XPost: talk.politics.guns
From: bliss@sfo.com
On 09/09/2010 10:13 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
> B Sellers wrote in news:i6939n$squ$1@news.eternal-
> september.org:
>
>> On 09/08/2010 02:23 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> "SaPeIsMa" wrote in
>>> news:3I-dnZFMcNqSeBrRnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@bright.net:
>>>
>>>> "RD Sandman" wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9DEC80ABF1E54hopewell@216.196.97.131...
>>>>> Peter Franks wrote in
>>>>> news:i63tp3$7dr$1@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have no problem decriminalizing drugs, however a couple of things
>>>>>> need to be addressed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) How do you protect the children from exposure to drugs (or any
>>>>>> controlled substance for that matter)? My suggestion is to
> increase
>>>>>> the penalties for supplying controlled substances to minors,
>>>>>> including alcohol.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You protect them the same way you do for other dangerous things
>>>> EDUCATION.
>>>
>>> I agree, but my response above was directed at increasing penalties
> for
>>> supplying controlled substances to minors.
>>>
>>>>>> 2) If someone choose to voluntarily take an intoxicating drug, then
>>>>>> they are immediately and effectively responsible for all of their
>>>>>> actions, no matter how impaired. Any negative impact to others
>>>>>> (read: accident) shall be treated as (attempted) first-degree
> murder
>>>>>> and dealt with appropriately, including the death penalty.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't go that far, but I would make them responsible in every
>>>>> way I could for whatever injuries resulted from that drug use.
>>
>> Include alcohol?
>
> It is a drug.
>
>>>> Including their long-term health issues.
>>>
>>> Yep.
>>>
>>>> For example if you smoke, all smoking related ilnesses are NOT
> covered
>>>> by your Medicare/Medicaid/Obamacare.
>>>
>>> Bingo! Exception for smoking (drug) cessation activities.
>>>
>>
>> I am not in favor of the use of tobacco but I think we
>> have enough people already dying slowly in the streets and on
>> the sidewalks so I don't think any illness should be excluded
>> just because some fool brought it on themselves.
>
> I said that if you are attempting to quit, you should get help. If you
> are not, why waste the money?
People with bad habits get illness un-related to those
bad habits.
If they go untreated perhaps because they fear the
hassle they will be given about their bad habit by physicians
the may spread those illnesses unrelated to their bad habits
among the general population inadvertently. People can have
bad habits and still are a part of the Public so Public
Health needs to take account of this population.
And how can you tell a tobacco smoking related illness
from a non-tobacco related illness with similar symptoms such
as influenza or pneumonia. There are plenty of sick people with
illnesses that may be hereditary who have symptoms that look
like they might be tobacco related in a clinic but which
can be alleviated with treatment.
I can readily see with your scheme great problems
arising. For example did you know that junkies had HIV-AIDs
long before it showed up in the gay population. Because they
were junkies no one bothered to investigate their symptoms
because junkies were assumed to be unhealthy. Maybe they
even spread HIV to careless autopsy technicians and
pathologists.
Don't make the same mistake because you are annoyed
with smokers.
later
bliss
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
