• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Drug use/drug testing in the CF (merged)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dire
  • Start date Start date
I am all for legalization like everyone else, but these guys have some really stupid ideas, when it comes to other issues. The sillyness of their party distracts people from the real issue--that legalizing marijuana will be a great benefit to the nation, and fix many of its problems, particularly in the urban centres.
 
Considering most of the inner city problems stem from hard core drugs, I don't think legalization will be the great saviour you're portraying it to be.

However, you're right, the party is silly.   A single platform party like this is foolish at best.

Where are the Yogic Flyers when you need them?
 
Infanteer said:
Considering most of the inner city problems stem from hard core drugs, I don't think legalization will be the great saviour you're portraying it to be.

Interesting. I have never heard of marijuana being called a hard core drug before. The problem arises with drug dealers. The drug dealers primarily sell marijuana because it is the easiest to get, and most people smoke it, so it is easy to sell. They then use the money they make to further their other criminal activities, get illegal weapons, what have you.

If marijuana (and a handful of other non addictive, but currently unjustly illegal drugs) is completely legalized, and sold in government run businesses like the LCBO, people will go to these stores to buy it, where the quality and purity can be assured, and the sale can be taxed, and have the taxes go to whatever (like the taxes on alcohol).

Stiffer sentences should be given to anyone buying or selling marijuana on the streets, for example mandatory 20 year jail time, in order to force people to buy from the stores, and put the drug dealers out of business.

Licences would be issued to parties who want to grow amounts for sale at the stores, and they would be watched closely by the government to ensure they are doing everything correct.

If people had a legal way of obtaining these drugs, they would use it. But the way the laws are now, force people to break the law, and in turn the laws  do not serve in the best intrest of the people. Alcohol is the perfect example. When it was illegal, people had to use bootleggers to get it. They did not stop using it because it was illegal. Now that alcohol is regularly available, when was the last time you heard of anyone going to a bootlegger to get it? Are all people raging alcoholics? The government lets many more dangerous things be legalized, such as alcohol and cigarettes, so there is really no reason to have some drugs legalized.

The problem with drug use, stems from overuse. Like your mum surely always told you "too much of anything is not good". Lots and lots of people use drugs recreationally, and it is only a very very very small amount of them who have issues with them. This leads one to the probablility that the problem lies with the people's own addictive personalities and personal problems, then the drugs being the problem. If you have more serious underlying issues, then anything can be abused and things will turn out negative for the person. Some people abuse alcohol, some abuse painkillers, some abuse food. Rush Limbaugh abuses all three. Should these things be made illegal just because a small minority abuse them? No, of course not, after all people need food to live, people can use painkillers to medicate themselves, people can use alcohol to enjoy themselves. Well the government has already shown that they believe marijuana can be used to medicate people. Many safe drugs can be used by people to enjoy themselves, and some drugs can help feed one's mind and improve their life.

People in this hemisphere have been conditioned to think all drugs are the same and all drugs are evil. This is of course, not a realistic assumption. A plant or chemical can not posess personality charicteristics. People need to be more properly educated about drugs. If and when they are legalized, scientists and researchers can find out much more about them, then they are currently allowed to, and not be forced to write false, biased reports on them.

Everything in the universe has a "good" and "bad" side. Drugs are no exception. Some drugs, the "good" side outweighs the "bad" side, and some it is vice versa. I can give examples. Crack cocaine is what I would call a "bad" drug. It is quite easy to overdose and kill yourself, the high is short, and it is physically addictive--your body goes into withdrawl after only using a small amount. This kind of drug should be banned, and its useage condemned. Other drugs such as heroin, and basically any opiate, PCP, and any other physically addictive drug, should be banned outright, and stricter laws should be in place for those who would sell or buy these drugs. The negative side of these drugs outweigh the positive side, so these are overall negative drugs. Again, "too much of anything is no good".

However if you accept this, then you must accept that some drugs have a positive side that outweighs the negative side. Marijuana is the most widely used. The only real negative effect is that smoking marijuana can harm your lungs, and the usual factors including imparing judgement, as alcohol or other legal drugs do as well. Some other drugs that I would classify as "positive" drugs, include things, such as LSD, DMT, Psilocybin mushrooms, cacti and soforth. These again, are not in the least addictive, and in fact, the experiences are usually so intense and often life altering, that one does not want to use them more then maybe a few times a month at the absolute most. Effects also disapate with overuse, so the drug itself prevents abuse. Not to mention these drugs are much more difficult to overdose on, and problems really only arise with people who are not prepared for the experience, and they end up losing too much of their judgement, as they were not expecting the trip that they got and became overwhelmed and tried to kill themselves or the like. Prohibitionists like to "sex up" unusual phenomenon like LSD "flashbacks" to try and scare people out of using drugs, when in actuality very little is known about these occurances, and more research should be given to understand why, in rare instances, they do occur. If people can figure out if they happen when used in combonation with other drugs or whatever, then they can be prevented (or enhanced, depending on what one desires). There is very little reliable research done on drugs, and it is a disservice to all, not having this information available so that people can make informed decisions about what they want to do to themselves.

With legalization, these "good" drugs can be packaged and sold to the public. The government can research, and develop proper education to inform the people. Tell how much to take, when to take, how much is too much, what to do if you have taken too much, what to expect when you take the drug and so on. The taxes from selling the drugs can go to addiction treatment programs to treat the small minority of people who do become addicted, or need help.  It can also educate people that they should not be taking drugs with a negative mindset, or to escape problems in their lives, but rather to enjoy, and experience and enhance all that life has to offer.
 
and most people smoke it

I am all for legalization like everyone else

NBK - if you can't see that your beliefs are different than the majority of us on this board, then you have indeed spent far too many hours drawing on the cool end of a zeppelin. These statements may be true in the circles you run in (where the majority of people are bisexual, if I remember correctly), but please don't make broad statements like that, which can insinuate that we agree with you. Frankly, I am surprised of your interest in the Military. The vast majority of people I have served with were anti-pot, anti-hard drug, etc.

Your opposing point of views are fine, but you would be the first to wail and gnash your teeth if some of us with..umm.. more "old-fashioned" ideals were to make broad statements that indicated our point of view was "normal" and included your support...

 
A Ministry of Marijuana? Don't we already pay enough federal bureaucrats?

As a sidenote, nothing beats the platform that the Rhinoceros Party of Canada ran on before it was disbanded in 1993. Here are some examples of their brilliant ideas:

- repealing the law of gravity,
- paving the province of Manitoba Manitoba to create the world's largest parking lot,
- instituting illiteracy as Canada's third official language,
- tearing down the Rocky Mountains so Albertans could see the Pacific sunset,
- building sloping bicycle paths across the country so that Canadians could "coast from coast to coast",
- annexing the United States, which would take its place as the third territory in Canada's backyard, in order to raise the average national temperature,
- breeding a mosquito that would only hatch in January so that "the little buggers will freeze to death",
- turn Montreal's rue Ste-Catherine into the world's longest bowling alley,
- selling the Canadian Senate at an antique auction in California,
- painting Canada's coastal sea limits so that Canadian fish would know where they were at all times,
- counting the Thousand Islands to make sure none are missing,
- banning lousy Canadian winters.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Rhinoceros%20Party%20of%20Canada

And to think this party at one time came in 2nd in some ridings, even ahead of the Conservatives.

Sorry, I'm getting off topic now.


 
If you see how many people are killed in drunk driving accidents (including one from my former high school, less than a month ago)  even with all of the warnings, info etc... does anyone honestly think that people will always use marajuana responsibly, legalized or not?

creating a defence fund for those accused of cannabis-related crimes; 

what kind of offences would these people need defense money for?  Dealing?  Possession?  Mischief while high?  The users can pay for it just as long as they don't take money off our taxes for such a purpose.

The government lets many more dangerous things be legalized, such as alcohol and cigarettes, so there is really no reason to have some drugs legalized

Last time I checked, Canada was moving away from cigarettes, with public smoking bans/campaigns becoming more prevalent.  Cigarettes are only legal now because they were instituted in times when we did not know how hazardous to our health they were, and only consumer demand is keeping them legal.  Do you want the same thing to happen to marajuana?  Marajuana does have some longer-term effects, such as memory loss, and who knows what else it does?  It already has side effects such as memory loss.  ;D
 
muskrat89 said:
These statements may be true in the circles you run in (where the majority of people are bisexual, if I remember correctly),...

That seems like a rather broad statement.
 
Danno - NBK stated that, in another thread

One more thing. I cannot think of one single girl that I have ever met since junior high who was not very openly bisexual. Almost all the guys I know, save a few fascists who just "tolerate" are quite openly bisexual as well.

Most people are bisexual. If you think about it, there is no reason not to be bisexual. If you only like boys or only like girls, you are cutting off 50% of the entire population that you may have a meaningful, loving relationship with.


Try again, pup
 
Attaboy!  :) 

I even gave you a "promote" thingy, because you took a jab standing up  :salute:
 
muskrat89 said:
NBK - if you can't see that your beliefs are different than the majority of us on this board, then you have indeed spent far too many hours drawing on the cool end of a zeppelin. These statements may be true in the circles you run in (where the majority of people are bisexual, if I remember correctly), but please don't make broad statements like that, which can insinuate that we agree with you. Frankly, I am surprised of your interest in the Military. The vast majority of people I have served with were anti-pot, anti-hard drug, etc.

Your opposing point of views are fine, but you would be the first to wail and gnash your teth if some of us with..umm.. more "old-fashioned" ideals were to make broad statements that indicated our point of view was "normal" and included your support...

Haha, I know very much that the loudest people on this forum are the polar opposite of me when it comes to some things. I dont believe that I have ever said that everyone on this fourm belives in the same things that I do. Or anyone else for that matter. If I did say that, then please show me where I said that, and I will retract it, because I never believed that. What would be the point of participating on this forum if I just replied with "yes I agree" to every post, especially when I disagree? I believe that I read a survey once that said something along the lines of most Canadians had used marijuana at one or more times in their life. I dont remember the survey however so that doesnt mean much. I think most Canadians have used some drug at one time or another. Maybe not you or your friends, but this is a big country, with a diverse population.

I as well think it may have a lot to do with a generation gap. You are much older than I, and are likely out of touch with several generations which have progressed since yours. I would not expect you to think the same way as I.

Frankly I am suprised at your intrest in the military. The vast majority of people in the Canadian Forces that I know are open minded, intelligent and tolerant of new ideas, and more interested in debating arguments then making attacks on someone who has an opposing viewpoint, just because they can not find a fault with it.

If you want to debate any points I made than it would fill me with such glee to hear them. I did not mean to try and represent army.ca, but I would much rather have someone make posts criticizing the points I made. I think what I have said made a lot of sense, and if people an find flaws in it, then please tell me, so I can consider them and try to figure out if they are real problems with my view or not.

Express your "old fashioned" ideas on this forum, by all means, and if I feel like it, I will be more than happy to point out all the ways in which you are wrong  ;D
 
nbk - refer to my quotes (from your posts) above. I would imagine that most of the participants on this board, consider themselves part of "most people" and "everyone else" - surely even you can follow that logic - please consider yourself shown. Or, to demonstrate that I am a reasonable man, explain to me, and other members of this board why we, or even most of us - aren't included in those two groupings.


I am also interested in knowing, since you brought it up - how many people you have actually known, know, or have met - in the Canadian Military. Use as many years as you like. Then we can determine which of us has had a more representative sampling...when it comes to "anti-drug", as opposed to "open and tolerant".

I am not attacking your viewpoint - I simply stated that you were making assertions like "everyone else" and "most people" - when I did not believe that to be accurate. In fact - re-read your own post, where you quoted me - I said "your opposing views are fine".
 
What I find funny about this is that every where in Canada they are blocking poeple from smoking, they spend millions on adds telling all the damage that smoking does to people and then they want to decriminalize another substance.
 
Marijuana in my opinion should stay illegal, however; there are proven medicinal uses for it, and I think that should be explored.
 
muskrat89 said:
nbk - refer to my quotes (from your posts) above. I would imagine that most of the participants on this board, consider themselves part of "most people" and "everyone else" - surely even you can follow that logic - please consider yourself shown. Or, to demonstrate that I am a reasonable man, explain to me, and other members of this board why we, or even most of us - aren't included in those two groupings.

I re read all of the posts on this thread that I made, and cannot see where I've stated that "everyone on army.ca supports legalization of marijuana". I see where I wrote "I know very much that the loudest people on this forum are the polar opposite of me when it comes to some things" and "I believe that I read a survey once that said something along the lines of most Canadians had used marijuana at one or more times in their life" but I do not see where I stated that I represent the general consensus of the views of the people on army.ca.

muskrat89 said:
I am also interested in knowing, since you brought it up - how many people you have actually known, know, or have met - in the Canadian Military. Use as many years as you like. Then we can determine which of us has had a more representative sampling...when it comes to "anti-drug", as opposed to "open and tolerant".

Well I personally know about 2 dozen people in the navy and army, reserves and regular force. However it is worth noting that that part was said more to mock what you said about my intrest in the military, then try to justify your belief that I think people on army.ca (or the military in general) support legalization of marijuana (which I have stated several times is a false belief, stemming from twisting my words around, and trying to read something else into what I wrote).

muskrat89 said:
I am not attacking your viewpoint - I simply stated that you were making assertions like "everyone else" and "most people" - when I did not believe that to be accurate. In fact - re-read your own post, where you quoted me - I said "your opposing views are fine".

As stated several times now, when I said "like everyone else" I was referring to all of the people that I know personally in this country, see in public, on school campuses, in the media, etc, etc. Not knowing or having spoken to anyone who opposes legalization of marijuana, it would not be fitting for me to say anything less than "everyone else" when I am speaking about what, from my own experiences, seems to be the general consensus among Canadians. Perhaps you should not read too literally into my words. I obviously do not know every person in this country, so do you really think that when I say "everyone else" I believe am actually speaking for absolutely every other human being? When I say "everyone else" I am speaking about everyone else that I know about.

But again, why is this a discussion about semantics when I have made a post with many points about an issue that you obviously disagree with. Please read my second long post in this thread, and tell me how my argument is flawed, and we can discuss that instead of these other trivial things.
 
My apologies - taking words literally is a flaw of mine.

So - if I said "NBK, you should support George Bush, just like everyone else" that would OK, because it would be inferred, somehow that what I really meant was just like "most of the people I know". Gotcha

We do agree on one thing - this is exasperating!

You go ahead and keep typing - it just reinforces my point.


 
A TEN HUP!

I was a mar eng tech 312  and got kicked out in 77 for smoking some hash I bought in Albourg Denmark.

This year I am coordinating three marijuana festivals and they are in Toronto Hamilton and Niagara Falls.

The Date is Aug 21 for all three and the event is called CANABIAN DAY FEDTIVAL.

To get info on these three events please visit http://www.canabianday.ca

Or buzz@canabianday.ca

Oh and by the way, I still smoke and am still healthy.

Dismiss!
 
Whatever, dopey.   Glad you and your illegal drugs got the walking papers.  Have fun at your little drug party, the Hells Angels appreciate your support....
 
[quote author=BuzzzWorthy]
I was a mar eng tech 312   and got kicked out in 77 for smoking some hash I bought in Albourg Denmark.
[/quote]

Well done Jackass

There's nothing like having the service well represented by some glassy-eyed druggie...Glad they caught you. Too bad your release wasn't by way of Club Ed. It might have smartened you up!
 
Back
Top