to comment on a Lawyer's ability to deal with stress. My brother is a lawyer and I can tell you its not as simple as just 'buck up and learn how to cope'. And yes, he uses the occasional drug. |
You do realise I only mentioned that because of Spanca's linked article, which directly commented on lawyers turning to drugs because of being overworked? Please comprehend what is being said before flying off the handle.
| Sinthesys wrote: | | You have shown a profound misunderstanding of the reasons behind drug use and the effects on the individual. Also, weed has been decriminalised in W.A, so if I'm carrying a stick, or have 2 plants growing, I'll get a fine and no criminal record. But anyway, downloading movies and music is law breaking, but I'm sure a large portion of the non-drug taking population partakes in it near daily. I guess its ok to choose what laws you break if they don't involve drugs... |
You're flat out wrong here. There's no "profound misunderstanding" here. Just like there's no decriminalisation of cannabis in WA, this is entirely a misnomer. There are many offences in the criminal law which aren't recorded on your criminal record, they are still crimes though. Try being a repeat offender and see how sentencing views your criminal record then.
Alcohol, whilst still a drug and still bad for you, is entirely different, mainly due to its levels of dependency relative to most drugs. The fact is, as soon as anyone starts talking about anything other than cannabis, this entire discussion gets blown out of the water and has no grounds to stand on. Is cannabis more addictive than alcohol? Pretty sure they're on the same level. And just like cannabis, I guarantee if you started continually binge drinking at a party and got trashed, you'd be looked down upon by your peers too. And if you hopped behind the wheel of a car, you'd be equally culpable.
Your comment on movies and music is just devolving to a childish level; they are revenue-driven crimes not social health concerns, an entirely different playing field when it comes to the impact on society and the culpability associated with that.
I won't continue posting in this thread if it deteriorates further. I'll stay so long as comments are thought out, reasonable and respectful.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Jibbs wrote: | | Hey, at least slave chocolate(is their such a thing?Good ol benza) pays their fair share of taxes.By all means continue arguing the point.So far a fruit shop and chocolate has become involved, let's try aiming for less desert themed foods and more savoury goods. |
So money involved with the slave trade, forcing children into slavery is ok cause they pay taxes?
Wow thats kind of a fucked up perspective to take on things.
| Quote: | | Sure, on a personal level the dealer maybe supporting a family on his takings but from an overall perspective illicit drug money goes towards benefiting the illicit drug trade. |
So because it goes to a drug dealers family instead of a multi billionair CEO's family its worse?
Buying slave chocolate is every bit as bad as buying drugs if we follow your rational. I'm not talking about tiny no name brand choclat companies either, it's people like Nestles and shit doing it.
Or hell, is buying consumer electronics supporting the communist regime in china?
Buying jewlery supporting the militia and blood dimond trade in Africa?
Buying make up and deoderent supporting animal testing?
You can't hold the consumer culpable for the circumstances of the product being made in because basicly everything you buy has gone through some fucked up shit somewere down the line.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sinthesys
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 2968
$poons: 58.00
Location: Perth
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Windburn wrote: |
You're flat out wrong here. There's no "profound misunderstanding" here. Just like there's no decriminalisation of cannabis in WA, this is entirely a misnomer. There are many offences in the criminal law which aren't recorded on your criminal record, they are still crimes though. Try being a repeat offender and see how sentencing views your criminal record then.
|
| Quote: | Opposition Leader Paul Omodei said soft cannabis laws treated possession of up to 30g of the drug, and cultivation of up to two plants, no more seriously than a parking fine.
|
Well, lets see who's right shall we...Link to news article. But I'm sure your not misinformed at all...
| Quote: | | Alcohol, whilst still a drug and still bad for you, is entirely different, mainly due to its levels of dependency relative to most drugs. The fact is, as soon as anyone starts talking about anything other than cannabis, this entire discussion gets blown out of the water and has no grounds to stand on. Is cannabis more addictive than alcohol? Pretty sure they're on the same level. And just like cannabis, I guarantee if you started continually binge drinking at a party and got trashed, you'd be looked down upon by your peers too. And if you hopped behind the wheel of a car, you'd be equally culpable. |
Isn't this just proving my point that it isn't about the legality of the drug, its about abusing substances, irrelevant of legality, to excess? If you manage and control your intake of illegal substances, I fail to see the harm it causes any more than the managed intake of legal drugs. Isn't this a case of a bunch of kids blow their hands off with fireworks, so now no one is trusted to use them?
Oh, and your argument about the irresponsibility of using drugs based on the legal rammifications: if you've ever gone to score drugs, the chances of being caught are very slim. Worst case scenario is you are pulled over on the way home, and even then, they'll have to suspect you are hold drugs, then do a full car search to find them, which is highly unlikely. Once I'm home, the likelyhood my house will be searched is practically nil considering i've never been on the inside of a police station in my life.
_________________
GT: Da Herbalist - Keep on Choppin'
Last edited by Sinthesys on Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:21 pm, edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanca
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 7926
$poons: 106.00
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sinthesys wrote: | | Windburn wrote: |
You're flat out wrong here. There's no "profound misunderstanding" here. Just like there's no decriminalisation of cannabis in WA, this is entirely a misnomer. There are many offences in the criminal law which aren't recorded on your criminal record, they are still crimes though. Try being a repeat offender and see how sentencing views your criminal record then.
|
| Quote: | Opposition Leader Paul Omodei said soft cannabis laws treated possession of up to 30g of the drug, and cultivation of up to two plants, no more seriously than a parking fine.
|
Well, lets see who's right shall we...Link to news article. But I'm sure your not misinformed at all...
| Quote: | | Alcohol, whilst still a drug and still bad for you, is entirely different, mainly due to its levels of dependency relative to most drugs. The fact is, as soon as anyone starts talking about anything other than cannabis, this entire discussion gets blown out of the water and has no grounds to stand on. Is cannabis more addictive than alcohol? Pretty sure they're on the same level. And just like cannabis, I guarantee if you started continually binge drinking at a party and got trashed, you'd be looked down upon by your peers too. And if you hopped behind the wheel of a car, you'd be equally culpable. |
Isn't this just proving my point that it isn't about the legality of the drug, its about abusing substances, irrelevant of legality, to excess? |
Nowhere in the article you linked does it say it is legal. That article supports what Windburn was saying and also reinforces the point that legality (or illegality as it may be) isn't the driving force behind the problems of drug use that others have suggested in this thread.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sinthesys
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 2968
$poons: 58.00
Location: Perth
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Nowhere did I say it was legal, I was merely referring to the fact that it is not treated as a criminal act, but rather the person is slapped with a civil penalty in the form of a fine.
_________________
GT: Da Herbalist - Keep on Choppin'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Infested Jibbs
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 5969
$poons: 1307.90
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | Jibbs wrote: | | Hey, at least slave chocolate(is their such a thing?Good ol benza) pays their fair share of taxes.By all means continue arguing the point.So far a fruit shop and chocolate has become involved, let's try aiming for less desert themed foods and more savoury goods. |
So money involved with the slave trade, forcing children into slavery is ok cause they pay taxes?
Wow thats kind of a **** up perspective to take on things. |
When did i say it's ok?Point it out?Jesus christ.
| Benza wrote: |
| Quote: | | Sure, on a personal level the dealer maybe supporting a family on his takings but from an overall perspective illicit drug money goes towards benefiting the illicit drug trade. |
So because it goes to a drug dealers family instead of a multi billionair CEO's family its worse? |
Yes, it is.That is the foundation of our capitalist society.This multi billion dollar family has obviously somewhere down the line taken the initiative to provide a product/service and 'played the game' so to speak-all within the rules(generally speaking, even the Rockefeller's aren't perfect).If your dealing to support a family you need your arse kicking in as the future your building for your family is built upon the proverbial pillar of sand.
| Benza wrote: | Buying slave chocolate is every bit as bad as buying drugs if we follow your rational. I'm not talking about tiny no name brand choclat companies either, it's people like Nestles and **** doing it.
Or hell, is buying consumer electronics supporting the communist regime in china?
Buying jewlery supporting the militia and blood dimond trade in Africa?
Buying make up and deoderent supporting animal testing?
You can't hold the consumer culpable for the circumstances of the product being made in because basically everything you buy has gone through some **** up **** somewere down the line. |
Oh fuckin bullshit benza.It's ok because everyone else is doing it?That's your argument?Pathetic.
Diamonds are available which are now classified as not being blood diamonds, for those who want a clear conscience the choice is there.The same with makeup-most are available as not being tested on animals.
Communism?That's a whole different kettle of fish.
You show me a morally sound way of purchasing drugs(aside from manufacturing them yourself for personal use) and i'll show you an argument worth continuing.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mipac
Status: Offline
Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Posts: 2931
$poons: 849.60
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
All the weed I buy is home grown. Don't trust that foreign stuff.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
InvivnI
Status: Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 2041
$poons: 513.10
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Drink:Yes
Smoke: No
Drugs: No
I have a friend on drugs and she's in a pretty bad way right now, it's definitely put me off them.
_________________
My Photos
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Psy Storm
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 86
$poons: 5.60
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Jibbs wrote: |
You show me a morally sound way of purchasing drugs(aside from manufacturing them yourself for personal use) and I'll show you an argument worth continuing. |
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Morals are informed by your culture. If the culture says that drugs are wrong then chances are people are going to have a moral objection to drugs, even if there is nothing wrong with drugs. Drugs are just a substance they have no inherent evilness or goodness. To illustrate lets look at euthanasia. Our law says it is wrong and that it is immoral. However this doesn't mean that it IS wrong. In fact I support euthanasia and have no moral qualms about it, I actually think it is immoral to deny people the choice.
In any case the fact is that alcohol and tobacco cost the tax payer more money than all other drugs combined.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Klawrence
Status: Offline
Joined: 21 May 2006
Posts: 851
$poons: 86.40
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Smoke: No
Drink: Yes
Drugs: Do them? No, make them? Yes, the illegal type? No. Which manufacturer is more evil?
Its funny how the personal philosophical threads eventuate at exam times. I'm almost certain there was an exact same one this time last year, and of course mid semester exam was a vicious religion vs. atheism vs. agnosticism thread/ south park episode. I love this forum. Actually, its funny that this topic does jump up just now since i just had a bioethics exam about people's moral right to take and use illicit/ legal drugs.
I concluded under Mills harm principle firstly that intervention of drug use is justified by the harm that excessive drug use causes third parties. I think that i also said that punishment of individuals who were drug users was not justified under the concept of determinism unless the punishment was an effective means to pressure drug users to modify their behaviour and stop the third party harm to others. Also, prohibition has empirically shown to be infective (currant prohibition of illicit drugs, alcohol in the past). The overall conclusion was that the only way to curb illicit drug use is for it to be deemed unpopular by society.
and so, pretty much my view is that drug use (including the use of alcohol) is not morally justifiable, but neither is the majority of the legal punishment attributed to its use (thats the pessimistic determinist coming out in me). The reason i do/dont do it is becasue I see the benefits of abstinence outweighs the risk of the alternative (the un-calculated genetic risk of dependence)
also, someone who went to my highschool (wasnt 'friends' with them) died approx 3 weeks ago from an OD on Special K (ketamine) and methadone. She was trying to get off heroin apparently (OD on methadone), i didn't realise she was ever into such hard drugs. Interestingly, a few of her direct friends who you would label as token 'druggies' have gone quits, 3 of them even went as far as to go to a Queensland rehab centre. Point: I'm only 19 and i know someone my age who is dead, form drugs; ultimately above all I dont want to be dead, immediate inference: The benifits are too minute to justify the use. simple.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boxer
Banned User
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 16
$poons: 6.00
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I drink, don't do any drugs at all.
Been tempted to try an E, but my friends reckon it just made them all horny. If that's the case I reckon someone spiked my drink when I was 12.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Klawrence wrote: | Smoke: No
Drink: Yes
Drugs: Do them? No, make them? Yes, the illegal type? No. Which manufacturer is more evil?
Its funny how the personal philosophical threads eventuate at exam times. I'm almost certain there was an exact same one this time last year, and of course mid semester exam was a vicious religion vs. atheism vs. agnosticism thread/ south park episode. I love this forum. Actually, its funny that this topic does jump up just now since i just had a bioethics exam about people's moral right to take and use illicit/ legal drugs.
I concluded under Mills harm principle firstly that intervention of drug use is justified by the harm that excessive drug use causes third parties. I think that i also said that punishment of individuals who were drug users was not justified under the concept of determinism unless the punishment was an effective means to pressure drug users to modify their behaviour and stop the third party harm to others. Also, prohibition has empirically shown to be infective (currant prohibition of illicit drugs, alcohol in the past). The overall conclusion was that the only way to curb illicit drug use is for it to be deemed unpopular by society.
and so, pretty much my view is that drug use (including the use of alcohol) is not morally justifiable, but neither is the majority of the legal punishment attributed to its use (thats the pessimistic determinist coming out in me). The reason i do/dont do it is becasue I see the benefits of abstinence outweighs the risk of the alternative (the un-calculated genetic risk of dependence)
also, someone who went to my highschool (wasnt 'friends' with them) died approx 3 weeks ago from an OD on Special K (ketamine) and methadone. She was trying to get off heroin apparently (OD on methadone), i didn't realise she was ever into such hard drugs. Interestingly, a few of her direct friends who you would label as token 'druggies' have gone quits, 3 of them even went as far as to go to a Queensland rehab centre. Point: I'm only 19 and i know someone my age who is dead, form drugs; ultimately above all I dont want to be dead, immediate inference: The benifits are too minute to justify the use. simple. |
Hehe, I've been skirting around JS Mills' utilitarianism & social morality theory and HLA Hart's legal positivism (paternalist theory) in nearly all of my posts, not wanting to go too far into jurisprudence and social theories to really put people to sleep
Great to see there are a few scholars in here (and that goes for some of you other great posters that I've failed to acknowledge as such so far). I'm really enjoying the excellent points of view raised here, particularly where they relate to the framework of society integrity.
I also had a bad experience during high school, and I didn't really know how to deal with it at the time. Ended up not being able to help a close friend out of a drug problem that ended up getting her kicked from home, she disassociated with her friends and pretty much dropped out of school until she was much older. I haven't had any real contact with her since.
Really sorry to hear about your friend 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeoSanity
Status: Offline
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 2988
$poons: 17.20
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Smoke: Used to [Quit last December]
Drink: Often [About once or twice a week]
Drugs: On Occasion [Only pot these days]
I think I've reflected my drug policy a number of times on IRC.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
