- Joined
- Dec 17, 2011
- Messages
- 1,981
- Reaction score
- 806
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
How should the government deal with it? As of now they pour lots of money into enforcing laws against it, and the use of it is still widespread.
How should the government deal with it? As of now they pour lots of money into enforcing laws against it, and the use of it is still widespread.
It would help if I knew what it was... did you mean "Marijuana?" First, it helps to understand the history of Hemp, which basically made Marijuana illegal - we have the robber barrons of textiles in the early 1900's to thank for that. However drug use will not decrease with laws, it just pushes underground. It would be better to legalize both hemp and marijuana and have it controlled under the FDA. One has to understand human nature - the more people say "don't use this thing" the more people want to know why we shouldn't use it. If it were available and not illegal, yes people would still use it but the mystery of it would dwindle. There will always be abusers of everything/anything so no change there.
My view is make all drugs legal - meth, heroin, X, new designer drugs. Just cut off the federal tax dollars for detox. If people want to use drugs, get addicted to drugs let them - their assets will be used to detoxify them and get them clean and if they have no assets, they go into a federal program which then taxes their estate or garnishes their future wages to pay off the debt. One federal detox per person - after that their on their own.
See that's why drugs are illegal - the government is scared ****less that people will become drug addicts en masse and we'll have dead and dying people all over the streets. The government couldn't let that happen so hospitals and doctors would be overwhelmed with the alleged addicts and who would pay for it but the taxpayers. That would cause a **** storm and government would get their asses handed to them because taxes and detox welfare programs would pop up all over. However, the truth is that probably wouldn't happen that way at all - it would probably decrease the amount of drug use in America. it's a gamble, one that our government doesn't want to take.
If addiction is an illness its safe to say that people who have this mental illness either are already addicted, or are already being treated for their mental illness for tobacco, alcohol, perscription drugs or illegal drugs or --- other things like nymphomania, over eating etc. If you characterize drug addition as a mental illness (which I don't agree with) there is already methods to treat mental illness.I'm with you until the rehabilitation part.
Addiction is a mental illness. It is not uncommon for it to require several rounds of treatment and rehabilitation - for ANY mental illness - before permanent wellness is established. While it's easy to say they "did it to themselves," and in most cases (but not all) that's true, it's ultimately detrimental to society to either let them languish or keep them in indentured servitude for possibly decades.
If they have pre-existing addictions and as you previously ascribed, are mentally ill and have been diagnosed as such (one would assume so if it's pre-existing) then these individuals are already being treated with legal prescription drugs. If the mental health system failed them? More like, they failed in their treatment. I would deal with them exactly as I've stated... for example, Bob has been bi-polar since he was 16 (now 35) and has been under physician care but decides he does not want to take his medication any more as he feels it's not making him better. He decides he's going to self medicate with heroin - get's addicted and now is a bi-polar heroin addict... he would be detoxed once under federal guidelines as I've stated, put back under his mental health doctors care, and told he must take his previous medication. If he decided again, NOT to take his medication for bi-polar disorder and again moves back to heroin, he's on his own. Ethically, the state and society has taken care of this man - they've cleaned him up at no cost to him, provided him housing, medication to kick heroin, counseling, a program and put him back into the mental health system such that he can be a valued part of society. If he REJECTS such ovations and decides he doesn't like it - Ethically I'm fine with him living and dying in the gutter. That probably wouldn't happen and if say this goes on for another 3 or 4 times, I would garnish the mans wages and put him in debt to the government such that any money he makes the rest of his life will go towards paying off that debt until it's paid off in full. My way gives everyone 1 shot to **** up and gives everyone a get out of drug addition free card. My conscious can certainly live with that just fine.In addition, a lot of people who develop addictions have a pre-existing mental health problem. And oftentimes they turn to drugs after the mental health system has failed them - an unfortunately common occurrence. How exactly do you deal with that ethically and from a care standpoint?
It's too expensive because it's not insurance, it's a payment plan. If it were insurance, you'd only use it when big health issues occur. We use "insurance" today for everything - therefore it ceases to be "insurance". When our healthcare system actually WAS insurance our healthcare system was much less expensive.This begins to expand into other problems we have like the insane cost of health care. Truth is, most people can't afford any healthcare at all without insurance in this country. It's too expensive. It's the most expensive in the world. Expecting an addict to be able to shell that out when even most well-off middle class people can't is insane, and it is essentially condemning them for life.
I don't disagree - but I also don't see a way to get those things by making drugs all legal, and providing free detox forever for addicts who cannot control themselves whether it's due to mental illness or not.In addition, the gobsmacking inadequacy of our mental health resources. A lot of addicts are self-medicating because they haven't been able to get decent care. Sometimes for money reasons, and sometimes because the programs either don't exist or were badly implemented.
I think harm reduction programs need to be expanded. I think we need affordable and universal health care. I think we need to work harder at caring for the mentally ill in a comprehensive way.
I don't think it will necessarily rise in the general population but I think it will rise in certain parts of the population... It will be less affordable if government, out of pity, charges those who are NOT addicts more for care to make up for the recidivist addicts who continue to make the same mistakes over and over. I'm advocating some tough love here --- you get one free detox - after that you're on your own. I don't see the downside and while it may sound very harsh and callous, it will to some extent remove the damaged individuals from the gene pool such that the genetic prevalence of such an addictive behavior is less in the future.As you said, it is unlikely that legalizing drugs will increase abuse in the long run (though we may experience a short-term rise - worth it for the eventual outcome, in my opinion). And it is still true now that most people choose to do the drugs they become addicted to. So why would it be any different or any less affordable than it is now? It could be drastically more affordable if we fixed our healthcare system. A drop in the bucket.
Legalize it all and put in place laws laterally to alcohol use. Must be 18, don't operate a car, public use limited, etc.
Allow the private sector to act accordingly - businesses can exclude employment over its use, insurance companies can refuse to cover you over its use, etc. If you want to do drugs and fully understand what it entails, more power to you.
However, if you snort a line of coke and your heart stops, you'd be better off left for dead.
How should the government deal with it? As of now they pour lots of money into enforcing laws against it, and the use of it is still widespread.
treat it as the equivalent of alcoholic beverages
Legalised, taxed and regulated.
I'd ban using it in public though. No-one wants a second-hand buzz in a restaurant.
I'd ban using it in public though. No-one wants a second-hand buzz in a restaurant.
Addiction is labelled a mental illness. It no doubt an area where natural and environmental predilection and physiological factors are important. But it is distinct from many other mental illnesses in the sense that there is a lot of choice involved. Acknowledging the complexities of the issue must not take away the real moral and character issues involved; a heroin addict is not simply a unfree victim of a mental condition.Ockham - Not true at all.
The mental health system is badly broken. A lot of people get turned away, or inadequately treated, or even badly treated. Just because they've been diagnosed is no guarantee that they're receiving adequate care. I know of all kinds of people who have been mistreated in institutions, or just handed cocktails with little or no therapy or progress reports, or simply told "No money, no service." I have a friend whose sister is going through problems right now because she is mentally ill, needs help, but was abused last time she was in-patient and is now scared of going back. This stuff happens all the time.
Addiction is well-established as a mental illness. Whether you believe in it is besides the point. And the reality is that mental illness often requires prolonged treatment, sometimes multiple times. "Bipolar Bob" may have gone off his meds because they stopped working properly and he was having manic thought disorder. Maybe it's not just because he's choosing to be unwell. And the reason no one catches it until Bob is off his meds and de-stabalized is because of how inadequate our mental health system is.
That is why you can choose to go one that doesn't allow it. It isn't up to the customer to force the owner through the power of the law.I'd ban using it in public though. No-one wants a second-hand buzz in a restaurant.
amsterdam coffee house maybe?I'd ban using it in public though. No-one wants a second-hand buzz in a restaurant.
Addiction is labelled a mental illness. It no doubt an area where natural and environmental predilection and physiological factors are important. But it is distinct from many other mental illnesses in the sense that there is a lot of choice involved. Acknowledging the complexities of the issue must not take away the real moral and character issues involved; a heroin addict is not simply a unfree victim of a mental condition.
I don't think marijuana should be illegal. The problems associated with it, even in a cultural and social sense, do not seem to warrant the trouble that prohibition has. I do not think this is generally the case with illegal drugs however, whatever the real problems of their prohibition.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?