Pack93z
15 years ago


Drugs are a victimless crime. If your neighbor smokes crack, it has NO effect on you unless he operates a motorized vehicle and plows into your house or runs over your dog. Or he becomes an addict and he steals your DVD player.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



If all they did was light up, snort, inject, or swallow the shit.. I would agree that it would be a victimless crime.

But there are far deeper aspects of it that surround addiction.

Legalizing it would most likely introduce the drug to more of the population, hence rising the number of addicts that get hooked.

So yes there may be a added benefit to taxing and controlling it.. but there will also be a larger load on society to support, treat, and rehab the additionally folks that become addicts.

Drugs affect people differently.. but I would have to say in my experience, the addiction of coke, heroin, and some of the other narcotics outweigh those that are presently legal today.. never tried it myself.. just speaking of those around me.

In the end.. is it morally and financially worth it? I highly doubt it.

BTW.. I have no objections to running Billy's ads or telling the "real" story behind his demise.. society and most importantly kids need to hear the real story behind substance abuse.. no one is above it or can cheat its effects.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Nonstopdrivel
15 years ago
Is it financially worth it? Absolutely. The potential medical costs of treating a few extra addicts would be several orders of magnitude less than the cost of the prisons we are building to prosecute and cage millions of non-violent drug offenders.

I question how many addicts would truly be created if we legalized. Again, the number of smokers continues to decline. The number of caffeine addicts is stable. No matter how legal the drugs might be, you can't be intoxicated on the job. And legalizing drugs takes away a lot of the thrill of them. I've heard the argument that we need to protect the risktakers from themselves. Bollocks. It's the risktakers who are using the drugs when they're illegal. If we legalize them, they'll move onto some other thrill.

Besides, the very fact we would instantly destroy the infrastructure that props up the drug lords should be reason enough to legalize drugs. The moralists who insist on keeping them illegal could be considered, philosophically speaking, indirectly responsible for the violence and murder that surrounds the drug industry. They stridently claim that drugs lead to crimes against others. While that may be true (how often does some drunk asshole beat up his wife?), far more crimes are perpetrated by the people who take the most risk -- and thereby stand to profit the most from -- the traffic of illicit and therefore very lucrative substances.

Make drugs cheap, easy, and (relatively) safe, and their market disappears overnight.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
15 years ago

The moralists who insist on keeping them illegal could be considered, philosophically speaking, indirectly responsible for all the violence and murder that surrounds the drug industry.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Really.. lol.. that is classic rhetoric if I have ever seen it.

So those that oppose the death penalty are indirectly responsible for murders and serial killers as well?

And because you support such legalization, your philosophically are innocent?

What a crock of misdirection.. I can buy into the possible financial impact, albeit I would like to see a study supporting such a statement with the impact that these drug dealers and "thrill" seekers will just move onto another illegal act which they will be arrested, prosecuted and jailed for.

You statement is correct, some will move onto another "drug" or "thrill".. but that won't have judicial ramifications tied to them? Of course they will.. it will probably be some unregulated aspect of the culture. Thinking it won't is naive, IMO.

So do we just continue to say, okay, we have a problem, lets legalize it, tax it, and they will move on to another crime.

Reality is.. some in this world chose not to obey the laws of the society for whatever reason, by legalizing more isn't going to change their behavior.. it is just going to modify it into another direction.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
longtimefan
15 years ago

subject: Re: Pitch man "Billy Mays" ???

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



LOL
Pack93z
15 years ago
I disagree, the subject that is continuing has morphed from Mays and his demise.

That is the hidden beauty of forums, topics spawn related discussion..

And I have to laugh a little.. Zero derailed an entire page or two of a topic in the main thread yesterday because it preempted his thread.. irony is humorous in doses.

BTW.. that last bit is intended in HUMOR. ;)

Topic.. Billy sure can peddle crap.. living or not.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
Speechless and disappointed.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
15 years ago
Sorry my opinion and maybe failed humor left you speechless and disappointed.

For the humor... it is just that..

For the topic morph.. yes it is off topic from the origins, but the topic creator and subject have moved in this direction.. which has a tie in based on the reported nature of Billy's death.

Should his infomercials be pulled.. no, it still streams revenue to the company and more importantly to Billy's estate.

Additionally, I don't think it should be swept under the rug, the reason that contributed to his death.. drug abuse. Which is turn begs the question.. how to prevent such a thing.

I could be completely wrong in my opinion..

BTW.. I am not saying it is wrong to steer it back closer to topic.. just I can understand how it got here.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
No one mentioned anything about being off topic. I posted the subject. I didn't say get on topic or anything. I posted the subject. I haven't even read any posts, but maybe looked at one and it mentioned drugs so I assume it was about his death.

For those following this discussion, I apologize for my poor contribution which seems to have stalled it. I'll try to stay out of these discussions and gradually others as well.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
15 years ago
Apparently I misread the Longtime quote and your post.. the mistake is mine. And I apologize for the error.

Carry on..
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Cheesey
  • Cheesey
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
15 years ago
I just don't see how legalizing a dangerous substance is a good way of thinking.
"Victimless" crimes?
I bet drunks use the same thought line.
Yes, it's a small fraction that drink, drive, and then injure or kill someone. But if it's one of YOUR loved ones that is the victim in this case, i bet you wouldn't feel like it was such a great idea to make more mind altering substances legal.
Addicts destroy the lives of others. Thats fact. Putting more choices out there for those people is not a great idea.
Watch "Cops" a few times, and see the people that will steal to get a fix. I saw one dude on there the other day that admitted he spends $1000.00 a DAY on coke. Where does he get the money? Shoplifts and then sells the stuff he steals.
"Victimless" crime? Yeah......only because you don't SEE how much more you have to pay for items to pay for the stuff ripped off by these scum bags.
So....because they don't hurt someone physically, they shouldn't be locked up? Most criminals that commit violent crimes.......their first crimes arn't usually violent crimes. They work their way up the ladder, till one day they DO hurt or kill someone.
If you break the law, you SHOULD be held accountable and locked up! Maybe if we DID that more, we would cut down on the amount of VICTIMS out there.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.
wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.
Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : Turns out he like older women
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : I wasn't supposed to say anything, but yes the word is out and we are happy 😂😂😂
Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : I might be late on this but Aaron Rodgers is now married
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

14-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

14-Jun / Community Welcome! / dfosterf

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.