Drugs

[rushyrulz]

Originally Posted by ChrisReams

I drive slower when I'm high. If the speed limit is 45, I go 40. Because I am more relaxed and more paranoid. So, no. You're wrong again.

That's good for you, but that doesn't prevent thousands of people from dying by drugged driving each year...

Thanks for trying to shoot my argument down like usual, appreciate it.
@ap: Sorry too busy defending myself from people like ^ to finish my train of thought.

You're mostly correct on everything else.

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

That's good for you, but that doesn't prevent thousands of people from dying by drugged driving each year...

Thanks for trying to shoot my argument down like usual, appreciate it.

Quit responding to irrelevant shit and respond to all the points in my post.

[Yieldsign]

Rushy, you are extremely irritating and your posts show a clear bias and lack of deeper thinking regarding this subject. If anyone is trolling, it's you.

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

My philosophy on doing drugs in the first place.

Experimentation is retarded, it only takes 1 time to become addicted, and it's not worth it to take the risk. Taking drugs for recreational purposes is also retarded, you don't need to be tripping to have a good time. More times than not, you're too damn stoned to remember anything that happened anyway, so there's really no purpose in taking them in the first place.

No, it does not only take 1 time to get addicted, you're making a blanket statement that simply does not apply to all drugs. Marijuana is not physically addictive; saying anything to the contrary is disregarding scientific fact. If you're going to disregard science in favor of exaggerated BS, then you have no place in critical thinking. At all. You won't get anywhere here by continuing your current strategy because most people in this forum want to discuss fact, not fiction.

You don't need TV to have a good time. You don't need bars to have a good time. You don't need books to have a good time. This is an incredibly bad argument because no recreational activity on its own is necessary to have fun - yet you single out all drugs as the one that is negative for no factual reason - instead, you're spouting off stigmatic crap with no basis.

Also, you're confusing short term memory with long term memory. It is true that marijuana can affect long term memory (although, as I've pointed out, this is only caused by excessive smoking within a certain context, which most smokers do not do), but it certainly does not cause anterograde amnesia, which ironically, zolpidem (or ambien), a legal prescription drug, does. So do benzodiazepines, legal prescription anxiolytic drugs.

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Alcohol is bad only if you become addicted or become too intoxicated.

Omg, No Way!!!! It's not like that statement doesn't apply to every other drug, too! But the point is that alcohol has a low overdose threshold and is very physically addictive.

Cigarettes and marijuana should both be illegal. Cigarettes can kill you. Marijuana can lead you to killing others. Neither seem like they should be legal, especially cigarettes because there has never been a medical purpose or good cause for them.

Marijuana has been statistically proven to demote violence in people. Not to mention, a significantly lower proportion of people drive after smoking than drive after drinking. You're grasping at straws right now.

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Sure tobacco chews your body up because IIRC, they put fiberglass in it, but at least you're ****ing up your own life instead of the little old lady crossing the street. This is probably the reason why cigarettes are legal too. The reason why I think cigarettes should be illegal and tobacco legal is because there's no second-hand tobacco deaths.

keep in mind that psychedelics have an extremely low rate of violent incidents. And these are the type of drugs that we are advocating legalizing. Again, most people do not drive while on psychedelics, and the ones that do report far less motor impairment than drunk driving. I'm not advocating driving under the influence of any drug, but simply pointing out that what you're saying isn't really predicated by fact.

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

So basically, there are no good outcomes from taking drugs for recreation, and I don't think 99% of people doing these drugs have a medical marijuana prescription. So in my opinion, stay off the drugs, stay off the booze, stay off the cigs and it'll be better off for everyone involved.

How about for recreation? What is wrong with having fun? The last time I checked, your subjective opinion isn't the standard for what is right and wrong in regard to how people spend their time. and 99% of these people don't have medical marijuana licenses because they use it recreationally; which shouldn't be illegal for the reasons we've pointed out. So far, you haven't given any good reason why recreational drug use (excluding dangerous drugs like heroin, free base cocaine, methamphetamine, etc) should be illegal.

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Yeah, and if pigs flew, the universe would be a magical place. Fact of the matter is that illegal drugs are illegal, so there are no public warnings and nobody would dare make a suit resulting from taking illegal drugs. Also, I thought this was a place for discussion not trolling, this is like the 3rd time you've targeted me so far, and that makes you, sir, an asshole.

Yes, the fact of the matter is that illegal drugs are illegal, but that does not necessitate the fact that it is right. In fact, it is totally unrelated, logically. This is critical thinking dude; the point is discuss issues that we find pertinent to our lives. Are you saying laws can't be changed or can never be wrong? Guess what, at one point in time it was illegal to interracially marry, and now it's not; are you saying that law should never have been changed because "if pigs flew, the universe would be a magical place?" Are you SERIOUS?

Also, this is the 3rd time I've "targeted" you because you've made 3 posts, what the hell. If you post, expect other posters in this thread to respond to you. If you haven't noticed, I've also responded to aperson, ich-whatever, jenova sephiroth... aka, the people who have posted in this thread. If you don't want your opinions dissected, get the hell off of a board called "critical thinking." I'm not sure if you possess the critical thinking faculties to understand what "critical thinking" entails.

[MrGiggles]

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

There's something perplexing about that particular word combination.

I think it makes a certain amount of sense. I've read that THC alone causes a very anxious and psychotic high, while CBN (another prevalent cannabinoid) offsets it with muscle relaxation and helps prevent some of the negative bits from THC like anxiety and nausea. It's a feeling I get while high too. aperson could probably shed more light on the subject than I could.

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

@ap: Sorry too busy defending myself from people like ^ to finish my train of thought.

You're mostly correct on everything else.

I have no idea how you could possibility hold the views you have and agree with my post without there being massive contradictions somewhere in between. Please elaborate.

[Reincarnate]

rushy: If you're trolling, stop. If you're not trolling, take what's being said to you a bit more seriously.

[rushyrulz]

This is my final reiteration of my sole argument that everyone keeps trying to redirect to what I said before.

Ignore everything I said before.. my main argument is that when you get high or drunk, don't go out and drive your car around town. My only concern is people getting killed by drunk/drugged drivers. If you want to do drugs for recreation, fine. If you want to do drugs for other purposes, fine. I used to think that people cared about their own lives, but I don't anymore, go ahead and mess yourself up.

It just seems utterly unfair to the huge amount of people killed yearly by drunk/drugged drivers, if you think that innocent people deserve to die and you argue against this point, I feel sorry for you, I don't care what forum this is, have some respect for a human life.

With that, I'm gonna go ahead and get out of this topic (Ding dong the troll is dead the wicked troll is dead!) and hope that you guys realize all I'm trying to do is advocate the all too high percentage of deaths that come from drunk/drugged driving.

PS I was never trolling

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

With that, I'm gonna go ahead and get out of this topic (Ding dong the troll is dead the wicked troll is dead!) and hope that you guys realize all I'm trying to do is advocate the all too high percentage of deaths that come from drunk/drugged driving.

PS I was never trolling

You don't get off that easy.

Why am I allowed to drive after I eat a banana? All that potassium might get me pretty drugged up.

What about after I take some Tylenol?

What about after I take some Tylenol with Codeine for my recent shoulder injury?

What about after I smoke a bowl of weed?

[MrGiggles]

I'm totally down with a message of "don't drive under the influence", I know a lot of people feel they drive safely under some drugs but I'd rather people just don't take the chance.

but you sound like you're backpedaling from all the stuff you said earlier about illegal drugs killing people and legal drugs being good, etc. I think you put too much stock in what the government says is legal or illegal.

[rushyrulz]

Originally Posted by aperson

Why am I allowed to drive after I eat a banana? All that potassium might get me pretty drugged up.

Trolololololololol.

I do get off that easy.

Originally Posted by MrGiggles

but you sound like you're backpedaling from all the stuff you said earlier about illegal drugs killing people and legal drugs being good, etc. I think you put too much stock in what the government says is legal or illegal.

You start saying stuff you don't mean and going to extremes when you're getting attacked 4 to 1.

What I meant by legal drugs was like aspirin and ibuprofen, not cigarettes, alcohol and tobacco like people thought.

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Trolololololololol.

I do get off that easy.

Potassium is a drug, much like aspirin, much like THC.

What I'm trying to get at here which you seem to be too dense to comprehend is that there is little to no correlation between "legality of a drug" and "the increase in danger if you were to drive under the influence in this drug" which is still what you are arguing.

Hell, salvia is legal and have you ever seen someone drive on salvia?

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

What I meant by legal drugs was like aspirin and ibuprofen, not cigarettes, alcohol and tobacco like people thought.

Then you don't mean 'legal drugs' you mean something else and it is your job to clarify what you mean.

[rushyrulz]

I started out by saying

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Good drugs good, bad drugs bad.

But then somehow this turned into a legal vs. illegal battle, so I had to clear up what I was referring to as legal drugs (maybe the OP was referring to legal drugs such as salvia and tobacco)

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

What I meant by legal drugs was like aspirin and ibuprofen, not cigarettes, alcohol and tobacco like people thought.

Originally Posted by aperson

Then you don't mean 'legal drugs' you mean something else and it is your job to clarify what you mean.

I did ^^

Originally Posted by aperson

What I'm trying to get at here which you seem to be too dense to comprehend is that there is little to no correlation between "legality of a drug" and "the increase in danger if you were to drive under the influence in this drug" which is still what you are arguing.

Hell, salvia is legal and have you ever seen someone drive on salvia?

As far as I'm concerned, anything that messes with your perception shouldn't be paired with driving.

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

As far as I'm concerned, anything that messes with your perception shouldn't be paired with driving.

When I eat an apple when I'm hungry I can feel the changes in my body as the sugars metabolize into more energy. It starts as a tingling sensation in my fingers then ripples back to my core and feels quite nice. Therefore, an apple has altered my perception and by your argument I shouldn't eat an apple while driving.


What chemicals do we ingest that don't alter our perception? How many times do I have to repeat this point in different ways before you quit saying I'm trolling or you try to discard it as irrelevant before you actually get the meaning of what I'm saying?

[rushyrulz]

Don't believe I ever said alter..

I'd have an easier time understanding your examples if they weren't all small scale eating an apple or a banana. Drugs have a serious effect on your perception and it's not a positive effect, as you can see in the salvia video you posted. Drugs trigger a stronger response and a more negative response. Eating an apple is legal because it alters your perception positively, drugs are illegal because they alter your perception negatively.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

So cars should come equipped with sensors that prevent them from starting if you're really angry?

Anger effects your perception how? That's just reckless. I mean.. I'm getting pretty mad and I can still see that there are 5 fingers on each of my hands.

EDIT2: k, done for real this time, getting tired of fruit analogies,et al

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

As far as I'm concerned, anything that messes with your perception shouldn't be paired with driving.

So cars should come equipped with sensors that prevent them from starting if you're really angry?

[danny53x]

ya

[aperson]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Eating an apple is legal because it alters your perception positively, drugs are illegal because they alter your perception negatively.

Then define what 'alter your perception negatively' is.

You keep defining everything in terms of something else yet somehow you magically never get back to a place with a concrete example or definition.

[Yieldsign]

Don't worry, he's going to make a tautology between "negative" and "illegal drugs"

[aperson]

I'm gonna paraphrase a quote here but I think it gets a pretty good point across:

"Why the hell is pleasure a negative side effect?"

[Yieldsign]

Well, I do agree to an extent that it's a bad idea to drive on quite a few substances (legal ones included; alcohol, opiates, etc...) but I don't think that should be the basis of criminalization. I mean, it's becoming quite invasive at the point when we're hindering peoples' rights to alter their consciousness on the basis of what they might do when there isn't much empirical evidence to support that claim.