StarGateWars Forums

I am personally part of people who are 100% in favour of total ban towards them. Also in favour of drastic policy from authorities, to fight actively dealers and drug distribution, to limitate the most arrival of said drugs, to prevent all damages they do on people. Addiction, heart attacks, brain damages, overdose, violence, black market...
i'm wondering if everyone is also totally against them, unless there are also drugs consumers among debaters who would try to defend their point of view as well...

Forgot to mention, large scale drugs trading pay terrorism..

Two words:
Free Will

Ahhh how i love the assertion that illegal trade in drugs funds terrorism.

would you care to prove that? or are you just repeating the same old tired lies that govs like to spout in propoganda campaigns.

There is no evidence that illegal drugs (which is purely an arbitrary choice i might add) fund terrorism. Organised crime yeah, but theres no link between people like the mafia & terrorism either.

Cocaine, heroin, opium, LSD, extazy, cannabis (not medical, it's sort of an issue)...is what I talk about.

I'm not against alcohol, of course. Just against abusive use of it that causes street violence and car accidents.

~Josh~ wrote:Two words:
Free Will

Free will to have black market, addiction and overdoses? No thanks!


I suppose Kit-Fox doesn't consider FARCs (for example) as terrorists...interesting.

Well going on precedant, in that the IRA was treated by the US as freedom fighters.

By that acknowledgement FARC arent terrorist but freedom fighters.

Besides FARC gets more money from 'other' sources than drugs. mentioning drugs is like saying the gov makes more of cash off a 1p tax on something than they do off their 30%+ income taxes.

Kit-Fox wrote:Well going on precedant, in that the IRA was treated by the US as freedom fighters.

By that acknowledgement FARC arent terrorist but freedom fighters.

Besides FARC gets more money from 'other' sources than drugs. mentioning drugs is like saying the gov makes more of cash off a 1p tax on something than they do off their 30%+ income taxes.

FARC are terrorists for me, Colombia isn't a dictatorship, and what FARC promotes is far far worse than what Alvaro Uribe could ever do. Hardly freedom that is. More a Cuba/Venezuela v2 we could see coming.

Drugs and kidnapping, whatever...

Afghanistan is the largest exporter of heroin in the world and whilst the Taliban was in power the majority of that money was used to fund Al Qaeda and since Al Qaeda is considered a terrorist organization I would say that you are incorrect Kit-Fox but meh not even relevant


are narcotics bad absolutely but Earendil is absolutely correct prescription drugs are becoming more and more of a problem especially things like OC's and Percocets which are both opiates but are "regulated" even though all you need is to get two different doctors and you have two prescriptions....the pharmaceutical companies do not care nor have they ever cared about the people who get their drugs just as long as they turn a profit

Angnoch wrote:Afghanistan is the largest exporter of heroin in the world and whilst the Taliban was in power the majority of that money was used to fund Al Qaeda and since Al Qaeda is considered a terrorist organization I would say that you are incorrect Kit-Fox but meh not even relevant

Even better example than mine.
Was wondering which one I should have used...

I'm gonna have to repeat myself arent I?

I'm seeing the same old tired misunderstandings about drugs repeated. Do you know how very very hard it is to become addicted to analgesics, een opiate based ones? Its almost impossible.

Addiction to medical based painkillers is usually becuase you are using illegal drugs as well which metabolise with the medical drugs leading to the great/longer high.

Oh & using House as an example of medical drug addiction is really really bad, because it shows that he is psyhically addicted to it (or at least he displays symptoms to suggest that) and such an addiction is really really stupidly unlikely (i'd quote the figures but i cant recall them from my drug management 'seminar') it is much more likely to be a mental addiction which is easily cured & rarely presents any psyhical symptoms except the really unlucky (your telling me House just happens to be one of those right?)

EDIT: Al Qaeda again just like FARC gets more money via other means than drugs but as it doesnt fit in i'm not suprised its not accepted. Drugs trades simply arent as profitable as other actions to groups like these.

its not a matter of which is more profitable for the terrorists its just a fact that drugs supply income for them


as for opiate based drugs not being physically addicting you might want to go over those figures again buddy since opiates and meth are actually a physical addiction it may take time but it does become a physically necessity because it alters your brain chemistry and hormone production

You would have to take opiate based drugs like vicodin etc etc (insert name of opiate based drug here {just to many to name each one}) for many years, something in to the order of 15+ years to make such a permanent change to your body chemistry. EDIT: and very few have perscriptions that would last that long or take such amounts religously for so long either.

I really should remember after having a couple of 'seminars' on it included in my pain management treatment due to the amount i'm on at such a 'young age' (as far the the docs are concerned its young).

It's funny because I was seeing a documentary showing "rave" people addicted to extazy and LSD, an hour ago...and it gave me the idea to start this topic!

LegendaryApophis wrote:It's funny because I was seeing a documentary showing "rave" people addicted to extazy and LSD, an hour ago...and it gave me the idea to start this topic!

generally speaking street drugs are somewhat different to perscription drugs. with street drugs it is usually the cutting agents you get addicted to rather than the raw drug itself, especially as the cuting agents are usually chosen to help you metabolise the drugs into your system, so they are usually chemicals your body can 'bond' with quickly

except Oxycontin has proven time and again that after one prescription people can become violently addicted leading people to steal and kill just to supply the habit.

it does not require 15+ years I know from watching a friend sink into a percocet addiction and it only took him taking the wrong dose once and ejoying it a little to much he went to rehab for 3months and is alright now but that was a rough year and a half to be friends with him because he "needed" it so badly

Indicating that it was a mental addiction, generally these do come on quicker but even so usually tend to take time to develop, unless the subject 'wants' the addiction. Such feeling usually stem from a desire for control over ones life or from darker areas of the human psyche.

I could be wrong of course, I dont know the full ins & outs of the person and situation and he could have been one of the very unlucky who have reactions to drugs of these types (such reactions can lead from instant addiction as mentioned to of course death upon taking the drug, very rare indeed but then it can happen)

I suppose I should have qualified it really the 15+ years (although you could argue anywhere from 10years+, depends who you talk to really) is for a psyhical addiction that has changed your bondys basic chemical processes & responses.