Anyone who uses this garbage deserves everything they get.
Chlorine in the gene pool.......
I love the Christian sentiments expressed by people on these posts. If you are
not able to feel empathy for drug addicts, then you have never taken the time to
learn anything about drug addiction.
"[Phoenix is] a city that is directly supplied from Mexico and then that
city is used as a massive distribution hub. And Salt Lake City is one of the
first stops in the distribution network for drugs leaving Phoenix,"Add this to the very long list of reasons we MUST secure our borders. We must
accept the reality that "unlicensed pharmacists" also cross the border
and do irreparable harm to our citizens.
@ Mainly MeI completely agree with you. Too bad people can't
get addicted to doing good things for others, drug use is selfish, and
dangerous. @ DrGrooveyBeing Christian does not mean you
accept and tolerate everything.
We can't possibly hope to beat this drug so the thing to do is legalize it,
@Brave Sir Robin - Banning the drug will not solve the abuse issue. It's
not a liberal theory, it is only the sad reality.
"We can't possibly hope to beat this drug so the thing to do is
legalize it, right, liberals?"Straw Man Alert!Sane
Drug Policy would entail having the legality/illegality and punishment for
violation be proportionate to the amount of societal and personal harm inflicted
by the substance, not the arbitrary and overly harsh "war on drugs" we
have to day that wreaks as much havoc on society as the drugs themselves. Drugs
that cause horrific physical side effects, including disease, addiction, crime
and death should remain Schedule 1 controlled substances. Krokodil would clearly
fall into this category, just like Meth and Heroin should as well. However, drugs such as cannabis, psilocybin and others that cause very little
harm to the users or society, even compared to other "legal" drugs such
as alcohol and tobacco, should not be prohibited to adults over 21. In fact,
since many people will always seek altered states, we should craft laws and
regulations that steer them away from harmful ones to those that are safer and
cause less damage to society and persons. If someone interprets this
to mean "Legalize Everything!" then that person has a basic
"Add this to the very long list of reasons we MUST secure our
borders."Krokodil can be made from ingredients that are easily
available in America, from knowledge on the Internet by any idiot in any home in
the country. Hermetically sealing our borders would only give the illusion of
"safety" because, unlike drugs like cocaine, there is nothing about this
drug that requires it to physically enter the country at the border.Only thru better education and treatment can we prevent drugs like this from
taking hold in our communities. Drug addiction and the associated ills are a
public health problem, not a purely criminal one. You can not
eradicate the ills of drugs with prohibition. You only empower the worst
elements of society by turning the manufacture, control and distribution over to
criminals. This is the lesson of prohibition in the 20's. Krokodil, bath
salts, "spice", etc are the inevitable end-game of the failed War on
Drugs: substances far more horrific than the ones the war was trying to prevent
in the first place. The very definition of failure.
@ Brave Sir Robin - It would be far better if drugs, even this one, were
legalized. Krokodil is made by reducing codeine to morphine using the same
processes often used to make meth. It's not the morphine that causes damage
to people, rather it's all the impurities in the substance caused by people
who have no idea what they are doing making it at home. At least if it was legal
people wouldn't be getting all the impurities which cause damage to the
blood vessels leading to tissue necrosis. Legalization would have the benefit of
not making violent drug lords in south and central America rich. And finally, if
you look at studies in countries where drugs have been decriminalized/legalized
such as Portugal, use has actually fallen over time.
Legalize it if you want just stop asking me to pay for someones choice to use it
and all the fallout that comes from it. Personally taxing it would help
alleviate that issue. I don't use drugs and I think the are a
bane on our society and I wish we did not have to deal with them. That being
said we all know that the vast majority pours in from our southern border. It
is clear that this administration simply won't secure our borders (to buy
votes and gain power) and previous administrations have flat out failed to get
the job done. What a surprise, government failing the people they are supposed
represent. Securing our borders and stopping law-breaking people
pouring into our country, often loaded with drugs, needs to happen regardless.
One need only look at the demographics of the prison population to see that it
needs to be done sooner rather than later.Addiction is a horrible
thing and I empathize but at the same time I do not have enough money to pay for
all the ills that this lifestyle brings with it. There are also consequences
for individual choices.
@UtahCentristEquating psilocybin to cannabis seriously undermines
your own argument. The psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, THC, is far less
dangerous than "magic mushrooms". Psilocybin is much closer to LSD-25
than THC in affects and danger.
@Brave Sir RobinActually that's the libertarian view. The liberal
view would involve many more sentences and regulations.
"Being Christian does not mean you accept and tolerate everything."Uncle Rico, I read your comment, and then I reread the comment you are
talking about: "I love the Christian sentiments expressed by
people on these posts. If you are not able to feel empathy for drug addicts,
then you have never taken the time to learn anything about drug
addiction."Could you show me in this comment where s/he said
anything about accepting and tolerating everything? "We
can't possibly hope to beat this drug so the thing to do is legalize it,
right, liberals?"Brave Sir Robbin, having read your comments i
belive you are a small government constitutionalist. Can you tell me where
society derives the authority to tell anybody what to put in their own body?
First of all show me where that authority is in the Constitution. Then make the
argument for a local government dictating what you choose to ingest.