Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The drug addicts create the demand for drugs, and no matter how many drug dealers you'll waste, new ones will come if they can profit. The root of the problem are drug addicts. Right now in the Philippines, drug dealers along with drug users face zero-tolerance shoot-to-kill punishment, and it's an amazing success with thousands of arrests and/or executions since it's start 6 months ago, and drug cartels are cracking, to the extent that very rich and powerful mayors and politicians who have links to them have surrendered to the police.

    From a moral perspective, the drug addicts committed the sin of indulgance, the drug dealers of violence and greed. In democracy, indulgance is not considered bad, so according to our society, you can only blame the drug dealer, and that should be our policy if we want it to be consistent with our other laws. Whether you think indulgance should be punished or not is what separates ideologies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    it's an amazing success with thousands of arrests and/or executions since it's start 6 months ago
    Rocketing murder rate = success?

    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    From a moral perspective, the drug addicts committed the sin of indulgance, the drug dealers of violence and greed. In democracy, indulgance is not considered bad, so according to our society, you can only blame the drug dealer, and that should be our policy if we want it to be consistent with our other laws. Whether you think indulgance should be punished or not is what separates ideologies.
    "the sin of indulgance" :rofl:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dingleberry jam)
    Rocketing murder rate = success?
    Execution, not murder, of criminals, who resisted peaceful arrest. In a year they will all die out or leave the country.


    "the sin of indulgance" :rofl:
    What? I said that as a Westerner you wouldn't consider this to be a big deal. What are you trying to prove and/or argue?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    Execution, not murder, of criminals, who resisted peaceful arrest. In a year they will all die out or leave the country.
    Hasn't the murder rate gone up without adding in the extra judicial killing figures?

    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    What? I said that as a Westerner you wouldn't consider this to be a big deal. What are you trying to prove and/or argue?
    Nothing, always makes me chuckle when i see it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dingleberry jam)
    Hasn't the murder rate gone up without adding in the extra judicial killing figures?
    That's because of drug dealers killing buyers they are afraid are undercover cops, and drug cartels panicking and having insider fighting. So what? It's an expected consequence that shows how dangerous the drug black market is. Soon enough it will disappear. Zero tolerance works. It worked in New York, and it will work here as well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    That's because of drug dealers killing buyers they are afraid are undercover cops, and drug cartels panicking and having insider fighting.
    You mean the increased danger has made the trade all the more lucrative and is pushing cartels to greater extremes to hold on to it?

    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    So what?
    Oh i dunno, murder just seems a little worse than the 'sin of indulgence'.

    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    It's an expected consequence that shows how dangerous the drug black market is. Soon enough it will disappear.
    Never gonna happen, we can never eradicate drugs, they'll always be plenty of people that desire a high and always plenty waiting to fill the demand.


    (Original post by LibertyMan)
    It worked in New York,
    Did it? Wasn't crime down nationwide?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'd say both drug dealers and addicts are at fault, but drug dealers are probably more at fault.

    The reason for that is because an addict is an addict. He made the error of taking drugs the first couple of times, but once he's addicted there isn't really a lot he can do about it. He has developed a dependence on the drugs, and coming off them is likely to be extremely difficult without serious help.

    Drug dealers on the other hand, can stop what they're doing at any time. But they don't, they instead prey on the addicts' initial errors and subsequent weakness, and continue to seek new customers and create even more addicts.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    it's got everything to do with the individual and their choices
    nobody gets addicted from one taste of something - it's always about containing the habit
    I will stand here and claim happily that most people who've tried hardcore drugs (heroin, meth, etc) aren't addicts of those things
    in fact, a study I was reading about a month ago now actually confirmed that
    drug dealers exist because there's a market of consumers for illegal drugs, and without that market, they wouldn't exist - they just want the money. they're never going to be able to make people be irresponsible. and if they have a hand in it, it's something that the individual consumer should be responsible for, seeing as it's *their* life.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Both are a scourge on society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Drug addicts should be treated with compassion and empathy. Some of you completely fail to acknowledge that there are all sorts of various conditions as to why somebody becomes addicted to drugs and ends up messing up their life. There's a cause and effect to everything. Look at how things work in Portugal for instance, i'm pretty sure they are decriminalised there and are treated with empathy. Some of you here have attitudes that won't solve anything, your views will only allow the vicious circle to continue.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheIr0nDuke)
    I'm a fascist for wanting people to not be criminals, not to ruin their mental health or have to deal with the kinds of people that sell such filth? Sure lmao

    There has never been a 'war' on drugs. Police should jail those who choose to buy illegal substances to put people off buying. If wanting to uphold the law makes me a 'petty, moralising, groupthought mutha****' (so eloquently put, by the way), then so be it.

    Have fun being a drug taking degenerate.
    I'm pretty sure they do? except for weed, ( apparently you have three chances then you go to court, swear people caught with drugs get caught anyway )..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elmosandy)
    I'm pretty sure they do? except for weed, ( apparently you have three chances then you go to court, swear people caught with drugs get caught anyway )..
    The problem I have with weed is that police officers issue a 'cannabis warning' that was never passed through Parliament. It is a totally unofficial, unlawful warning that doesn't go on a criminal record.

    Police don't go searching for those in possession, only those who are selling. Much more worth their time with the budget cuts etc.
    Offline

    13
    expecting any subtle, meaningful discussion on facebook was your first mistake.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheIr0nDuke)
    The problem I have with weed is that police officers issue a 'cannabis warning' that was never passed through Parliament. It is a totally unofficial, unlawful warning that doesn't go on a criminal record.

    Police don't go searching for those in possession, only those who are selling. Much more worth their time with the budget cuts etc.
    ^ yeah that's what I mean, drug like cannabis get a official warning, not a charge, or anything like that, three chances only, I think after that a guy who told me on the street that after three chances you get taken to court. I think anything else, it's seen as an offence.

    Yeah cannabis is seen as not a drug or dangerous, that's why it's gone through an ' official warning' instead of a straight arrest.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tabstercat)
    expecting any subtle, meaningful discussion on facebook was your first mistake.
    She put a picture of her daughters ashes saying ' to all drug dealers this is my daughter now, how do you live with yourselves? People share this to raise awarness etc... ' and then everyone attacked her for saying it's the drug dealers fault. It sparked an interest in me, is it the drug dealers fault or the addicts? What do you think? I think drug dealers are quite responsible, they should just let her grieve though. It wasn't even a lets look at the comments first to see what they're saying '
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by elmosandy)
    She put a picture of her daughters ashes saying ' to all drug dealers this is my daughter now, how do you live with yourselves? People share this to raise awarness etc... ' and then everyone attacked her for saying it's the drug dealers fault. It sparked an interest in me, is it the drug dealers fault or the addicts? What do you think? I think drug dealers are quite responsible, they should just let her grieve though. It wasn't even a lets look at the comments first to see what they're saying '
    the question starts from a false premise...I don't believe it's any one person's fault for drug addiction. The answer is obviously far more nuanced than that. Though the woman's original post does sound stupid, as if she is ignoring her daughter's responsibility entirely.

    Telling drug dealers to stop selling won't change a thing, we need total drug decriminalisation as soon as possible. We need addiction to be treated as a medical issue rather than a criminal issue. We need harm reduction campaigns from the government rather than anti-drug propaganda.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tabstercat)
    the question starts from a false premise...I don't believe it's any one person's fault for drug addiction. The answer is obviously far more nuanced than that. Though the woman's original post does sound stupid, as if she is ignoring her daughter's responsibility entirely.

    Telling drug dealers to stop selling won't change a thing, we need total drug decriminalisation as soon as possible. We need addiction to be treated as a medical issue rather than a criminal issue. We need harm reduction campaigns from the government rather than anti-drug propaganda.
    That's actually a true statement. I think that's actually a really good decision on this situation! Anyways I just thought if we had to choose a side to blame ultimatly who would it be ? Drug Dealers or Drug Addicts?? Which one? Although I am still in two sides of this. I agree the answer is far more nuanced ( i don't know why we have to use big ass words though ) than that. It really does depend on the situation.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater the facebook post
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Personinsertname)
    It's never one thing.
    Everything in this world/ universe is intrinsic. No matter how small every action is connected. Butterfly effect when used in regard to time travel.
    You could blame the government for not legalizing the drug or creating safe alternatives... Drug dealers need money.
    Drug takers need entertainment or some escapism from the stress.

    Im probably a drug taker myself i take "joy" everyday. - Check Lisa: The painful
    I'm probably blaming the government a bit too much here but my point is that everyone is at fault.
    You want such laws therefore you should enforce and expect such?
    What about differing opinions, people , experiences.

    Though i do think of the drug dealer as the main problem.... Drug takers without no supply can't do ****. They just start gasping and getting withdrawal symptoms. Im might be simplifying and being a bit rude but i just have one point, not hate on any person.
    Hmmm that's true there are different experiences and and situations and people and drugs invovled. That's true, you need to look at the situation.

    However in my caption, it was more diccussion. The woman was greving over her daughter dying from drug abuse. Anyways, the comments, were full of, i'm sorry but its your daughter who took the drugs, the dealer didnt force her, it's her fault, while I think they could have just let the woman gieve but the point I was making, do they have a point? Is it the daughters? I undersatand that you feel there should be no-one at fault as it just a terrible situation but it was more for diccussion, if you were to say was the drug accidt not to blame ? or did they make themselves be put in that position ? No judgment more a diccussion on what you think about the comments on the post.


    https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho....php?t=2771724 this is more what I was trying to say... are drug addicts victims or not? Do you think drug addicts are passivly destroying their own lives or not? Do you agree with the comments? It wasn't really a judgment
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kittyk16)
    I'd say the addict Is to blame because like the McDonald's reference and obesity, lots of people go to McDonald's sometimes and their fine but if someone chooses to go their everyday then they get fat, it's up to them how often they go. This is the same with drugs, lots of people try drugs, but if you choose to buy them often then you become addicted. The dealers just giving you that choose
    Isn't it different, mcdonalds is mcdonalds, drugs are addictive chemicas that can ruin peoples lives way more than obesity.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elmosandy)
    Isn't it different, mcdonalds is mcdonalds, drugs are addictive chemicas that can ruin peoples lives way more than obesity.
    Hmm, not all drugs are addictive, McDonalds can ruin peoples lives beyond obesity and obesity is a lot more harmful than a lot of drug addictions. Heroin for instance is particularly non-toxic and an addict with a clean supply could use regularly with very little impact on their health.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.