Singapore Expats Forum

Hangem Up By the Toes Lah

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:20 am

It's a little like blaming the gun manufacturer for a shooting death and not the person with their finger on the trigger. Where is personal responsibility?

User avatar
Vaucluse
Director
Director
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sun, 10 Jul 2005

Postby Vaucluse » Sun, 30 Oct 2005 1:13 pm

Both Mary, both are illegal.

Definitely won't defend the gun lobby - leave that up to SE - but there is aworld of difference, one cannot compare the two, it would be too simple. A drug courier knowingly causes death and misery by his actions, and does it for financial gain. It is illegal to transport and sell (probably the biggest difference between drugs and guns) this stuff and the sellers have no problem having children as their customers.

The big boys behind it all? Of course they need to be caught - howmuch do governments spend on this . . .

:(
......................................................

'nuff said Image

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Sun, 30 Oct 2005 2:57 pm

Vaucluse wrote:Both Mary, both are illegal.

Definitely won't defend the gun lobby - leave that up to SE - but there is aworld of difference, one cannot compare the two, it would be too simple. A drug courier knowingly causes death and misery by his actions, and does it for financial gain. It is illegal to transport and sell (probably the biggest difference between drugs and guns) this stuff and the sellers have no problem having children as their customers.

The big boys behind it all? Of course they need to be caught - howmuch do governments spend on this . . .

:(


Ut oh. Our first disagreement. Actually, I don't disagree with you, its just that someone who needs a fix will get it at any cost, from anywhere. A drug mule is despicable, a pusher selling the stuff at a playground far worse still. At some point the end user, the addict or casual user must take responsibility as well.

The death penalty doesn't seem to have stemmed the drugs flowing into the US or all the money thrown at the problem. The problem is that people need to get high.

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Postby Wind In My Hair » Sun, 30 Oct 2005 3:26 pm

i find this a tough one to grapple with. i admire the strong views on either side expressed here. feel kind of sheepish to be ambivalent about something as serious as capital punishment.

on one hand i'm glad that in singapore we don't have to worry about kids being tempted to try drugs. although MHB may be right that those who really want a fix will get it at any cost, don't forget that there are many people who are on the periphery, who may get addicted if they had been exposed and so thankfully were prevented from being exposed to drugs in the first place. and i do believe the death penalty has a strong deterrent effect.

on the other hand, i would not be able to look someone on death row in the eye and tell him that he deserves to lose his life and whatever the future held for him because of a stupid mistake he made. so in a way i'm glad the decision is out of my hands. i don't feel entirely comfortable with it, but don't feel strongly enough about it to speak up or do anything about it.
Last edited by Wind In My Hair on Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
banana
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue, 24 May 2005

Postby banana » Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:10 pm

The "let's protect our kids from drugs" argument is seriously weak. Statistically, recreational drugs have killed less people than legal and taxable alternatives. Alleged societal damage, if investigated objectively, is not caused by the existence of mind/mood alterants but by the stigma attached on those who indulge. I'll bet many of you have had your fun in your younger days and probably are better people today because of it. So why demonise another depleting instrument of pleasure?
some signatures are more equal than others

dot dot dot
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu, 21 Oct 2004

Postby dot dot dot » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 9:21 am

banana wrote:The "let's protect our kids from drugs" argument is seriously weak. Statistically, recreational drugs have killed less people than legal and taxable alternatives. Alleged societal damage, if investigated objectively, is not caused by the existence of mind/mood alterants but by the stigma attached on those who indulge. I'll bet many of you have had your fun in your younger days and probably are better people today because of it. So why demonise another depleting instrument of pleasure?


Heroin = recreational drugs? :?

Banana, go for a weekend to visit Amsterdam and see what the freely available 'softdrugs' / recreational drugs like marihuana has done to the youngsters in The Netherlands. No stigma there, but definately social damage.

Eric

User avatar
Vaucluse
Director
Director
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sun, 10 Jul 2005

Postby Vaucluse » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:01 am

banana wrote:The "let's protect our kids from drugs" argument is seriously weak. Statistically, recreational drugs have killed less people than legal and taxable alternatives. Alleged societal damage, if investigated objectively, is not caused by the existence of mind/mood alterants but by the stigma attached on those who indulge. I'll bet many of you have had your fun in your younger days and probably are better people today because of it. So why demonise another depleting instrument of pleasure?


Having a joint now and then is different from injecting shit into your body - and since when is Heroin a recreational drug? Sorry, my fruity friend, not with you on this one.
......................................................



'nuff said Image

User avatar
whatalark
Regular
Regular
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon, 06 Jun 2005

Postby whatalark » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:17 am

banana wrote:The "let's protect our kids from drugs" argument is seriously weak. Statistically, recreational drugs have killed less people than legal and taxable alternatives. Alleged societal damage, if investigated objectively, is not caused by the existence of mind/mood alterants but by the stigma attached on those who indulge. I'll bet many of you have had your fun in your younger days and probably are better people today because of it. So why demonise another depleting instrument of pleasure?


You are hereby sentenced to do at least one year's social work with the streetfolk and drug addicts of New York City, San Francisco and any other major metropolitan area where drugs have destroyed the lives of the addict him/herself and their family's.

I guess you haven't tasted of the druggie's lifestyle personally. Can't imagine you saying this otherwise.
no trees were hurt in the making of this post but a few electrons were terribly inconvenienced

Wham
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue, 12 Apr 2005
Location: Singapore

Postby Wham » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:06 am

Shesh Banana, Do you think about what you write or does it just spill out?

"Alleged societal damage, if investigated objectively, is not caused by the existence of mind/mood alterants but by the stigma attached on those who indulge. "

So the Heroin addicts on the streets of many big cities are actually NOT suffering from drug addition - but suffering from the "STIGMA" of being a Heroin addict. Interesting perspective...

Your comments on this thread beg me to ask if you have ever been damaged by the stigma of NOT THINKING before you write.
"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." Samuel Johnson

User avatar
k1w1
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon, 30 May 2005

Postby k1w1 » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 1:01 pm

I think what banana could be trying to get at is the damage that is wreaked through alcohol, anti-depressants and all kinds of other legalised drugs. The stigma attached to having a couple of beers after work is quite a different thing to having a joint to chill out at the end of a long day.

And that's about where I got lost...

Wham
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue, 12 Apr 2005
Location: Singapore

Postby Wham » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 1:09 pm

Actually - i think he just made an ill advised comparison between what people in the west would call "recreational drug use" and something as catastrophic and debilitating as Heroin addiction. ...an easy mistake to make if you don't actually think while you type.
"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." Samuel Johnson

User avatar
banana
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue, 24 May 2005

Postby banana » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 7:18 pm

Take a chill pill kids, no where did I say Heroin is a recreational drug. All it is is a very efficient replicator of naturally produced endorphins and its prolonged use causes the body to stop it's own production. To categorically deny everyone, including and especiallyterminal patients, is not exactly the most democratic legislation is it?

IMHO, recreational drugs are those that have minimal physical impact such as marijuana, MDMA, LSD, so on and so forth. "Soft drugs" as Eric so eloquently put it. The social damage they have wreaked are not directly caused by their use but by societal perception of which. It is a really old argument albeit one that still stands. Just ask yourself, how many people get into fisticuffs whilst stoned, tripping or blissed out? How many end up in hospital with broken noses, lacerated faces or even dead from a night of boozing that went awry? How many people die a year from lung/nose/throat cancer?

A bunch of people telling another bunch of people what they can or cannot do with their own bodies is a bloody primitive mentality if you ask me.
some signatures are more equal than others

User avatar
Vaucluse
Director
Director
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sun, 10 Jul 2005

Postby Vaucluse » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 7:20 pm

:roll:
......................................................



'nuff said Image

User avatar
banana
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue, 24 May 2005

Postby banana » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 7:24 pm

:cool:
some signatures are more equal than others

User avatar
Vaucluse
Director
Director
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sun, 10 Jul 2005

Postby Vaucluse » Mon, 31 Oct 2005 7:26 pm

:)


What'cha smokin', dude?
......................................................



'nuff said Image


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests