Drugs

[Keef]

I meant if they were to be legalised.
EDIT: I see what you mean though. I am saying if weed was "legal" (you could buy it from an authorised seller and use it), then I, certainly, would buy it from the authorised seller, rather than the random drug dealer. Regardless of the cost. Prison isnt really worth it just for one nights entertainment.

If I could get it cheaper from my bro down the street, I would. Market regulation, in any area of the market, almost universally promotes some sort of black market. That is why if drugs were to be legalized they should be completely deregulated. Let the private sector decide upon proper methods and safety standards and whatnot.

 

[tejsodi]

When I look at this thread and read some of the things people say are freaking hilarious. Everything in THIS world is a drug. Saying caffeine, nicotine, pharmaceuticals, sugar ect.. Are bad Isn't going to do anything I'm sure you guys have all done them..

 

[ExigeEvan]

When I look at this thread and read some of the things people say are freaking hilarious. Everything in THIS world is a drug. Saying caffeine, nicotine, pharmaceuticals, sugar ect.. Are bad Isn't going to do anything I'm sure you guys have all done them..

Sugar isn't a drug

 

[ell470]

Sugar isn't a drug

No, but overconsumption of it is dangerous!

 

[ExigeEvan]

No, but overconsumption of it is dangerous!

As with anything. Including water.

 

[ell470]

As with anything. Including water.

Yeah, I know, forgot that overconsumption is never good

 

[Dotini]

Are any of our readers familiar with DMT?

I have not taken it. But apparently a 5 minute trip will put you in touch with inter-dimensional aliens. Alex Jones, whom I do not watch or listen to, is claiming the world elite in government, business and military have been using and promoting DMT and other drugs for many decades. Jones is convinced that "the elite" are working in cooperation with "machine elves" in order to carry out an alien agenda. I say this is improbable, but there may be certain elements of the the story which are nevertheless historically true.

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2011/...k-elves-is-there-a-government-dmt-conspiracy/

 

[tribolik]

Are any of our readers familiar with DMT?

I have not taken it. But apparently a 5 minute trip will put you in touch with inter-dimensional aliens. Alex Jones, whom I do not watch or listen to, is claiming the world elite in government, business and military have been using and promoting DMT and other drugs for many decades. Jones is convinced that "the elite" are working in cooperation with "machine elves" in order to carry out an alien agenda. I say this is improbable, but there may be certain elements of the the story which are nevertheless historically true.

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2011/...k-elves-is-there-a-government-dmt-conspiracy/

I prefer DTM

To all that are agaisnt the legalization of drugs havent you learned anything with the prohibition era in the USA last century?

PS: Damn I just saw the DMT video... first DMT isnt injected ... Its smoked and its no orgasm.. its about 10 minutes of huge alucinations and you just cant move, some are only able to through up.. its pretty much the matrix and everyone sees diferent things but its just your mind all S%$#% up and it goes as fast as it kicks in... if you try to make sence of it youll probably end up crazy as hell- so yes maybe it does allow us to see aliens or maybe its just your brain all F&%$&

Then again some say we are able to think and reason because some monkeys eat the wrong mushrooms a few milleniums ago

 

[Villain]

Eating McD's every day is just as bad for you as smoking every day.

But secondhand McD's never hurt anyone. Hence* the ban on smoking in restaraunts.




*Meaning that it is a law supported by the public's fear of secondhand smoke.

 

[Azuremen]

But secondhand McD's never hurt anyone. Hence* the ban on smoking in restaraunts.




*Meaning that it is a law supported by the public's fear of secondhand smoke.

You don't have to eat at restaurants that allow smoking, either.

 

[Villain]

Azuremen at his finest - pithy without adding anything to the conversation.

The first part of Noob616's comment:

The smoking ban in restaurants and bars here bothers me. If a restaurant wants to let people smoke on their property, they should be allowed to. I'm not a smoker, and I would simply not enter a restaurant with smoking. In my hometown, there were two breakfast places that were considered to be the "smoker's restaurants". They reeked of cigarettes, and I didn't eat there..

I bolded the parts you obviously missed. I didn't respond to that because I agree with it. I was just bringing up a valid point on why the laws banning smoking in public places exist.

 

[Crispy]

I have really bad asthma. Everytime I'm near a smoker, I can't breath. Thats why I personally think that they should make a designated smokers room.

 

[ell470]

I have really bad asthma. Everytime I'm near a smoker, I can't breath. Thats why I personally think that they should make a designated smokers room.

In Sweden they've banned all smoking inside pubs, restaurants & shopping malls. All public places basically. I think it's great! And I'm a smoker!

 

[Joel]

The first part of Noob616's comment:



I bolded the parts you obviously missed. I didn't respond to that because I agree with it. I was just bringing up a valid point on why the laws banning smoking in public places exist.

EDIT: Whoops, nevermind.

 

[Hollidog]

If I could get it cheaper from my bro down the street, I would. Market regulation, in any area of the market, almost universally promotes some sort of black market. That is why if drugs were to be legalized they should be completely deregulated. Let the private sector decide upon proper methods and safety standards and whatnot.

Is it really worth saving a few bucks a gram to risk spending time in prison? What about all the other things that come with a drugs related criminal conviction. It might be different for you, but I love to travel and have the freedom to do what I want. If I can limit the risk I have to take, then I definitely would.

Of course there would be a black market, but in no cases is the black market for something bigger than the legitimate market for it.

But secondhand McD's never hurt anyone. Hence* the ban on smoking in restaraunts.




*Meaning that it is a law supported by the public's fear of secondhand smoke.

I dont know about you, but I would rather breath in second hand smoke, than eat second hand McDonalds.

 

[BobK]

I dont know about you, butI would rather breath in second hand smoke, than eat second hand McDonalds.

We have another thread for that

 

[FoolKiller]

I have really bad asthma. Everytime I'm near a smoker, I can't breath. Thats why I personally think that they should make a designated smokers room.

Why should you get special treatment for your medical condition?

In Sweden they've banned all smoking inside pubs, restaurants & shopping malls. All public places basically. I think it's great! And I'm a smoker!

But clearly not a business owner.


Smoking bans for businesses violate property rights of business owners, all so that people who can't, or don't want to enter a building with smoking don't have to use their brain before walking in the door.

 

[ell470]

Why should you get special treatment for your medical condition?

But clearly not a business owner.

Smoking bans for businesses violate property rights of business owners, all so that people who can't, or don't want to enter a building with smoking don't have to use their brain before walking in the door.

But businesses here are allowed to have specific areas (rooms) for smokers, but those rooms usually get pretty nasty, stinky & warm.

Most pubs & restaurants have an smoking area outside, I think the ban is great, I really don't like to smoke indoors anyway, it tastes baaaaad!

 

[FoolKiller]

But businesses here are allowed to have specific areas (rooms) for smokers, but those rooms usually get pretty nasty, stinky & warm.

Most pubs & restaurants have an smoking area outside, I think the ban is great, I really don't like to smoke indoors anyway, it tastes baaaaad!

And all of this changes the property rights issue how?

 

[ell470]

And all of this changes the property rights issue how?

It doesn't, but here no business owns the property anyway, the pubs & restaurants all rent.

 

[FoolKiller]

It doesn't, but here no business owns the property anyway, the pubs & restaurants all rent.

From whom?

 

[ell470]

From whom?

The company that built & (or) own the building.

I feel my english isn't good enough so here's an example:

Most buildings in the city I live in is either owned by the city itself or one of the property agencies that own the majority of buildings/houses/forests etc in Sweden.

edit:

I read up on the Swedish smoking ban. Apparantly it doesn't matter who owns the property, ALL service restaurants must follow this law, only exception being outdoor cafés. They may if they want however have an smoking room, but it's illegal to serve drinks or food in there. By law all employees has the right to an smoking free workplace with the exception of home care personel & personal assistants.

That's what it says anyway, residential buildings are a different story, if you own where you live, you can smoke all you want
(and many places where you rent also)

 

[FoolKiller]

The company that built & (or) own the building.

I feel my english isn't good enough so here's an example:

Most buildings in the city I live in is either owned by the city itself or one of the property agencies that own the majority of buildings/houses/forests etc in Sweden.

Oh no, your English is fine. Possibly better than mine. I understand you, but I am attempting to make a point and lead you there step-by-step.

Someone owns the property. That someone has property rights and should be allowed to determine the rules customers and employees must follow, so long as it involves otherwise legal activities. By banning a legal activity from specific kinds of private property your government violates the rights of those property owners.

No one would agree with similar rules to be set on their homes.

I read up on the Swedish smoking ban. Apparantly it doesn't matter who owns the property, ALL service restaurants must follow this law, only exception being outdoor cafés. They may if they want however have an smoking room, but it's illegal to serve drinks or food in there. By law all employees has the right to an smoking free workplace with the exception of home care personel & personal assistants.

That's what it says anyway, residential buildings are a different story, if you own where you live, you can smoke all you want
(and many places where you rent also)

But it should matter who owns the property. Your government, and mine, doesn't think it should because they are all run by a bunch of self-important tools who apparently have no real problems left to worry about.

In the instances where the city owns the land, then they can regulate what can and can't be done within, as they are then also acting as property owners. But when private citizens own property government somehow believes that they can determine what otherwise legal activities should be allowed.

And yes, all governments use the workers' rights argument to enforce these things, but it isn't as if ten years ago someone got a job as a bartender and walked in on their first day and said, "WHOA!!! People smoke here? But what about my health?" Same thing with customers. No one walked into a bar and got caught off guard by smoking. That's almost as dumb as walking outside and getting caught off guard by the sky. People made those choices at a time before these rules but after the dangers were known. We didn't become a bunch of stupid children unable to control our lives in the last ten years. Our government just became even more full of douchebags than it was before. Oh, and Rob Reiner's mouth finally got bigger than his stomach (hard to believe, I know).

 

[ell470]

Oh no, your English is fine. Possibly better than mine. I understand you, but I am attempting to make a point and lead you there step-by-step.

Someone owns the property. That someone has property rights and should be allowed to determine the rules customers and employees must follow, so long as it involves otherwise legal activities. By banning a legal activity from specific kinds of private property your government violates the rights of those property owners.

No one would agree with similar rules to be set on their homes.

But it should matter who owns the property. Your government, and mine, doesn't think it should because they are all run by a bunch of self-important tools who apparently have no real problems left to worry about.

In the instances where the city owns the land, then they can regulate what can and can't be done within, as they are then also acting as property owners. But when private citizens own property government somehow believes that they can determine what otherwise legal activities should be allowed.

And yes, all governments use the workers' rights argument to enforce these things, but it isn't as if ten years ago someone got a job as a bartender and walked in on their first day and said, "WHOA!!! People smoke here? But what about my health?" Same thing with customers. No one walked into a bar and got caught off guard by smoking. That's almost as dumb as walking outside and getting caught off guard by the sky. People made those choices at a time before these rules but after the dangers were known. We didn't become a bunch of stupid children unable to control our lives in the last ten years. Our government just became even more full of douchebags than it was before. Oh, and Rob Reiner's mouth finally got bigger than his stomach (hard to believe, I know).

Ah, I see! We completely agree that both your & mine government has pushed through a lot of wierd/stupid/insane laws to please the loudest whiners

I don't know if you know this, but in Sweden you have to be 20 to buy alcohol, and you can't buy it in regular stores. We have what we call "Systembolaget" that is both owned, run & funded by the government

They have alot of other crazy ideas too, but they don't fit in this thread

edit: they even put 15 as minimum for buying energy drinks (red bull etc) because 3 morons drank 6 or something in a row and nearly had an heart attack. I mean come on....

 

[FoolKiller]

Ah, I see! We completely agree that both your & mine government has pushed through a lot of wierd/stupid/insane laws to please the loudest whiners

Yes.

I don't know if you know this, but in Sweden you have to be 20 to buy alcohol, and you can't buy it in regular stores. We have what we call "Systembolaget" that is both owned, run & funded by the government

You have to be 21 here to buy, own, or drink alcohol, and in certain areas, like my home state, only beer can be sold in a grocery. Liquor and wine must be in a separate store or pharmacy. But the government doesn't own any of it, they just tax it like they do.

And no alcohol sold before 1:00PM on Sundays. Apparently allowing me to get a good buzz before the first football game starts interferes with church.

 

[ell470]

Yes.

You have to be 21 here to buy, own, or drink alcohol, and in certain areas, like my home state, only beer can be sold in a grocery. Liquor and wine must be in a separate store or pharmacy. But the government doesn't own any of it, they just tax it like they do.

And no alcohol sold before 1:00PM on Sundays. Apparently allowing me to get a good buzz before the first football game starts interferes with church.

We can buy light? Beer anyday of the week, (3.5%), the stronger stuff is "Systembolaget" only Monday - Saturday

In bars you can buy alcohol from 02.00pm until they close (usually around 02.00am)

Just for fun, let's compare the legal age limits

In Sweden when you turn:

12 - you may choose which parent you want to live at, if they are divorced.

15 - you may have sex, drive a moped, have a summer job & buy energy drinks

16 - you may get a license & drive a "light" motorcycle, start getting your drivers license for car.

18 - you may finally get a 'real' drivers license, drive a 'real' motorcycle, buy cigarettes, VOTE, go to a club/night club and drink hard liquer (but you cannot buy it yet outside a bar)

20 - here's where most age limits vanishes in Sweden, from here on you can pretty much do whatever you want as long as it's legal

 

[Blitz187]

^^ Interesting

Age Limits in Holland:

16 - You can get your license for scooters and motorcycles up to 50CC - You can buy beer, but not hard liqour.

18 - You can get your drivers license for a car or motorcycle, buy weed and hard liqour and get into most clubs, although if the bouncer doesnt like you you don't get it.

And thats its... Buy the time youre 18 here you are treated as an adult.

My childhood was spent in Florida and right before I left at age 16 I had just gotten my drivers license. Then I came to Holland and I couldnt drive anymore, BUT I could drink beer! Suprising change... The only plus side of this imo was that I learned my limits at an early age.

 

[Hollidog]

New Zealand it goes like this:

12, stay at home unsupervised.
14, look after children who are under 12.
15, learners drivers licence for car, ability to ride 50cc scooter
15 1/2, ability to drive car by self but only between 5am and 10pm
16, have sex
17, tried as an adult for criminal charges, full car drivers licence, full motorcycle licence, although it is a different course.
18, vote, bet at gambling place (not casino), buy alcohol, cigarettes, go to bars.
20, gamble in a casino

They are thinking about putting the age up for buying alcohol from places that arent bars, i.e. supermarkets and liquor stores, too 20.
And I think the driving age may have increased to 16.

 

[ell470]

@Hollidog

I love that turning 15 let's you drive a car but only between certain times, hilarious!

I know it is a wee bit off topic, but I would love to hear from more countries

 

[Hollidog]

Its a pretty good system really, at least from the point of view of how relaxed it is. There is no compulsory insurance here and you can drive whatever size engine you like. The only pain is that you cant drive your mates around, so you either have to take separate cars, or risk the huge fine $400 (may have gone down), and the points off your licence. Which reminds, me, my points have come off since I got my ticket for carrying passengers...
The stupidest thing about it from a liberal point of view is that because it forces everyone into separate cars, it turns the journey into a race, rather than a cruise.