General Discussion

backscatter712

(26,357 posts)

1. There's a lot of way to structure legalized hard drugs...

Reply to another_liberal (Original post)

Thu Feb 6, 2014, 02:37 PM

Feb 2014

For example, if people are worried about overdoses, on top of strict regulations on the manufacture of heroin, with packaging and labeling with precise doses, that's one way to do it.

Or there could also be legal, regulated "opium dens", where there are trained people on staff that administer the opiates, in known doses, and they have the customers lay in beds or couches on site, where they can be watched, and medical intervention can be done quickly if there's a problem. If Philip Seymour Hoffman got his heroin at one of these dens, he'd still be alive.

This way, people can get their highs without dying, with prices in a legal market that are affordable, so people don't have to steal to get their highs.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

73 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Russell Brand: Philip Seymour Hoffman is another victim of extremely stupid drug laws. [View all] another_liberal Feb 2014 OP

There's a lot of way to structure legalized hard drugs... backscatter712 Feb 2014 #1

H's a victim of extremely bad decisions. nt kelliekat44 Feb 2014 #58

We tend to criminalize or bomb things we don't understand Yavin4 Feb 2014 #2

Regardless of the stupidity of the drug laws Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #3

You knew him? another_liberal Feb 2014 #5

Well you know what they say about assumptions Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #6

Assumptions like yours . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #7

Can you be a victim of yourself? Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #10

One can be a victim of uncaring, greedy pushers . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #16

On your question Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #17

There is a difference, yes. another_liberal Feb 2014 #19

Opiate addicts are victims. Gormy Cuss Feb 2014 #25

im not totally blind to complexity of the human experience Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #27

and you've decided (see your posts above) where that line is CreekDog Feb 2014 #32

Take a breather Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #34

This message was self-deleted by its author CreekDog Feb 2014 #35

Don't worry, I'm not the one pulling anything CreekDog Feb 2014 #36

You know I get a nickel Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #37

It's a label, Boom . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #42

I'm sorry Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #43

A big deal, are you? another_liberal Feb 2014 #49

You asked the question Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #52

Discussion points? another_liberal Feb 2014 #54

... Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #57

Let's predict Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #47

Odd that-- as it seems to have adhered rather effectively. LanternWaste Feb 2014 #71

Well, Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #72

oh my God, you are so full of it... Skip Intro Feb 2014 #38

... Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #39

so you're saying you don't agree with Democrats on most of the major issues CreekDog Feb 2014 #70

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2014 #45

HaHaHa HangOnKids Feb 2014 #9

It says you should keep Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #11

Sorry don't take orders from you HangOnKids Feb 2014 #12

And here's your sign Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #14

BOOM BOOM BOOM HangOnKids Feb 2014 #15

No more a victim than all those entertainers in the 50-70 who chose drugs that ended their lives. kelliekat44 Feb 2014 #13

Just because some rather shallow people may have thought of them as such . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #18

The term reprobate is highly charged and quite offensive HangOnKids Feb 2014 #20

Especially in this context. another_liberal Feb 2014 #21

Sorry I was agreeing with you HangOnKids Feb 2014 #22

My mistake. another_liberal Feb 2014 #24

Sure. Regulated dosage could easily have saved him. Had he known his dose he most likely would not grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #26

sure and someone could have injected for him Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #28

Or his doctor. But still the dosage is not marked on the illegal drugs. grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #29

Crazy, right? Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #30

you're not the authority on that CreekDog Feb 2014 #31

Their goes my paddle again Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #33

YOU are the arbiter of such matters? Heidi Feb 2014 #62

Pardoned Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #65

Question Time, video of Brand talking about this very subject Bluenorthwest Feb 2014 #4

Russell Brand 'Heroin the retina of my soul Ichingcarpenter Feb 2014 #8

Victim ?????!!!!!! lol. nt clarice Feb 2014 #23

Philip Seymour Hoffman was....... WillowTree Feb 2014 #40

Are you sure? another_liberal Feb 2014 #41

The heroin ones are Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #44

Brand is right . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #51

Maybe you should check out some places that don't have such neanderthal drug laws SomethingFishy Feb 2014 #68

Good post Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #69

Pretty sure. WillowTree Feb 2014 #46

Addiction is a complicated thing. progressoid Feb 2014 #48

It's a big World . . . another_liberal Feb 2014 #50

"You could say the same about smoking, or gambling......." WillowTree Feb 2014 #55

Addiction is not a choice. NYC Liberal Feb 2014 #53

But doing drugs in the first place is. WillowTree Feb 2014 #56

Wrong. Genetics plays a large part in addiction. NYC Liberal Feb 2014 #59

But only if you use the drug(s) at least once. WillowTree Feb 2014 #61

And again, that "predilection" is much, much stronger in those whose parent(s) NYC Liberal Feb 2014 #66

Because they didn't *become* addicts until they themselves used drugs the first time. WillowTree Feb 2014 #67

I guess you win DU for being so superior. Heidi Feb 2014 #63

Not superior at all. Just being real. WillowTree Feb 2014 #64

Nooooo! We *need* the War on Drugs. Romulox Feb 2014 #60

It's the U.S.A., so it's all about money and control. hunter Feb 2014 #73