*

Offline Parsifal

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
I just took this again for the first time in four years, and apparently I'm drifting slowly to the right:



While we're giving explanations of our views, I'll outline how and why my views have changed.

The primary driver for my move to the right is a focus on individual rights and responsibilities, particularly with regard to purchasing decisions. For example, I believe that businesses are well within their rights to do all of the following things:
  • Run a pub where smoking is permitted, and expect support from the law.
  • Run a pub where smoking is prohibited, and expect support from the law.
  • Sell marijuana, cocaine, heroin and other drugs for recreational use.
  • Sell mince containing unusual ingredients, such as horse meat.
  • Pre-install abhorrently insecure malware on laptops. This is a terrible business decision, but it is not wrong.
  • Provide assisted suicide services, subject to some regulation to avoid this becoming an easy option for people with temporary depression.

In all of the above cases, I believe that the role of government is not to prohibit, but to regulate; the government should ensure that products are labelled with accurate and complete information as to their contents, so that consumers may make educated decisions.

On the other hand, the reason I am still in the green quadrant is that I still feel there is a place for stronger regulations when it comes to business decisions that affect society and the environment. When purchasing decisions impact the world around us, rather than only the person making the decision, the government needs to step in and provide incentives for businesses and consumers to do the right thing. The much-debated carbon tax in Australia is an example of this, as is the gun control issue.

On civil liberties (the vertical scale), my position is unchanged. Gun control is probably the only issue I don't agree with your average libertarian on. I strongly believe in equality for men and women of all races, gay marriage, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to use drugs and drastically reduced copyright and patent laws. A government's role is to protect its people, not protect antiquated customs and traditions.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 05:01:41 AM by Parsifal »
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

Thork

You would allow businesses to sell heroin for recreational use?

That seems insane. Heroine is highly addictive and it kills. Heroin addicts only have a 50% survival rate.

Quote from: http://luxury.rehabs.com/heroin-addiction/death-mortality-rates/
In 1997, nearly half of the men had died. The most common causes of death were drug overdose (21.6 percent), followed by homicide, suicide and accidents (19 percent), liver disease (15.2 percent) and cardiovascular disease and cancer (both at 11.7 percent). These alarming statistics is clear warning for addicts to seek for the best exclusive residential or outpatient addiction treatment center as soon as possible.

How about cocaine (US example) ... currently not widely available
Quote from: http://luxury.rehabs.com/heroin-addiction/death-mortality-rates/
Among emergency room visits for illegal drugs, cocaine use topped the list at 482,000 visits

Drugs like those are so dangerous to a population, they are illegal in every country on earth. The British tried to sell opiates to the Chinese public and that led to the Opium wars. The Chinese did not want a huge proportion of their population wacked out of their minds and a high mortality rate.

Then there is taking heroin or cocaine and driving, kids finding the stuff lying about (you just made it widespread) and could OD, the increased risk of HIV and other diseases from sharing needles, sick days as large numbers of people just don't get to work because they are sky high and don't care - there aren't many heroine addicts that hold down a 9-5 job, the huge elevation in crime because addicts will do absolutely anything for a fix. This is a terrible idea. I'm all for personal responsibility, but I don't agree class A drugs should be legal because there are large numbers of vulnerable people and this would ruin their lives.

Also I'm a libertarian for the most part and I don't think guns should be legal either. Purely because you have the right to your own freedom and liberty, but so does everyone else and shooting other people is easy to do and I don't think people should have to risk that all day every day. Its not worth it for the wet guy who needs a gun to feel like a man. Want to shoot, go to a gun club. Don't go into a bar with a gun.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 08:47:01 PM by Dr David Thork »

Ghost of V

Cocaine and heroin should be legally sold. If someone is stupid enough to use them and get addicted, that's their problem.

I doubt Parsifal was advocating the use of the drugs, just that he thinks they should be legal to use if one is so inclined.

Thork

Can you imagine adverts on TV for heroine?
You buy a magazine and it has a free sample hit stuck to the cover.
Fizzy drink companies adding it to their products (Cocaine used to be in Coca Cola hence the name). "Sorry sir, we don't have heroin free Pepsi, would a regular Pepsi be ok?
Promoters on the street giving out samples and encouraging people to take it?
Companies suing anyone saying their products are harmful?
Human trials by pharma companies on students who need the money?
Celebrity endorsement of heroine?
What happens when a female heroine addict gets pregnant?

You can't make it legal and then allow business to do whatever business wants. You need to draw the line somewhere.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 08:48:09 PM by Dr David Thork »

Thork, do you think making drugs illegal and stigmatizing those that seek help with addiction is the best way to reduce the rates of drug use? The empirical evidence, which is far from conclusive at this point, disagrees.

Anyway, on the original topic, I think tests like this are fairly shitty. I prefer to view politics as a series of issues, and not just dogmatic philosophies that allow you to boil down complex issues to a few buzz words you like.

Here's my graph:
You don't think I'm going to post here sober, do you?  ???

I have embraced my Benny Franko side. I'm sleazy.

Can you imagine adverts on TV for heroine?
You buy a magazine and it has a free sample hit stuck to the cover.
Fizzy drink companies adding it to their products (Cocaine used to be in Coca Cola hence the name). "Sorry sir, we don't have heroin free Pepsi, would a regular Pepsi be ok?
Promoters on the street giving out samples and encouraging people to take it?
Companies suing anyone saying their products are harmful?
Human trials by pharma companies on students who need the money?
Celebrity endorsement of heroine?

You can't make it legal and then allow business to do whatever business wants. You need to draw the line somewhere.

Legalize and regulate, take the money saved from enforcing ineffective drug laws and extra income from regulation and put it into education and rehabilitation. I'm iffy on the highly addictive drugs as well, but we certainly need to relax the laws on the weak drugs like Marijuana.

Ghost of V

Can you imagine adverts on TV for heroine?
You buy a magazine and it has a free sample hit stuck to the cover.
Fizzy drink companies adding it to their products (Cocaine used to be in Coca Cola hence the name). "Sorry sir, we don't have heroin free Pepsi, would a regular Pepsi be ok?
Promoters on the street giving out samples and encouraging people to take it?
Companies suing anyone saying their products are harmful?
Human trials by pharma companies on students who need the money?
Celebrity endorsement of heroine?
What happens when a female heroine addict gets pregnant?

You can't make it legal and then allow business to do whatever business wants. You need to draw the line somewhere.

What if it was illegal to sell it but legal to use it?

Saddam Hussein

It's "heroin," Thork, not "heroine."  Inb4 Vauxy posts a quote of the mistake and nothing else.

Can you imagine adverts on TV for heroine?
You buy a magazine and it has a free sample hit stuck to the cover.
Fizzy drink companies adding it to their products (Cocaine used to be in Coca Cola hence the name). "Sorry sir, we don't have heroin free Pepsi, would a regular Pepsi be ok?
Promoters on the street giving out samples and encouraging people to take it?
Companies suing anyone saying their products are harmful?
Human trials by pharma companies on students who need the money?
Celebrity endorsement of heroine?
What happens when a female heroine addict gets pregnant?

You can't make it legal and then allow business to do whatever business wants. You need to draw the line somewhere.

I don't think that anyone is arguing that these drugs should have no regulations whatsoever.  You don't need to worry about promoters handing out free doses on the street for the same reason that you don't need to worry about that happening with cigarettes.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10537
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Discuss politics with Thork
« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2015, 09:44:00 PM »
In Thork's world "Sorry, sir, we're out of orange juice. Will a pint of vodka be fine?" is something that you might reasonably expect to hear in a restaurant.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

hey guess what narcotics are being used pretty much all the time by millions of people even though they're illegal:

all of them.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Parsifal

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
You would allow businesses to sell heroin for recreational use?

Yes.

That seems insane. Heroine is highly addictive and it kills. Heroin addicts only have a 50% survival rate.

Yes, and that's tragic. Let's solve the problem by making it illegal, thus providing incentives for addicts not to seek help for fear of retribution. Makes sense.

How about cocaine (US example) ... currently not widely available
Quote from: http://luxury.rehabs.com/heroin-addiction/death-mortality-rates/
Among emergency room visits for illegal drugs, cocaine use topped the list at 482,000 visits

482,000 sounds widely available to me. It's almost as if making drugs illegal doesn't stop people from using them.

Drugs like those are so dangerous to a population, they are illegal in every country on earth. The British tried to sell opiates to the Chinese public and that led to the Opium wars. The Chinese did not want a huge proportion of their population wacked out of their minds and a high mortality rate.

The Chinese can run China the way they want. As a citizen of Australia, I'll focus on influencing Australia the way I want.

Then there is taking heroin or cocaine and driving

... which I'm not advocating legalising.

kids finding the stuff lying about (you just made it widespread) and could OD

You mean like alcohol?

the increased risk of HIV and other diseases from sharing needles

Largely a result of drugs being illegal. Suppose heroin was legalised, and regulated so that every heroin vendor was required to offer clean needles with every sale of the drug. Imagine how much less damage could be done.

sick days as large numbers of people just don't get to work because they are sky high and don't care - there aren't many heroine addicts that hold down a 9-5 job, the huge elevation in crime because addicts will do absolutely anything for a fix.

Do you have any evidence that legalising it will increase the number of addicts? If, as you say, they will do anything for a fix, then they will find a way to obtain the drug whether or not it is legal. It's much easier to recognise and deal with such problems when they're out in the open, though.

This is a terrible idea. I'm all for personal responsibility, but I don't agree class A drugs should be legal because there are large numbers of vulnerable people and this would ruin their lives.

On the contrary, I think it would help a lot of people whose lives are being ruined now.

Also I'm a libertarian for the most part and I don't think guns should be legal either.

I didn't say that. I'm a moderate on the gun debate; as on many other issues, I advocate regulation rather than prohibition. I don't think it should be illegal to obtain a gun, but I also don't think it should be easy.

Companies suing anyone saying their products are harmful?
Human trials by pharma companies on students who need the money?

You can't make it legal and then allow business to do whatever business wants. You need to draw the line somewhere.

For fuck's sake, Thork. Did you actually read the post you're replying to? Here, let me reiterate the important part:

In all of the above cases, I believe that the role of government is not to prohibit, but to regulate

No, I don't think business should have a free hand when it comes to these things. However, I would prefer to see heroin and cocaine being sold by legitimate, regulated, taxable businesses than by the black market.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5864
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
The real strength in regulating and legalizing drugs comes in pushing the organized crime out of the game. You can have cleaner product that comes without the commensurate crime and violence attached to drug importing.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
    • View Profile
I don't personally support the use of drugs, but damn do I want to sell them. Being able to sell a product that literally addicts your customer to a point where they can't live without it? That's like running a business on easy mode.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5864
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
I don't personally support the use of drugs, but damn do I want to sell them. Being able to sell a product that literally addicts your customer to a point where they can't live without it? That's like running a business on easy mode.

If you, personally, wish to sell people drugs, how can you say, you personally, don't support their use?  Or will you make sure to tell your customers that buying drugs is a terrible idea?
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
    • View Profile
If you, personally, wish to sell people drugs, how can you say, you personally, don't support their use?  Or will you make sure to tell your customers that buying drugs is a terrible idea?

I'm saying I personally won't use them. I don't see how me personally not using them is somehow conflicting with the desire to sell them. Just because I think they're unnecessary doesn't mean everyone does and/or should think the same. For example, I know plenty of people who think video games are a waste of time and I would otherwise not care that they think that, except they insist on informing me that I am wasting my time. I think opinions on personal matters are to be kept to oneself and not impact other individuals. Yes, I think "drugs are bad, mmkay?" but that doesn't mean I am going to proselytize such an opinion to other people or attempt to stop them from drugging themselves.

If someone wants to do drugs they're going to end up buying something from someone. Why shouldn't that someone from whom they're buying be me?


*

Offline Particle Person

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2896
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
It was your use of the word "support" that was confusing. Selling drugs to people is the single most direct way to support drug use.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
    • View Profile
It was your use of the word "support" that was confusing. Selling drugs to people is the single most direct way to support drug use.

I don't think of it that way. I'm supporting the sale of them, not the use of them. For all I know they're buying mary-jay-wanna plants because it looks good in their garden. Maybe they're buying le shrooms for a psychology experiment.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5864
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
That strikes me as willful naïveté. You have to know that most people buy drugs to get high, so selling drugs to people so they can get high is supporting that. If you wanted to sell to users because you know your stuff is cleaner and so less people will OD, but ultimately you wish they would not use at all, , that idea makes sense. You just sound like you want to get rich from another's vulnerability and look down on it at the same time.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

Saddam Hussein

You just sound like you want to get rich from another's vulnerability and look down on it at the same time.

Yeah, but that's hardly out of character for Rushy.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
    • View Profile
You just sound like you want to get rich from another's vulnerability and look down on it at the same time.

Well, uh, yeah.

If you wanted to sell to users because you know your stuff is cleaner and so less people will OD, but ultimately you wish they would not use at all, , that idea makes sense.

This could be true, too. I mean, I can't have my customers dying on me. That'd be bad for business.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2015, 04:39:22 AM by Irushwithscvs »