Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

problem with that is, if they have any medical expertise at all, they'll know immediately there are no urinary conditions that change the color of your urine, with the exception of full blown kidney failure. although, you could drink a large bottle of green food coloring, say you're on Rifampin for something, which will cause them to reschedule the test. if they have intermediate knowledge of pharmacology though, they'd realize you don't have meningitis or tuberculosis and would be suspicious that you're on Rifampin.

I'm sure these guys know every trick in the book. So throw the book away.

When in doubt, surprise them.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

aka shit in the cup instead!

you're right. next time they ask me to piss in a cup, i'll piss on THEM

Instead of piss in the cup, you should ejaculate into it. Then once the technician received it they'd be all like

Gargling?

I'm upset about the violence created by black markets, the prison industrial complex, and the creation of violent criminals from non-violent drug offenders.

And yet you prefer to address social problems through throwing people in jail (or having them take drugs) rather than taking a more constructive approach.

Do you really think legalizing drugs would actually solve any of those problems? People would still be upset, still taking drugs, still have to pay for them somehow. Do you really think they're going to get jobs and pay, or just go without?

And since the drugs would be legal, corps would find money in reformulating them to be even more addictive and probably unhealthy (like tobacco, which was pretty benign until corps found they could make more money by reformulating it to be more addictive without regard to health effects).

But obviously, it's all about drinking the Fox News Kool-Aid, even if the doing it your way adds up to exactly the same results - throwing people behind bars and watching our nation crumble into a third-world country.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

People are going to do drugs. You aren't going to stop it short of iron-handed fascism.

We can either legalize, eliminate the black market (which would dramatically reduce prices and remove the violence associated with it), reduce prison costs, actually get product information to people, and you could take a similar approach we've taken with cigarettes and use tax revenue to educate as well as treat addiction as the medical problem it is.

Or

We can ban them, give criminals huge profit margins, allow bureaucrats and drug enforcement workers to feather their nests fighting an unwinnable battle (because we aren't an iron-handed fascist regime), suffer the violence that comes with black markets, pay increased prison costs, have people dying from overdose because they lack information on what they were sold, and still have people getting high anyway.

How many people are going to start doing any kind of drug if they're legal tomorrow?
With maybe a small exception on marijuana, it's only going to be people who'd end up doing those drugs regardless of their legality.



Implying criminals don't do this to a far greater extent. Why do you think crack cocaine came around? How many people have been sold some kind of soft drug laced with a hard drug? How do you stop that from happening in a black market?



This is funny because I don't watch Fox News and legalizing drugs is generally opposed by conservative types.



The purpose of legalizing is removing the criminal element.

The Opium War completely destroys this argument. You can go on saying and believing this if you like but it's simply willful ignorance since I pointed that example out to you before. There is also the more contemporary example of modern-day Russia.


Could you define "fascism" as you are using it, please?

Not all societies have rampant drug problems (legal or otherwise) so your initial assumption is faulty.
But those societies that do (China and the EU) manage their drug problems don't do it through legalization, whether drugs are legal or not.

If we assume that people will steal/cheat/murder/etc, would the appropriate response be to legalize that as well? And no, the "but unlike those crimes, drugs don't harm anyone but the user" argument has already been defeated, so you can't invoke that.

If you don't like cops and narcs "feathering their nests" by fighting an "unwinnable battle", then why are you so ardently opposed to completely changing tactics by looking at the reasons people turn to drugs in the first place, trying to deal with social problems by constructive and non-violent means?

Why is fighting an eminently "unwinnable battle" against poverty-driven crime okay, but fighting an "eminently unwinnable battle" against drugs is not okay?


This won't happen because people who are compelled to seek drugs will still do crazy things to get them. If corporations make far stronger variants of the drugs - which they will - no one will be interested in weed any more than cigarette smokers are interested in natural tobacco.

Your reasoning is also faulty in that you predicate your argument on the basis that the problem with drugs is the associated violence. For reasons that have already been explored, this simply isn't true; drugs are enormously destructive even when they don't cause violence.


To what end? Where do you think the money should go instead?


Given your own persistent, willful ignorance - e.g., in this very thread, the causes and legacy of the Opium War - what makes you think this will be any more effective at allowing others to make wise choices based on facts? And no that is not an insult - it is a relevant case example.

Information has been made available to you and you reject it; what makes you think others will do any different - suffer their own mistakes (and blame themselves) - any more than you do?


Which isn't working.

There are new young smokers every year. Cigarette companies aren't going out of business anytime soon, all this has done is effectively cuff the state to the cigarette corps by making them reliant on the tax revenue.

I think smoking is retarded, but I also think that extorting smokers for tax money because it's more politically popular than taxing the general population is evil. It is, in the final analysis, no different than a modern-day Jew tax: tax the unpopular folks, not those who benefit from their money.

Curiously enough the same people who find it unfair to heavily tax those who benefit most from the status quo, don't have a problem heavily taxing those who benefit the least. Why are you okay with overtaxing smokers, but not overtaxing the rich?


You really think that pot dealers are rich, rich as corporate raiders?
If pot were legal, how would it be better that LEGAL drug cartels profit off addiction?


Crack came about because criminals were looking to process cocaine using chemicals available to the socially marginal - as opposed to state-of-the-art labs that turned tobacco into cigs and corn into HFCS. Never mind that to argue that criminals can actually do industrial research better than organized, above-water businesses directly contradicts your pro-free market claims (and doesn't even stand up to a moment's thought - are criminals going to be scientific wizards comparable to the guys at pharmaceutical corps?)

Cigarette and pharmaceutical corps have been killing people for decades. "Legalization" hasn't changed that. Your argument that legalizing drugs would prevent criminals from killing people vacillates in the face of the fact that legalization would lead to a "pusher lobby" popping up overnight and brainwashing impressionable people like you.

Why do you think that legalization, industrialization and "oversight" of a questionable field would play out any different than it has with cigs - where it has descended into not only acceptance, but reliance upon and even subsidy of, an industry that kills thousands yearly?


Fill in the blanks, then. Where do you get your ideas?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

roflllllllllllllllllllllll

[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]

Come on. You can't be serious. The government and public figures and journalists all do their best to paint marijuana as incredibly harmful to one's health. I read an article once written by some bimbo idiot talking about how 'weed makes kids think they can fly out of windows.'

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming

Which is a red herring. The media emphasizes those specious arguments because they don't want to engage the more disturbing reasons why weed should be illegal.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_San_Fernando_massacre

if i were in charge, i'd legalize it all before i let something like this happen again.

Gangsters have been killing each other since before drugs became an issue. The Teamsters and Italian Mafia kill each other over garbage pickup.

I question whether criminals killing each other is really worse than mass apathy and social breakdown due to drug use being socially acceptable.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.