ClumsyMonkey.net

What a stupid idea. Make the taxpayers foot the bill in order to make sure that druggies are using drugs in a "safe way". Now they can make sure their heroin is authentic before placing it in their system. Hey they might even pick up a few leads while at the clinic. SCORE!

Call me crazy, but I doubt a heroin addict is really considering his health before he sticks himself. I'm sure while he's hard up for a hit, he says to himself "Wait, wait... I should go to the clinic, a 20 minute drive, before I funnel these illegal chemicals into my body."

I think there is a use for this clinic. We could swap out their real heroin for sterilization fluid while they aren't looking. I think that would be useful for society.

venom - it can be strongly argued that nicotine is as or more addictive then cocaine or heroin. cigarettes are legal, and you do not see people indulging in all sorts of petty crime to feed their smoke habit.

Oh, i wasn't saying "make rehab centres and they'll come." I'm talking forced. Instead of sticking them in a jail cell, send 'em to rehab. Allowing people to take part in an illegal activity is just hypocrisy, that won't do. I'm saying, round up the people if need be. If a cop or just a civilian sees or knows of people who are shooting up, have a number to call. Make it a huge campaign. And as for getting rid of whoever's distributing the drugs, i agree with reno. done

How about, instead of spending money on places to "shoot up", give the money to schools and businesses for drug testing, and put drug users in rehab. If it's such a problem that we need places for people to go to do something otherwise illegal, let's just stop the problem all together...

Unfortunately, Robbo, ours is a society that is perpetually engrossed with treating the symptoms of a problem instead of its cause.

robcore wrote:Oh, i wasn't saying "make rehab centres and they'll come." I'm talking forced. Instead of sticking them in a jail cell, send 'em to rehab. Allowing people to take part in an illegal activity is just hypocrisy, that won't do. I'm saying, round up the people if need be. If a cop or just a civilian sees or knows of people who are shooting up, have a number to call. Make it a huge campaign. And as for getting rid of whoever's distributing the drugs, i agree with reno. done

Dude, do you seriously think that people will be forced off drugs? If they don't want to get better, its not going to happen. Maybe they'll stay clean throughout the rehab, but if they're not making the descion to do it themselves, as soon as they're out, they'll be right back on them.

See, Doug, great idea, but its starting to sound to me more and more like cigarette companies. Phillip Morris advertised to children/teenagers, but that didnt really affect their sales.


Also Chris, though I see your point, heroin affects the user in different ways. People can still go through with their normal routine while under the influence. Heroin, not so much...

happeningfish wrote:Unfortunately, Robbo, ours is a society that is perpetually engrossed with treating the symptoms of a problem instead of its cause.

Makes sense. It's cheaper that way and it creates less unrest. A quiet ignorant drugged up population is easier to govern (with lots of money, of course).

Why stop here? How about giving condoms to rapists to avoid spreading AIDS as well?

doug wrote:A few things i'd like to say first. Why does there have to be a war on drugs? what is the matter with drugs? what is immoral about drug use? why should drugs be illegal? can anybody tell me?

here's how a little liberty can fix the whole damn thing. all you have to do is legalize, legalize, legalize. then a big corporation, let's call them "Doug's Drugs" (heh) can come in and start mass producing higher quality, less dangerous drugs. The government can come in and set up a bunch of regulations like they do for food - now drugs will come in packages with things like their purity and ingredients and most importantly, SIDE EFFECTS, listed.

Doug's Drugs will make sure that it creates the safest possible product... and we'll pay for a safe injection site to be built without one dime of tax money! that way our consumers can come into a "drug" store and buy our product, then go into the next room and shoot up on clean needles.

i know reno thinks different, but there is no way a junkie would rather buy his product at a higher price and with far more unknowns from some street dealer then buy it from me at a lower price with more guarantees with respect to quality and safety.

there would be no need for the growers & sellers to do anything illegal. they could open up legit businesses. they wouldn't have to kill anybody.

my solution does not even involve abolishing the government. in fact, i even allow the government to meddle. this solution is totally doable.

the point is, the state looks ridiculous by saying "don't use drugs (but here's a site for you to use drugs at)." they should just say "what the hell do i care if you shoot up? go crazy, man!" they don't look like hypocrites, druggies get their shit in a safe, cheap and dependable mannor, and i make a million goddamn dollars.

any questions?

wow, he's even got government regulations too.

the problem is this.....they (your company) thrives on the weakness of certain people. That's what's wrong with drugs....they serve no purpose. Same goes for the company your creating. it thrives on abuse of the substance. Breweries makes a product, and a certain % abuse it. Cigarette companies make a product, and the same is said for them. Doug's drugs makes a product that 100% of it's users abuse. It's not "ethical" for a buisness to do that. you won't get any investments or stock bought with a company like that. and even then, it's solely on greed and again...on the weakness of people. not ethical. (an oxymoron if i've ever heard one...buisness ethics)

and then of course as you've mentioned, drug cartels will lower their prices, because they are based on the desperate looking to make a quick buck. instead of a quick buck they'll get a quick quarter. that's just the way it is. and even then...hardcore users wouldn't want a regulated doseage of drugs....if their tolerance is high, they'll want cheep hard drugs, that are potent and deadly.

sandman wrote:sorry i misunderstood our convo from msn last night apparently
but im all for the fighting it on home soil and all .. but with drugs like cocaine for example with the cartels in columbia (and else where of course but since its most prevalent there im going with that) .. what do you do or suggest? the government is trying to fight them but with the amount of money and all that they have its not easy.. hell i believe i heard/read somewhere about the US govt helping out the Columbians with the fight against the cartels and such but theyre still not making that much progress..

oh and since i just noticed this..
rob, traditional rehab only works when ppl go there.. this is an intermediate essentially.. you cant force someone to goto the rehab.. here you subliminally convince them to basically

the problem with columbia and mexico and other poor countries is that political bodies are corrupt and only want to get elected for the sole purpose of standing with their hand out waiting for the buy off. Vicente Fox, is the only mexican president that has "stood up" against drug lords. the problem with him is that he talks hard, but has yet to do anything. you need a man of action in situations like this. Columbia and Mexico have a long standing habbit of electing the currupt people into office. They'll put on a horse and pony show that makes them look like they're fighting drug lords, so that the world will get off their asses, but really they're not doing anything. example...Panama!

oh and by the way, we can force people to go to jail...we might as well take them to rehab instead of jail.

Corey wrote:Why stop here? How about giving condoms to rapists to avoid spreading AIDS as well?

exactly!

thirdhour wrote:

robcore wrote:Oh, i wasn't saying "make rehab centres and they'll come." I'm talking forced. Instead of sticking them in a jail cell, send 'em to rehab. Allowing people to take part in an illegal activity is just hypocrisy, that won't do. I'm saying, round up the people if need be. If a cop or just a civilian sees or knows of people who are shooting up, have a number to call. Make it a huge campaign. And as for getting rid of whoever's distributing the drugs, i agree with reno. done

Dude, do you seriously think that people will be forced off drugs? If they don't want to get better, its not going to happen. Maybe they'll stay clean throughout the rehab, but if they're not making the descion to do it themselves, as soon as they're out, they'll be right back on them.

Point is, we can't have them doing drugs. If rehab can't do it, then a jail cell will.

So we will be spending billions of dollars and not be fixing anything?

We can't govern them ALL. There's obviously a policing problem on the downtown east side. HOW many women were killed on the Pickton farm before anyone did anything? But we're not concerned about protecting them, just throwing them in jail.


Besides, who is this plan of yours going to benifit? Hey, you have a big problem, but instead of trying to help you, we'll force you to do something you dont want to do, then because you didnt really have your heart in it in the first place, it wont work, and then we'll punish you for not being able to help yourself and send you to jail...


Let's compare it to say... someone with an eating disorder. Thats an addiction. But yet, somehow we dont find it so hard to get help for those people. And once again with that, force-feeding them just isnt going to work. They need counselling and support to help them make the desicion to get better. A parralel to safe injection sites would be a facility where people affected with the disease could go to find information about getting nutrients and possibly talking to a nutritionist.

Sure, its not illegal to starve yourself, but why should that matter? You're not hurting anyone else either way.

Yannic you said Doug's Drugs reminds you of a cigarette company and that makes perfect sense as that's essentially what we'd be. just another narcotics dealer.

Ethics schmethics. People want to get high. I want to get rich. that's all there is to it. i need everyone to apply a normal amount of perspective here and consider the following:

Doug's Drugs won't be producing products that kill people. At least, we'll be trying very hard to make sure that "death" is not a listed side effect of use of our product. That's a tough sell you see.

i remain firm in my belief that no drug cartel could compete for long with a corporation. in fact, why would the "cartels" even have to be cartels? they could just open up their own shops, pay their own chemists, and join the world of legitimate businessmen.

Remember when alcohol was prohibited? there were illegal, violent booze dealers. now it's legal and you don't need a dealer, you just go to 7-11.

but drugs DO and WILL kill. There is nothing you can do to make Crack/Cocaine/Heroine NON-lethal. And people who use drugs don't care if "death" is a side-effect. If they did, they wouldn't be using them in the first place.

Corey wrote:but drugs DO and WILL kill. There is nothing you can do to make Crack/Cocaine/Heroine NON-lethal. And people who use drugs don't care if "death" is a side-effect. If they did, they wouldn't be using them in the first place.

Exactly it.......everybody who uses knows that it could kill them in the end. Even though people (like several friends of mine who use marijuana) laugh at those commercials that show what it does to you..........they know its bad for you when ya dig into the nitty gritty of the whole concept.

BTW - cheers on that giving condoms to rapists thing....

how do you know that there's "no way" i can make non-lethal drugs?

are you a highly paid chemist motivated by a big pay raise?

until you are, and you've tried, you would do well to remember the old adage "never say never." after all, i'm sure once there was a time when there was "no way" we'd ever have human cloning or a cure for small pox.

Doug, You say that there would be no need for cartels, but you also say that there'd be a legal drugging(for lack of a better term o.o) age. That's almost contradicting yourself. You said yourself It'll be like a cigarette company. So, just like with cigarettes, the cartels get ahold of drugs and sell them for higher prices to twelve-year-olds. Kids get addicted at an early age, and eventually end up dying. So basically, doesn't your idea equal more death for everyone?

doug wrote:how do you know that there's "no way" i can make non-lethal drugs?

are you a highly paid chemist motivated by a big pay raise?

until you are, and you've tried, you would do well to remember the old adage "never say never." after all, i'm sure once there was a time when there was "no way" we'd ever have human cloning or a cure for small pox.

My proof? Prescription drugs. These are legal drugs that serve a purpose but if used incorrectly can and will kill you. They have been made as healthy as possible and still side effects exist. You telling me that heroine wouldn't be the same?