[commanderkai]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I'm not at all opposed to locking up meth dealers/manufacturers. But I do think we're a bunch of hypocrites when we think it's alright to export toxic pesticides to Brazil for profit but it's wrong to export Crystal Meth to the USA. That was my point. I sure as hell don't want that shit on OUR streets.

Manufacturers will always set up where they're least likely to be caught. If we were tougher on traffickers (and this has always been my position) they'd prefer to set up shop elsewhere.

Maybe I'm missing the sarcasm, or the humor, but I do not see the connection.

1) We're not illegally exporting toxic pesticides into Brazil. We're selling it to them to farmers. If the pesticide is illegal in Brazil, we'd just ship it to a country where it is legal.

2) It is not Canada's right to question the laws of other countries. India, for example, still purchases asbestos from us legally for their industrial infrastructure. The health consequences of said product are well known, but since India is completely AWARE of it, they are the ones who need to deal with the safety issues involving the material. The same goes to the pesticides in Brazil. They know how to use it safely, it's their choice to actually use it properly.

3) I agree that both traffickers AND the manufacturers should be punished more severely...but I still do not understand the whole "hypocrisy issue" you stated.

[romanP]

Choban Choban:

Agreed Roman, Though my statement in regards to alcohol consumption was that moderate responsable alcohol use doesn't kill people whereas my friend took 1 single hit of EX and died, so the moderation debate doesn't apply.

It does and it doesn't. What your friend ate was probably MDMA cut with something like dextromethorphan, the active ingredient in cough syrup, a mixture which can be seizure-inducing and lethal. Most of the time, ecstasy is safe. There are very, very few ecstasy-related deaths every year.

$1:

Leagalizing the drug and taxing it would not eliminate the black market for it where kids will still buy cut and mixed doses with no idea of what they are getting for cheaper than the govenment supply

Legalising drugs will not eliminate crime, but it will reduce it substantially. Take away the means for the black market to exist, and it will find something else to exploit.

[QBall]

romanP romanP:

The government can't control alcohol consumption either. You can kill yourself in 15mins with too much liquor, and "too much" isn't very much for an average sized person. Chugging down 20oz of 80 proof liquor will kill you easily.

You chug down that much hard liquor in 15 minutes (20 oz = 591 ml for those playing metric) you're going to throw it up. This is how your body deals with a poison. You would have to consume that much but over an hour or two in order to have a chance of killing yourself but avoiding your body's defences, but even then it's no guarantee.

[Choban]

romanP romanP:

Choban Choban:

Agreed Roman, Though my statement in regards to alcohol consumption was that moderate responsable alcohol use doesn't kill people whereas my friend took 1 single hit of EX and died, so the moderation debate doesn't apply.

It does and it doesn't. What your friend ate was probably MDMA cut with something like dextromethorphan, the active ingredient in cough syrup, a mixture which can be seizure-inducing and lethal. Most of the time, ecstasy is safe. There are very, very few ecstasy-related deaths every year.

$1:

Leagalizing the drug and taxing it would not eliminate the black market for it where kids will still buy cut and mixed doses with no idea of what they are getting for cheaper than the govenment supply

Legalising drugs will not eliminate crime, but it will reduce it substantially. Take away the means for the black market to exist, and it will find something else to exploit.

My belief is that legalization would increase the black market sales. A goverment controlled and regulated substance thats leagal would create more of a black market for those looking to pay less for it. look at alcohol and tobacco. 1 in 3 cigrettes sold is contraband these days, and we all know someone who makes moonshine/screech or some other form of basement liquor. I agree that whatever my friend took was cut not pure MDMA. I can't believe legalization would all of a sudden have street dealers selling pure stuff, theres just no profit in pure drugs.
Saying there are very few deaths attributed to something does not make it safe, there are very few shark related deaths, doesn't mean I'm going swimming in shark infested waters.

[Proculation]

Choban Choban:

Given what goes into ecstasy to manufacture it I would say make it an automatic attempted murder charge for amyone caught manufacturing it, same for meth, lsd and anything else that the cops have to wear enviroment suits when disassembeling a lab.
Leagalization of Marijuana is one thing, ecstasy kills people, I've seen it happen.

Tylenols kill too.

[ASLplease]

Proculation Proculation:

Choban Choban:

Given what goes into ecstasy to manufacture it I would say make it an automatic attempted murder charge for amyone caught manufacturing it, same for meth, lsd and anything else that the cops have to wear enviroment suits when disassembeling a lab.
Leagalization of Marijuana is one thing, ecstasy kills people, I've seen it happen.

Tylenols kill too.

lets assume for arguement sake that Tylenol doesn't have anything good about it. Do you really want your comment to stand alone, and justify the legalization of other drugs just because "Tylenols kill too"?

[Proculation]

It's just to say that because something can kill, it doesn't mean it's bad.

There are also drugs that do not kill at all that are illegal like LSD or shrooms.

[bootlegga]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Pesticides can be used safely.

Tell that to all the species of birds that have almost become extinct due to pesticides like DDT.

ridenrain ridenrain:

uranium can be used safely.

I wonder if people living in Hiroshima, Nagasaki or Chernobyl would agree with you.

ridenrain ridenrain:

asbestos can be used safely.

Once again, how many people got cancer due to its properties?

Where's your condemnation for the alcohol, cigarettes or military goods we export annually? Or is it just some vices are a-okay and others are not?

Lemmy Lemmy:

Assault rifles and dynamite and heroin and PCBs and all sorts of other dangerous shit CAN be used safely. But our track record, as a species, isn't very good in that respect. So, either we're too stupid to use dangerous products safely or we're not. But I'd rather make those choices, myself, than have the government do it for me.

I don't agree with Canada beign a leading producer of X / Meth either (especially given our efforts in Afghanistan to combat heroin production), but it's incredibly hypocritical given all the other potentially dangerous goods we export every year.

[Zipperfish]

Choban Choban:

and we all know someone who makes moonshine/screech or some other form of basement liquor.

I don't. Hook me up, man.

[Gunnair]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Choban Choban:

and we all know someone who makes moonshine/screech or some other form of basement liquor.

I don't. Hook me up, man.

Second!

Lately, my bathtub gins tastes like it was made in a toilet...

[ridenrain]

What's your point Boot?
All the legal products mentioned have safe use. To give credit to RomanP, even MDMA can be safe when prescribed by a doctor.

Right now, we are the leading manufacture of illegal, hardcore drugs.
Is that the Canada you want?

[commanderkai]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Where's your condemnation for the alcohol, cigarettes or military goods we export annually? Or is it just some vices are a-okay and others are not?

And this is where the argument fails. The alcohol, cigarettes, and military goods, as well as dynamite, asbestos, and whatever else Canadian companies produce that are dangerous (hell, might as well add cars, kitchenware, heavy machinery, so on and so forth) and that we export, we export LEGALLY to other nations.

Exporting substances that are illegal to other nations, as in meth and ecstasy to other nations, like the United States, and then acting like it's okay is a very stupid way to conduct your foreign policy. You want to be a libertarian or whatever, fine, but guess what? These things will cause huge issues with our foreign policy, and nobody wants that can of worms opened.

[Lemmy]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Maybe I'm missing the sarcasm, or the humor, but I do not see the connection.

Well, I was taking a Devil's advocate position, but it wasn't meant to be sarcastic or humourous. What I was trying to provoke was to think of the hypocracy.

commanderkai commanderkai:

1) We're not illegally exporting toxic pesticides into Brazil. We're selling it to them to farmers. If the pesticide is illegal in Brazil, we'd just ship it to a country where it is legal.

And I don't see where the tag "legal" matters. Legality is a matter of legislation, not of "right" and "wrong", per se. We LABEL crystal meth illegal and pesticide legal (well, a lot of the shit we export is ILLEGAL in Canada, but we ship it for use in 3rd world countries), but BOTH are harmful to humans. So, we're holding narcotics to a double-standard, which is absent of logic.

commanderkai commanderkai:

2) It is not Canada's right to question the laws of other countries. India, for example, still purchases asbestos from us legally for their industrial infrastructure. The health consequences of said product are well known, but since India is completely AWARE of it, they are the ones who need to deal with the safety issues involving the material. The same goes to the pesticides in Brazil. They know how to use it safely, it's their choice to actually use it properly.

Well, if our only concern is laws in OTHER countries, then we shouldn't lose any more sleep about exporting crystal meth than any legal but harmful substance. We trade with Iran and yet have great differences in our laws. You could say the same of heroin, which is legal for medical use in most countries: "If they want to use it properly or not, it's their concern, not ours, so let's go ahead and produce it and export it". It's a double standard.

commanderkai commanderkai:

3) I agree that both traffickers AND the manufacturers should be punished more severely...but I still do not understand the whole "hypocrisy issue" you stated.

The hypocracy lies in that we export many harmful things for profit. We feel shame to learn we're the world's biggest exporter of ecstasy, yet we don't lose a wink of sleep knowing we're the world's biggest exporter of carcinogenic pesticides, fertilizer and industrial chemicals. Our "legal" exports are causing MANY TIMES OVER the damage to humanity of our "illegal" exports.

So, let's either stop selling ALL the dangerous shit we sell or get the fuck off the high road when it comes to narcotics, because of a percentage of our trade value, we're causing humanity a lot more grief with the things we export "legally".

[romanP]

Choban Choban:

My belief is that legalization would increase the black market sales. A goverment controlled and regulated substance thats leagal would create more of a black market for those looking to pay less for it. look at alcohol and tobacco.

Okay. Why do you think that? I haven't seen any reasoning behind this argument.

$1:

1 in 3 cigrettes sold is contraband these days

That's because the tax on cigarettes is too high. I'm pretty sure the government is busy slowly pushing toward prohibition of tobacco. First it's high taxes, then you're not allowed to see what you buy before you buy it, then they take away flavoured cigars, next thing you know it'll be illegal to smoke anywhere.

$1:

and we all know someone who makes moonshine/screech or some other form of basement liquor.

I don't. I know people who make their own wine, which is legal. I buy my alcohol from the LCBO because I like being able to see, and live.

$1:

I agree that whatever my friend took was cut not pure MDMA. I can't believe legalization would all of a sudden have street dealers selling pure stuff,

It wouldn't have street dealers selling much of anything. We wouldn't have people selling drugs on the street so much if the drugs were legal and regulated.

$1:

theres just no profit in pure drugs.

There most certainly is. The more pure a drug is, the harder it is to move, and the more profitable it becomes.

$1:

Saying there are very few deaths attributed to something does not make it safe, there are very few shark related deaths, doesn't mean I'm going swimming in shark infested waters.

Drugs don't have instincts or cravings for blood. Discretion is very important when it comes to drug use. There is a reason you shouldn't buy drugs from any random person on the street, and it's because you really don't know what you're getting. I've only ever bought drugs from or through people I know who got them from a trusted source.

You can go swimming with the sharks, if you take the right precautions.

[romanP]

bootlegga bootlegga:

ridenrain ridenrain:

uranium can be used safely.

I wonder if people living in Hiroshima, Nagasaki or Chernobyl would agree with you.

What about the people who need medical isotopes for cancer treatment? That's a safe use of radioactive material.

$1:

I don't agree with Canada beign a leading producer of X / Meth either

MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine) and methamphetamine are not the same thing.