Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-05-2007, 03:08 PM   #21
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Some good points TRC.

perhaps Canada would be bette served to create a law where drug addicts, if caught have to go through a certain cleansing process?

Sort of like mental people being put in a mental home...type thing.

Problem is...isn't that considered infringing on their rights?

I do believe mental people are put in mental homes based on a judge's decision.....or something like that.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 03:10 PM   #22
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Some good points TRC.

perhaps Canada would be bette served to create a law where drug addicts, if caught have to go through a certain cleansing process?

Sort of like mental people being put in a mental home...type thing.

Problem is...isn't that considered infringing on their rights?

I do believe mental people are put in mental homes based on a judge's decision.....or something like that.

I have no problem with this, I believe that there is a provision where you can be declared unfit or incompetant and can be forced into treatment.

I also believe that people that are on UI should be randomly drug tested as well.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 03:33 PM   #23
RyZ
First Line Centre
 
RyZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Exp:
Default

I'm all for catching Crack, Cocaine, Meth and Heroin dealers but there is far better ways to spend $64 mil than trying to hunt down guys selling $25 bags of weed to guys playing video games in their basement.
RyZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 04:10 PM   #24
Flashpoint
Not the 1 millionth post winnar
 
Flashpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Exp:
Default

I'm not sure how 64 million dollars helps anything.

Society wants drugs. If it didn't, people wouldn't pay the amount of money they do to get a little coke now and again. So long as people want something, they'll find a way to get it.
__________________
"Isles give up 3 picks for 5.5 mil of cap space.

Oilers give up a pick and a player to take on 5.5 mil."
-Bax
Flashpoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 04:17 PM   #25
JohnnyFlame
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flashpoint View Post
I'm not sure how 64 million dollars helps anything.

Society wants drugs. If it didn't, people wouldn't pay the amount of money they do to get a little coke now and again. So long as people want something, they'll find a way to get it.

Exactly and as the posts since mine have pointed out society does NOT give a crap about catching drug dealers or drugs. The ONLY time it's interested is when individuals cause us annoyance because they have become dependant on the stuff. This is plainly one of those problems that never goes away unless there is a HUGE attitude change. There is really no argument that makes sense against legalizing the whole kit and caboodle cause there is zilch support for really dealing with it. We should throw into the beer stores, tax the heck out of it and use the dough to treat the addicts. Removes the crime element and solves the problem.

Unless society actually wants to clean up it's act and get rid of drugs there is really no argument against making money off just like booze. After all booze causes far more havoc with our roads littered with dead bodies thanks to it, homes torn apart and people suffering from the abuse of it known to each and every one of us.
JohnnyFlame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 07:29 PM   #26
Rockin' Flames
Crash and Bang Winger
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Texas
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
I have no problem with this, I believe that there is a provision where you can be declared unfit or incompetant and can be forced into treatment.

I also believe that people that are on UI should be randomly drug tested as well.
I think this is actually a great idea. I would also suggest actually even expanding it to include randomly testing people on social assistance.
Rockin' Flames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 08:36 PM   #27
RougeUnderoos
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockin' Flames View Post
I think this is actually a great idea. I would also suggest actually even expanding it to include randomly testing people on social assistance.
I think it is a great idea as well. I would also suggest actually even expanding it to include randomly testing people who receive family allowance cheques, GST rebates, tax returns and driver's "licenses" to drive automobiles on public roads that are paid for by our tax dollars.
__________________

RougeUnderoos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2007, 09:40 PM   #28
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Nope I just said UI, I firmly believe that if your receiving payment for not working you should have to submit to drug testing.

Welfare or social assistance is a different beast all together. I believe that the automobile one is self evident, and for the most part covered by employers, or should be.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2007, 11:02 AM   #29
Winsor_Pilates
Franchise Player
 
Winsor_Pilates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Van City - Main St.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Nope I just said UI, I firmly believe that if your receiving payment for not working you should have to submit to drug testing.
Is there a documented corolation between people on UI and drug users?
Winsor_Pilates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2007, 12:41 PM   #30
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates View Post
Is there a documented corolation between people on UI and drug users?
Don't know, too lazy to look it up today.

Its more of my own opinion, that there are already specific conditions to being on UI, and I see no issue in insuring that someone who's looking for a job in a day and age where drug testing is becoming prevelant as a condition of employment shouldn't be doing something that could prevent him or her from working. Especially when they're receiving tax payer dollars while they're looking for work

I also feel strongly that someone who's looking for work and needs to interview and do testing and other things shouldn't be indulging and taking a chance of potentially screwing up employment choices.

Just my 2 cents.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2007, 02:49 PM   #31
Thor
God of Hating Twitter
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Exp:
Default

I support the treatment funding, however Harper is holding back on supporting safe injection sites for example.

The war on drugs is a massive failure as we know it today, its a colossal one in the US.

The biggest problem we have as a society is our own ignorance about the effects, risks, dangers or drugs and this starts from a very early age.

I think the best move we could make is to legalize marijuana, get the criminals out of this large industry. But as for harder drugs, there are certainly more difficult issues to deal with.

The thing for me that bothers me the most is when you attempt intelligent debate on this issue, the mis-information campaigns of anti-drug groups rear their ugly head. Mushrooms make your brain bleed! Marijuana is a gateway drug!

Mdma (extacy) is a powerfull tool for psychologists that since it became something fun to party with in Texas long ago, it was banned as a class 1 drug. Now there are underground groups of therapists using mdma as a powerfull healing tool for more severe cases, and of course some less so.

Mushrooms (psilocybin, psilocin) are giving cluster headache users their biggest hope of relief for this BRUTAL affliction. A headache my friend described to me as wishing for death the whole time its hitting you.

Marijuana - Its healing/positive benefits for people going through cancer treatments, people with all kinds of afflications, is well known and well proven.

I do agree meth is a huge concern, heroin as well, and even cocaine to a point. The point I'm making is we have 3 drugs posted above which can if controlled be used legally, safely and under controlls similar to alcohol.

That would allow us to use our resources to go after other more concerning drugs with resources to help the roots of those problems.

Another topic related is prescription drug abuse by young people, and the over medication of our children by mental health professionals.

However a good open, intelligent debate is nearly impossible without the rhetoric of anti drug proponents and people who are simply uneducated in what they are so against.

Use our resources smartly, legalize soft drugs and spend the money/resources going after the more addictive and problematic drugs. Not just jailing up everyone and thinking this is the solution (hi USA).

On the topic of dealers. We all have such an easy time making them into evil figures in our society. They are reacting to a demand, you arrest them; someone else takes their place. If there is demand, there is going to be people supplying.

So if you hate dealers, why do you give the users such a pass? I hear this all the time, even from friends who buy pot, mdma, even cocaine.. They are all angels, while the dealers supplying them are so evil.

But let start somewhere, legalize at least marijuana, and soften the laws against mdma/mushrooms. That would be a good start
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2007, 02:56 PM   #32
driveway
A Fiddler Crab
 
driveway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Exp:
Default

Personally, I'm of the opinion that in a free country the government shouldn't be allowed to pass laws about what I can and can not put in my own body.

The only really decent complaint that people have about drugs is that they cause other societal problems (property crime being the big one). These problems are far more a result of the drugs being illegal in the first place than anything to do with the drugs themselves.

Legalize everything, then make the really hard stuff unappealing. For example, if someone wants to do heroin or meth, they can only do it in a small cubicle in the centre from which they have to purchase it.


Also, CC, your idea of drug testing people on UI is impractical, pointless, prohibitively expensive, and an invasion of personal privacy. I would vote against it and any politician who proposed it.
driveway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2007, 07:32 PM   #33
Savvy27
#1 Goaltender
 
Savvy27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Exp:
Default

This is a little off topic but I'm confused about the posters who are conjuring up images of predatory drug dealers who are hunting down the vulnerable among us and addicting them to their product. Do any of you have evidence that this is actually occuring?

I've never been approached by a drug dealer making a cold-call sales pitch and I have never met anyone else who has either.

It's bizarre that there remains support for a "War on Drugs" strategy akin to that of our southern neighbours when that very strategy has failed completely.

Personally, I think this money should be directed toward an increase in education for youth about drug use and the consequences. It would have to be an honest education because as Thor mentioned, the current strategy is to present all drugs as equally dangerous when that is not the case, and once young people start experimenting with drugs, or even questioning the information, they will know they've been lied to and the education will rendered useless.

If passed the 'tough on crime' aspect of this bill will turn out to be nothing other than a waste of money. Drugs will still be available, people caught with marijuana will spend more time in jail and will have fewer avenues open for them to make a positive contribution to society for the remainder of their lives. And since I know some of you will say that serves them right for breaking the law, I'm just going to have to disagree with you that society will benefit.
Savvy27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2007, 01:19 PM   #34
Flame Of Liberty
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sydney, NSfW
Exp:
Default

"War on drugs" is one of the biggest scams ever. You are not going to cut demand by cutting supply. It just isn’t gonna happen. You lock up few dealers, for a short period of time there will be a shortage of coke on the street which will only make this business more profitable and thus more people will engage in drug trade.

People make choices. If you choose to snort that shinguard and ruin your life - tough luck bro. I will rather support orphans who deserve help more than brainwashed morons who once wanted to be all cool and hip with their peers.
Flame Of Liberty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:05 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy