Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: tom joad on March 12, 2006, 05:18:22 PM

Title: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: tom joad on March 12, 2006, 05:18:22 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060310/hl_nm/steroid_rage_dc
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Dnizneer on March 12, 2006, 10:04:12 PM
My Hemorrhoids rage.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: tom joad on March 13, 2006, 07:23:29 AM
Taco Bell may make you shit blood for 3 weeks, but it may be reversible.

Good point.  But can Taco Bell permanently damage the brain?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Dan-O on March 13, 2006, 08:09:00 AM
Good point.  But can Taco Bell permanently damage the brain?

I don't know, but I went into a rage when they stopped selling Mucho Grande Nachos and may have suffered a stroke.

>:(
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 13, 2006, 04:46:25 PM
This study was done on Hampsters. All it proves is AAS causes Hampsters using to chase other hampsters tails around more often than hampsters not using AAS. ::)

The fact is...When you get higher up on the Evolutionary ladder as far as brain power and intelligence goes..The agressive effects of testosterone weaken to almost nothing.

Here is a study done ON REAL HUMANS determining there was no physiological effect noticed from the steroid (ABUSE).

Quote
The study was conducted at the University of Pennsylvania Treatment Research Center; 10 subjects were enrolled and 7 completed the protocol. AASs and other drugs were obtained and self-administered by subjects through their usual mechanisms. On-study evaluations included medical, behavioral, and drug-use assessments. While a high incidence of mood disorders and substance abuse was found, few clinically relevant changes in physiological parameters or laboratory measures were noted throughout the study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12938869&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_DocSum

Here is another Study discussing how "Roid rage" is a myth....

Quote
Endogenous testosterone levels have been linked to aggressive behaviour in both animals and humans. Studies administering moderate doses of exogenous testosterone for contraceptive and clinical purposes reveal essentially no adverse effects on male sexual and aggressive behaviour. However, investigations and case reports of athletes, usually involving higher doses, demonstrate an association between anabolic-androgenic steroid use and affective and psychotic syndromes and psychological dependence. Efforts to study the psychological and behavioural effects of anabolic-androgenic steroids are complicated by a variety of methodological limitations. Only 3 prospective, blinded studies demonstrating aggression or adverse overt behaviour resulting from anabolic-androgenic steroid use have been reported. With estimates of over 1 million past or current users in the US, an extremely small percentage of individuals using anabolic-androgenic steroids appear to experience mental disturbances severe enough to result in clinical treatment and medical case reports. Even among those so affected, the roles of previous psychiatric history, genetic susceptibility to addictions or mental disorders, environmental and peer influences, and individual expectations remain unclear.


This site (Norse site but english comments and reviews) has dozens of studies showing there aren't even any real irreversable side effects from Steroid use in normal healthy men.

Quote
The relative lack of significant effects of testosterone on angry behaviors indicate that there is not a simply, direct causal relationship between steroid use and aggressive behavior in normal men.

http://odin.dep.no/jd/norsk/dok/andre_dok/rapporter/012041-220005/hov008-bn.html
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: BroadStreetBruiser on March 13, 2006, 04:47:25 PM
johnny apollo, go to bed you type to fucking much
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 13, 2006, 04:58:14 PM
johnny apollo, go to bed you type to fucking much


If you don't want to learn then don't read what I type. Remain ignorant.


But for those of you who want to learn,I have alot of educational things to say. I also provide credible sources for everything I say unlike most people.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 13, 2006, 05:03:00 PM
I don't think roid rage is a myth.

I don't think its a huge concept though, its no more prevalent than alcohol induced aggressive tendencies and both these effects seem to be isolated to idiots who can barely control their emotions as it is.  Its no suprise that given increased testosterone that you'll find psychological effects (or decreased mental capacity to regulate emotions from alcohol)

Being an intelligent human being would diminish these effects because by virtue of intelligence you generally are in a lot more control with your actions.  Intelligent people are more logical and emotions are anything but logic at the best of times.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 13, 2006, 05:07:07 PM
I don't think roid rage is a myth.

I don't think its a huge concept though, its no more prevalent than alcohol induced aggressive tendencies and both these effects seem to be isolated to idiots who can barely control their emotions as it is.  Its no suprise that given increased testosterone that you'll find psychological effects (or decreased mental capacity to regulate emotions from alcohol)

Being an intelligent human being would diminish these effects because by virtue of intelligence you generally are in a lot more control with your actions.  Intelligent people are more logical and emotions are anything but logic at the best of times.


There isn't any credible scientific evidence that shows a link between Testosterone and Agression in adult healthy male humans.

The only thing you've got are anecdotal accounts which are about as reliable as bigfoot sightings or UFO sightings...Or even better as far as drugs go..."Marijuana madness". ::)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Matt on March 13, 2006, 05:17:22 PM

There isn't any credible scientific evidence that shows a link between Testosterone and Agression in adult healthy male humans.

The only thing you've got are anecdotal accounts which are about as reliable as bigfoot sightings or UFO sightings...Or even better as far as drugs go..."Marijuana madness". ::)

lol!

The American government is so moronic when it comes to weed.  Some people SMOKING A JOINT would get five years in jail.

In Canada, grow-ops in my city have been busted and all they get is house arrest lol.  Canada used to be bad but at least now they have common sense.  They need to punish distributors somehow because there is still social stigma surrounding weed.  But knowing there is no true "crime" when it comes to buying/selling drugs (ESPECIALLY weed), they don't give much punishment.

Hey DEA: newsflash - all your efforts don't even put a dent in drug use.  Stop trying, get your heads our of your damn asses, and find a system that WORKS if you want to curb drug use.  Ruining lives of users and dealers doesn't do that.  Get a damn clue.

Maybe spend taxpayer dollars chasing actual criminals.  Just a thought.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 13, 2006, 05:22:50 PM

There isn't any credible scientific evidence that shows a link between Testosterone and Agression in adult healthy male humans.

The only thing you've got are anecdotal accounts which are about as reliable as bigfoot sightings or UFO sightings...Or even better as far as drugs go..."Marijuana madness". ::)

You could well be right, 

What I'm wondering is have there been studies taken to see effects of increases on people who are known to have significant problems regulating emotion/displaying aggresive tendencies as it is?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: 240 is Back on March 13, 2006, 05:35:58 PM
Taco Bell may make you shit blood for 3 weeks, but it may be reversible.

It's also worth every drop of mixed liquid.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 13, 2006, 06:29:30 PM
lol!

The American government is so moronic when it comes to weed.  Some people SMOKING A JOINT would get five years in jail.

In Canada, grow-ops in my city have been busted and all they get is house arrest lol.  Canada used to be bad but at least now they have common sense.  They need to punish distributors somehow because there is still social stigma surrounding weed.  But knowing there is no true "crime" when it comes to buying/selling drugs (ESPECIALLY weed), they don't give much punishment.

Hey DEA: newsflash - all your efforts don't even put a dent in drug use.  Stop trying, get your heads our of your damn asses, and find a system that WORKS if you want to curb drug use.  Ruining lives of users and dealers doesn't do that.  Get a damn clue.

Maybe spend taxpayer dollars chasing actual criminals.  Just a thought.


Right considering Marijuana hasn't killed a single person in recorded medical History..Our Govt(U.S. govt) finds the need to Throw marijuana growers or Users into Prison for years.

Throwing someone into prison for smoking a plant to make themselves feel better...Real Logical! ::)

Throwing someone into Prison for taking a substance in their own homes to increase muscle growth...That's real logical!

Spending over 50 billion a year on the "war on drugs" when drug use is increasing in most areas.

Outlawing substances thus creating a "black market" around them where violent crimes thrive and the substance theirselves are less pure and more deadly than if produced by clean labs.

 ::) ::)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 13, 2006, 07:36:33 PM

Right considering Marijuana hasn't killed a single person in recorded medical History..Our Govt(U.S. govt) finds the need to Throw marijuana growers or Users into Prison for years.

Throwing someone into prison for smoking a plant to make themselves feel better...Real Logical! ::)

Throwing someone into Prison for taking a substance in their own homes to increase muscle growth...That's real logical!

Spending over 50 billion a year on the "war on drugs" when drug use is increasing in most areas.

Outlawing substances thus creating a "black market" around them where violent crimes thrive and the substance theirselves are less pure and more deadly than if produced by clean labs.

 ::) ::)

Whilst I personally favour and understand your point, if you don't see the other side of the argument then you're just as ignorant as those who adopt these laws blindly.  I'm not talking about steroids by the way as they have limited (if any) effect psychologically on the mainstream.

Given that the general population are somewhat "lacking in control" illegality surely provides a (crude) way of regulating drug use especially in public where such use may be damaging on other people's lives. 

I'm not saying that it would be worse without such government control or that there are not better options, just that its something to ponder - having known quite a few people who have been seriously addicted to marijuana.  And yes, whilst they have not died they have surely become underachieving deadshits (and in two cases there has been serious mental degradation).

I say this because I perceive that alcohol is the most damaging substance being abused and it causes a huge amount of trouble because of the fact that its socially acceptable, freely available, unregulated and legal to consume.

At the end of the day there is no right or wrong answer to this question.  People will die, have their lives ruined either way.  It seems unclear to me which side of the argument would produce the lesser injustices though  :-\
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: body88 on March 13, 2006, 07:44:24 PM

There isn't any credible scientific evidence that shows a link between Testosterone and Agression in adult healthy male humans.

The only thing you've got are anecdotal accounts which are about as reliable as bigfoot sightings or UFO sightings...Or even better as far as drugs go..."Marijuana madness". ::)


Saying Testosterone doesent cause aggression is complete shit. Study or not we all know that is shit.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 13, 2006, 08:06:13 PM
Whilst I personally favour and understand your point, if you don't see the other side of the argument then you're just as ignorant as those who adopt these laws blindly.  I'm not talking about steroids by the way as they have limited (if any) effect psychologically on the mainstream.

You're assuming I don't know the couterarguments. I've heard ALL of the counter arguments to legalization of illegal drugs and I can refute them all.


Given that the general population are somewhat "lacking in control" illegality surely provides a (crude) way of regulating drug use especially in public where such use may be damaging on other people's lives. 

You're making the false assumption these drugs would damage people's lives.

You're also assuming that making the drugs legal would increase the rate of use while the evidence shows contrary.

When Marijuana use was decriminalized in the Netherlands the rate of use didn't increase that much. As a matter of a fact the rate of use among teenagers in the Netherlands is BELOW that of teenagers in the united states.

You're also assuming that the "war on drugs" itself doesn't ruin people's lives or create even more crime when this is also false.


I'm not saying that it would be worse without such government control or that there are not better options, just that its something to ponder - having known quite a few people who have been seriously addicted to marijuana.  And yes, whilst they have not died they have surely become underachieving deadshits (and in two cases there has been serious mental degradation).

You've known no one who has ever been "Addicted" to marijuana in the medical sense. Marijuana isn't phsiologically addictive. In medicine "Addictive" is defined as there being a physical withdrawl from the drug you are addicted to. This isn't the case with marijuana.
People may like to smoke marijuana and then do it often,But this isn't addiction. They could stop anytime they wanted without any withdrawls.

Most studies showing marijuana has withdrawl symptoms are "junk science" by universities funded by the govt to come to a particular conclusion no matter what. This isn't real science.


Not that it even matters if Marijuana is addictive or not. Alcohol is also addictive and that's a proven fact. Yet Alcohol is Legal. Marijuana doesn't kill,Never has,Never can. Alcohol kills thousands of people a year in the U.S. alone..Yet it's legal.


quote author=rocket link=topic=59542.msg902589#msg902589 date=1142307393]I say this because I perceive that alcohol is the most damaging substance being abused and it causes a huge amount of trouble because of the fact that its socially acceptable, freely available, unregulated and legal to consume.

At the end of the day there is no right or wrong answer to this question.  People will die, have their lives ruined either way.  It seems unclear to me which side of the argument would produce the lesser injustices though  :-\
[/quote]

Marijuana itself has never killed a single person in recorded medical History. It just isn't toxic enough to cause an overdose or a death. Yet Alcohol killed over 85,000 in 2000 alone.
Compairing Marijuana to Alcohol is just stupid.

The fact of the matter is simple...Decriminalizing Marijuana might cause a slight increase in the number of vehicle wrecks a year..WoW! Keeping it illegal means we're spending BILLIONS upon BILLIONS a year fighting growers and users and even more Billions locking them up in Prisons and keeping them there. 1 single individual costs the Tax payers thousands of dollars a year to imprison. We Imprison THOUSANDS of marijuana growers,dealers and users a year.


Not even mentioning the entire Civil Liberties argument that everyone individual has the right to put whatever substance he wants into his own Body...The Govt has no right to say what you can or can't put into your own body.

It's funny that conservatives argue for "Small government" and "More civil liberties" yet they are always the one's who push the "anti-drug" bills into law and shout "Marijuana is deadly,Think of the children! More govt control!" when it comes down to it.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Hendrix on March 13, 2006, 10:08:59 PM
Steroid Rage exists as i have flown of the handle a couple of times
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 13, 2006, 10:22:48 PM
You're assuming I don't know the couterarguments. I've heard ALL of the counter arguments to legalization of illegal drugs and I can refute them all.

So tiring to have to listen to this self righteous nonsense.  You cannot refute all of the counter arguments. 

Quote
You're making the false assumption these drugs would damage people's lives.

You obviously don't know a lot of imbeciles.  Making drugs legal is as good a thing as going on TV and telling the world that drugs are safe.  People really are that stupid.

Quote
When Marijuana use was decriminalized in the Netherlands the rate of use didn't increase that much. As a matter of a fact the rate of use among teenagers in the Netherlands is BELOW that of teenagers in the united states.

Different culture, I personally wouldn't endorse marijuana in the US or australia (where I am).  That is, if I were attempting to curb use.

Quote
You're also assuming that the "war on drugs" itself doesn't ruin people's lives or create even more crime when this is also false.

Incorrect.  I said there were victims on both sides.  Remember, I am not debating any side, just pointing out that I recognise why there is a hesitancy to change things from how they are.  That has nothing to do with "the war on drugs" - a subject I know little about except to say that it seems to be a somewhat losing battle.

Quote
You've known no one who has ever been "Addicted" to marijuana in the medical sense. Marijuana isn't phsiologically addictive. In medicine "Addictive" is defined as there being a physical withdrawl from the drug you are addicted to. This isn't the case with marijuana.

I don't know, is not being able to sleep a physical withdrawal.  Ever seen a man pace in a room backwards and forwards for hours because he doesn't have any weed?  Every stood infront of someone who is babbling incoherent nonsense because he smoked weed an hour ago - so much so that he cannot respond to direct questions.. just keeps asking you whether "you want to die for this"?  Who really cares about defining addiction.  Suffice to say some people perceive they need to smoke weed continuously.  End of discussion.  Proving addiction means nothing.   

Quote
Not that it even matters if Marijuana is addictive or not. Alcohol is also addictive and that's a proven fact. Yet Alcohol is Legal. Marijuana doesn't kill,Never has,Never can. Alcohol kills thousands of people a year in the U.S. alone..Yet it's legal.

That is purposely naive, if anything in alcohols case it should be illegal rather than a catalyst for legalisation of other substances (via the faulty logic that if it is legal other drugs should be).  I'm sure you know that just as well as I do.  Somehow I think it shits on your case though doesn't it ::)

Quote
Marijuana itself has never killed a single person in recorded medical History. It just isn't toxic enough to cause an overdose or a death. Yet Alcohol killed over 85,000 in 2000 alone.
Compairing Marijuana to Alcohol is just stupid.

Actually I wasn't, I was pointing out that when a drug is considered safe by virtue of legality society (or more to the point, the imbeciles) abuse this and thus we have a problem.

Quote
The fact of the matter is simple...Decriminalizing Marijuana might cause a slight increase in the number of vehicle wrecks a year..WoW! Keeping it illegal means we're spending BILLIONS upon BILLIONS a year fighting growers and users and even more Billions locking them up in Prisons and keeping them there. 1 single individual costs the Tax payers thousands of dollars a year to imprison. We Imprison THOUSANDS of marijuana growers,dealers and users a year.

I'm not really arguing the case for marijuana, you were talking more broadly during your post (though I am aware you have referenced marijuana).

Quote
Not even mentioning the entire Civil Liberties argument that everyone individual has the right to put whatever substance he wants into his own Body...The Govt has no right to say what you can or can't put into your own body.

You say you can refute every side of the argument but you appear incredibly narrow minded.  You only really care about your civil liberties and your right to consume.  I'm not saying that either side has a irrefutable case.  What I was saying is that there are clear examples on both sides of where injustices will occur(ie, the fact that your actions are restricted to protect perhaps less responsible people).

You seem to lack the experience of ever knowing just how weak people really are and you've failed to convince me that legalising drugs is irrefutably necessary.  If anything my main concern, the example of alcohol and its misuse in society you absolutely fail to explain, rather attempting like oh so many of the self serving drug law reformists to use its failures to indicate validity based upon the fact that it is a menace yet still legal.

What a load of tripe. 

Why not be a progressive individual and admit that on both sides there are significant issues.   

Why be a hypocrite and claim you know everything? 
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Matt on March 13, 2006, 10:37:39 PM
I haven't read all the debate so far but the US war on drugs quite clearly and obviously causes far more harm than good.

Picture a system whereby all drugs are legalized and quality controlled by the government.  A system where BILLIONS in tax dollars are created every year and BILLIONS are saved by not fighting drugs (a fight the US government will never win, sorry to break it to the narcs reading this) - this money can be put towards educational programs to prevent drug use as well as rehabilitation programs.

Legalizing all drugs does not mean the floodgates will be open and everyone will do drugs.  If heroin was legal would you do it?  I wouldn't.  In fact, those who want to do drugs will do them regardless of the law.  The difference being that if they are illegal the quality is always in question and there is an underground economy being supported.

Hey guess what?  If I wanted to do a gram of blow tomorrow night, I WOULD DO A GRAM OF BLOW TOMORROW NIGHT.  If I wanted to do a gram of test each week for three months, I WOULD DO A GRAM OF TEST EACH WEEK FOR THREE MONTHS.  Myself and countless others have 0 regard to the law when it comes to drugs and OUR OWN bodies (not DEA property I should add).  Drugs being illegal just makes me concerned about the quality.  Drugs being illegal just wastes police manpower and ruins lives (of dealers and users).

And why is it that I am allowed to kill myself with fast food but not with drugs?  Who is the government to decide in what manner I can abuse MY body (again, not property of the conservative government).

Drugs have a stigma to them.  There are so many ignorant people out there when it comes to the safety of drugs.  My mother thinks that drugs are the worst things ever - and if all the bullshit she thinks about drugs WAS true (which it is not), I would think drugs are the worst thing ever too!

Native indian tribes have been using some psychedelic drugs (like shrooms) for centuries.  Almost any drug can be enjoyed if they are respected.

I was THRILLED to see a poster at my university which said "If you're going to do drugs, use a clean needle".  FINALLY somebody got the point - people WILL do drugs anyway.  It is useless to make a poster which says "Don't use drugs (heroin)" because people WILL do it no matter what.  So we should at least encourage safe and responsible use.  People would stop doing drugs as much if there wasn't this stigma.  We need to explain to people that drugs are a personal choice, but sometimes not the best choice - but ultimately their own choice and nobody else's.  People would not feel as rebellious if we explained this.

Check out this animated gif at the top of steroidabuse.gov:

http://steroidabuse.gov/images/125x125-steroids.gif

Drugs are not the enemy!  Ignorance is.

FACT: the current system and war on drugs is NOT working.  Who knows what system would work best, but the current one does not.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 13, 2006, 11:44:34 PM
You're right, ignorance is the enemy and the people who are irresponsible with alcohol and other drugs are very much the crux of why legalisation may create a big problem.  Ignorant people ruin it for all and sundry.  They cause the trouble and they vote in mass for the politicians who kneejerk upon drug related deaths, in turn forcing the passing of blanket laws unfair on the responsible.

Drug legalisation *might* work but to claim that you know it all and whats going to happen is hilarious! 

It is really not the short term that is the problem, its the long term effects of certain drugs becoming socially acceptable - and to the ignorant the law presents what is "acceptable".  Hence the reason alcohol is the most menacing substance on earth.   

If you don't believe me, talk to these numbskulls and watch them get conflicted when you say alcohol is a drug.

Addiction is only a question when people talk about substances suckering in the ill informed.  Well who gives a shit because people still start smoking every day.  It might have been an excuse when the public was unaware of the fact nicotine is both addictive and damaging to your health but nobody could use the excuse that when they started they did not know cigarettes were extremely unhealthy now.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 05:03:04 AM
Here's the low down on roid rage:

If you are an asshole before you start using, you will definetly be a bigger asshole when you are on.
If you are level-headed before you start using, nothing adverse will happen.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Sexual Mustard on March 14, 2006, 05:21:22 AM
Here's the low down on roid rage:

If you are an asshole before you start using, you will definetly be a bigger asshole when you are on.
If you are level-headed before you start using, nothing adverse will happen.

I tend to agree.... I believe any aggression while on the juice is purely psychological in that it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.  It will give assholes an "excuse" to be one.

SM
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 14, 2006, 05:32:29 AM
Here's the low down on roid rage:

If you are an asshole before you start using, you will definetly be a bigger asshole when you are on.
If you are level-headed before you start using, nothing adverse will happen.

Yeh, like I said, have there been studies done on subjects who are prone to emotional outburts/lack of control with respect to increasing testosterone.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: pumpster on March 14, 2006, 07:59:38 AM
Of course testosterone increases aggressivity, and of course a reduction in it will reduce aggressivity. Duh!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Dark_Matter on March 14, 2006, 08:22:58 AM
Roid rage is bullshit. It's an excuse for assholes to act like even BIGGER ASSHOLES!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 08:57:22 AM
Roid rage is bullshit. It's an excuse for assholes to act like even BIGGER ASSHOLES!

Right on the spot.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: pumpster on March 14, 2006, 09:05:50 AM
Roid rage effects may *not* be reversible in the case of Monster Triceps, I stand corrected. ::)
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=59266.0
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: tom joad on March 14, 2006, 09:07:40 AM
Roid rage is bullshit. It's an excuse for assholes to act like even BIGGER ASSHOLES!

yeah!  it gave those asshole hamsters an excuse to chase and bite their brethren for days!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 09:08:42 AM
Pumpster got really mad at me once I called him out on copying someones article & exposing him as a 17-year old punk, hahahaha, oh boy, hahahaha.
Monster idiocy.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: pumpster on March 14, 2006, 09:10:13 AM
Has it ever occurred to you that I don't have to attribute on this board, you idiot?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 09:11:22 AM
I bet pumpster is the type of guy who sucks off the old men at the gym to get access to some "throbbing" "hot" studies, hahahahah, oh boy, hahaha what a fag.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: pumpster on March 14, 2006, 09:13:51 AM
This guy has a lot of ideas, something happen in childhood?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 09:16:51 AM
Why don't you educate us about childhood, seeing as you are going through it yourself?
Is it hard for you? Mom fuck strangers a lot?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: sarcasm on March 14, 2006, 09:18:45 AM
hahahaha, oh brother, pumpster is the type of guy who applies for a secretary job and when the "boss" asks him if he takes dictation he says, "only the big ones", hahahaha, what a penis puffer.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 14, 2006, 09:20:15 AM
Ahhahahah, oh brother, I bet pumpster's the type of dude who sucks off bums just to have memories of the "good old days" when he gets old, hahahah, what a freakshow.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 14, 2006, 04:32:53 PM
So tiring to have to listen to this self righteous nonsense.  You cannot refute all of the counter arguments. 

You obviously don't know a lot of imbeciles.  Making drugs legal is as good a thing as going on TV and telling the world that drugs are safe.  People really are that stupid.

1.I can refute ALL of the counter arguments. Yes I can.

2.Yes Drugs can ruin people's lives. The whole idea of decriminalization is "Harm reduction" the same princible behind giving condoms out for free or providing needles to drug users for free. More harm is caused by drugs being outlawed than by them being regulated and produced legally and sold.

Different culture, I personally wouldn't endorse marijuana in the US or australia (where I am).  That is, if I were attempting to curb use..

"Different culture" is itself a copout. In reality most European countries have the same "Culture" as America does given the Internet and T.V....Europeans are extremly americanized.

Secondly curbing marijuana use shouldn't even be a govt priority considering it's much less problematic than Alcohol is.

Incorrect.  I said there were victims on both sides.  Remember, I am not debating any side, just pointing out that I recognise why there is a hesitancy to change things from how they are.  That has nothing to do with "the war on drugs" - a subject I know little about except to say that it seems to be a somewhat losing battle.

Hence the princible of "Harm reduction". Anyone who knows anything about the war on Drugs knows that it doens't accomplish what it was set out to do...Prevent people from using drugs. The fact is..People WILL do drugs regardless of their legality. Making them illegal meerly creates more problems as i've mentioned before. "Harm reduction" is the princible of acceptance, That people WILL do these drugs and that trying to stop them is futile. Trying to educate them on the best choices and giving them the tools needed to safely do these things is the best approach.
Like Giving out Condoms. People claim Giving out condoms makes people want to have sex..BULLSHIT! I've never wanted sex from seeing a condom. ::)
People who want sex will have sex REGARDLESS of having a condom or not. However providing condoms for free to people will lower birth rates and lower rates of STD's.
Preaching "Don't have sex" doesn't do shit...And hundreds of studies agree with me.


I don't know, is not being able to sleep a physical withdrawal.  Ever seen a man pace in a room backwards and forwards for hours because he doesn't have any weed?  Every stood infront of someone who is babbling incoherent nonsense because he smoked weed an hour ago - so much so that he cannot respond to direct questions.. just keeps asking you whether "you want to die for this"?  Who really cares about defining addiction.  Suffice to say some people perceive they need to smoke weed continuously.  End of discussion.  Proving addiction means nothing..
   

1.Insomnia isn't a physical withdrawl symptom just a mental one.

2.No.

3.No. I know numeorus people who have smoked marijuana and are 100% coherent. The only time I see people acting incoherent is after a few drinks of alcohol.

4.If Marijuana is addictive then by the same definition so is the Internet,So are video games,So is exercise,So is eating healthy...Should we ban them all too? Let's go ahead and ban everything people enjoy because they tend to do it more often because they ENJOY doing it..That'll work! ::)


That is purposely naive, if anything in alcohols case it should be illegal rather than a catalyst for legalisation of other substances (via the faulty logic that if it is legal other drugs should be).  I'm sure you know that just as well as I do.  Somehow I think it shits on your case though doesn't it ::)
   

This goes back to civil liberties. Alcohol is legal because people have the right to put whatever substance into their bodies. Marijuana is illegal because people don't have such a right. See the hypocrisy?


Here is something pretty funny....Here are what specific substances need to be to be considered a "Schedule 1 substance"(Like Marijuana is)

Quote
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.


Oh wow...Alcohol fits ALL of those definitions now doesn't it? Marijuana doesn't fit any of them but maybe (A) and even that is a stretch.

Here is something funnier....There's another...(D)

Quote
(D) The drug is not alcohol (ethanol) due to the failure of prohibition.


http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid=01-9306-filed

 :o WoW! They make it so Alcohol can't even be scheduled due to failure of prohibition EVEN IF it fits all of those definitions needed to schedule a substance.

So this is proof it has NOTHING to do with saftey but everything to do with politics.

People have been thrown into Prison for LIFE simply for selling marijuana.


Actually I wasn't, I was pointing out that when a drug is considered safe by virtue of legality society (or more to the point, the imbeciles) abuse this and thus we have a problem.

This makes no sense to me.


You say you can refute every side of the argument but you appear incredibly narrow minded.  You only really care about your civil liberties and your right to consume.  I'm not saying that either side has a irrefutable case.  What I was saying is that there are clear examples on both sides of where injustices will occur(ie, the fact that your actions are restricted to protect perhaps less responsible people).

In American law you can't punish someone for a crime they "Might" do. That would be in violation of the constitution. Punishing someone for consuming a substance because they "Might" commit another crime by consuming it doesn't make any sense at all.

The argument that "We punish drug users because they might commit violent crimes in the future." is a dead one and inconsistent with the way our entire country works. IF you condone punishing people for using a substance that "might" cause them to "possibly" commit some type of unknown crime in the unknown future..What's stopping you from punishing children with anger issues? Throwing 8 year olds away for good because they have mental problems that can't be fixed and they "might" commit some crime in the future.

I'm far from narrow minded...I have heard all of the argument for and against drug criminilization and the fact is it makes no sense to criminalize the drugs.


You seem to lack the experience of ever knowing just how weak people really are and you've failed to convince me that legalising drugs is irrefutably necessary.  If anything my main concern, the example of alcohol and its misuse in society you absolutely fail to explain, rather attempting like oh so many of the self serving drug law reformists to use its failures to indicate validity based upon the fact that it is a menace yet still legal.

Actually many of my family members are drug addicts or have been. I have seen first hand how ineffective the current statues regarding drugs are. People are thrown into jail...Nonviolent people thrown into jail simply for possessing a substance that makes them feel better. They spend years in Prison and then come out hardened criminals from being forced to socalize with them for so long.

In effect...The current "war on drugs" Creates many more times as much crime as it gets rid of. Actually..It hardly gets rid of ANY crime ignoring the crime it creates itself by making drug use a crime. ::)

What a load of tripe. 

Why not be a progressive individual and admit that on both sides there are significant issues.   

Why be a hypocrite and claim you know everything? 

I do admit there are issues on both sides. Drugs can cause problems. I'm not debating that. However I AM debating that the current "War on drugs" is 100% ineffective and pointless. That I know absolutely and I can argue against absolutely.

I never condoned legalizing all drugs. Different drugs would be treated differently. Marijuana would be treated differently than Cocaine. Steroids differently than LSD. Ect..ect. However when it comes down to it...People SHOULD have the personal choice to take the drugs they want and not have to go through the black market to get them which only causes more problems than there was to begin with.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Hendrix on March 14, 2006, 06:19:54 PM
I am a level headed guy but on the roids i have remarkedly higher aggression great for workouts not so good for social occassions, as a bouncer i was in an altercation with 4 patrons i exploded it was a bloodbath if it was not for my fucking partner not talking up some chick he eventually came out and had to subdue me, by this time the cops arrived and i was ready to give them a party i was lucky my partner was a huge guy who could subdue me.
Anyway of the roids i am a quiet unassuming guy with no anger.To cut a long story short you do not have to be an asshole before taking them to feel the rage.
I lost my job brought up on criminal charges being the victim of being spat in the face it was self defence on some charges others my lawyer argued steroid rage,A conviction and probation .Lost my job.Lost my girlfriend then an altercation in the gym i was banned this all happening in an 18 month period.
Any one saying steroid rage does not exsist is niave.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 14, 2006, 06:43:06 PM
I am a level headed guy but on the roids i have remarkedly higher aggression great for workouts not so good for social occassions, as a bouncer i was in an altercation with 4 patrons i exploded it was a bloodbath if it was not for my fucking partner not talking up some chick he eventually came out and had to subdue me, by this time the cops arrived and i was ready to give them a party i was lucky my partner was a huge guy who could subdue me.
Anyway of the roids i am a quiet unassuming guy with no anger.To cut a long story short you do not have to be an asshole before taking them to feel the rage.
I lost my job brought up on criminal charges being the victim of being spat in the face it was self defence on some charges others my lawyer argued steroid rage,A conviction and probation .Lost my job.Lost my girlfriend then an altercation in the gym i was banned this all happening in an 18 month period.
Any one saying steroid rage does not exsist is niave.

Sounds like alot of bullshit to me...

4 vs you and it "Exploded into a blood bath". Bahaha


Oh brother.... ::)


If I could of been put in that courtroom I would of made sure you got alot harsher sentence by proving Steroids had absolutely nothing to do with your inability to control yourself by showing scientific studies prove Steroids don't cause any increased aggression.

Apparantly you got a slap on the wrist by looking for a skapegoat and you were using Steroids so it must of been them! ::)


Anyone saying Roid rage doesn't exist is naive? Bullshit..Anyone who beleives anything YOU SAY is naive!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Hendrix on March 14, 2006, 07:28:26 PM
Sounds like alot of bullshit to me...

4 vs you and it "Exploded into a blood bath". Bahaha


Oh brother.... ::)


If I could of been put in that courtroom I would of made sure you got alot harsher sentence by proving Steroids had absolutely nothing to do with your inability to control yourself by showing scientific studies prove Steroids don't cause any increased aggression.

Apparantly you got a slap on the wrist by looking for a skapegoat and you were using Steroids so it must of been them! ::)


Anyone saying Roid rage doesn't exist is naive? Bullshit..Anyone who beleives anything YOU SAY is naive!
I take it you have never taken high amounts of anabolics,I was spat in the face and my anger overcompensated into a slug fest everything would have been fine if my partner was not in the club leaving me stranded, I was 270 and pissed use your imagination.
I have seen guys on huge amounts of test ticking time bombs i call them grenades ,not so long ago one of these meathead raped and killed a girl and pleaded steroid rage and there was literature and medical findings that found he was indeed under steroid rage he got a reduced sentence.
Studies you say do not increase steroid rage i bet do not involve human clinical trials or chimps our closet non human speceis instead you use guienee pigs what a fucking joke.
You had been a perfect witness because you have absouloutly no idea what your talking about.
Why do not try take a couple of grams of Test wash them down with some A bombs and go out in a social setting and see if you become irratable and increased agression.
Off the roids i am a very quiet shy guy when i drink i change into a happy sociable confident guy.I also had a friend who was on was being tail gated by 3 guys in a truck he gave them the finger and pulled into the parking lot the truck followed my freind got out and the truck took of in fear,He told me that he knew exactly what he was going to do to each guy and had to sit in his car for half an hour to calm down.You my friend has not been around the scene very long and you are very niave.
There are countless cases of Teens going off in society in violent rages and convictions that follow.
Anyone that claims steroid rage have a legitamate defence you should work for the prosecutor and show them your guinee pig experiments.
On study evaluations included medical, behaivoral, and drug use assesments while high incidence of mood disorders and substance abuse was foundYour quote and this does not take into account much higher doses that bodybuilders take.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Matt on March 14, 2006, 08:45:37 PM
One thing I notice about the USA: is every atheist a liberal and every Christian a conservative?   ???

It seems like some beliefs are just part of the package of a greater belief system (or lack thereof).  Not to bring religion in this thread, but I'm just curious about it.

Anyway, I don't claim to know that legalizing all drugs will be a great system, but I do know the current system is absolutely useless and complete shit.  Just look around you for all the evidence of that.

In any case, I couldn't give a fuck about the law when it comes to drugs.  I'll put whatever I damn well please in my body.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Hendrix on March 14, 2006, 09:52:57 PM
1.I can refute ALL of the counter arguments. Yes I can.

2.Yes Drugs can ruin people's lives. The whole idea of decriminalization is "Harm reduction" the same princible behind giving condoms out for free or providing needles to drug users for free. More harm is caused by drugs being outlawed than by them being regulated and produced legally and sold.

"Different culture" is itself a copout. In reality most European countries have the same "Culture" as America does given the Internet and T.V....Europeans are extremly americanized.

Secondly curbing marijuana use shouldn't even be a govt priority considering it's much less problematic than Alcohol is.

Hence the princible of "Harm reduction". Anyone who knows anything about the war on Drugs knows that it doens't accomplish what it was set out to do...Prevent people from using drugs. The fact is..People WILL do drugs regardless of their legality. Making them illegal meerly creates more problems as i've mentioned before. "Harm reduction" is the princible of acceptance, That people WILL do these drugs and that trying to stop them is futile. Trying to educate them on the best choices and giving them the tools needed to safely do these things is the best approach.
Like Giving out Condoms. People claim Giving out condoms makes people want to have sex..BULLSHIT! I've never wanted sex from seeing a condom. ::)
People who want sex will have sex REGARDLESS of having a condom or not. However providing condoms for free to people will lower birth rates and lower rates of STD's.
Preaching "Don't have sex" doesn't do shit...And hundreds of studies agree with me.

   

1.Insomnia isn't a physical withdrawl symptom just a mental one.

2.No.

3.No. I know numeorus people who have smoked marijuana and are 100% coherent. The only time I see people acting incoherent is after a few drinks of alcohol.

4.If Marijuana is addictive then by the same definition so is the Internet,So are video games,So is exercise,So is eating healthy...Should we ban them all too? Let's go ahead and ban everything people enjoy because they tend to do it more often because they ENJOY doing it..That'll work! ::)

   

This goes back to civil liberties. Alcohol is legal because people have the right to put whatever substance into their bodies. Marijuana is illegal because people don't have such a right. See the hypocrisy?


Here is something pretty funny....Here are what specific substances need to be to be considered a "Schedule 1 substance"(Like Marijuana is)
 

Oh wow...Alcohol fits ALL of those definitions now doesn't it? Marijuana doesn't fit any of them but maybe (A) and even that is a stretch.

Here is something funnier....There's another...(D)
 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid=01-9306-filed

 :o WoW! They make it so Alcohol can't even be scheduled due to failure of prohibition EVEN IF it fits all of those definitions needed to schedule a substance.

So this is proof it has NOTHING to do with saftey but everything to do with politics.

People have been thrown into Prison for LIFE simply for selling marijuana.


This makes no sense to me.


In American law you can't punish someone for a crime they "Might" do. That would be in violation of the constitution. Punishing someone for consuming a substance because they "Might" commit another crime by consuming it doesn't make any sense at all.

The argument that "We punish drug users because they might commit violent crimes in the future." is a dead one and inconsistent with the way our entire country works. IF you condone punishing people for using a substance that "might" cause them to "possibly" commit some type of unknown crime in the unknown future..What's stopping you from punishing children with anger issues? Throwing 8 year olds away for good because they have mental problems that can't be fixed and they "might" commit some crime in the future.

I'm far from narrow minded...I have heard all of the argument for and against drug criminilization and the fact is it makes no sense to criminalize the drugs.


Actually many of my family members are drug addicts or have been. I have seen first hand how ineffective the current statues regarding drugs are. People are thrown into jail...Nonviolent people thrown into jail simply for possessing a substance that makes them feel better. They spend years in Prison and then come out hardened criminals from being forced to socalize with them for so long.

In effect...The current "war on drugs" Creates many more times as much crime as it gets rid of. Actually..It hardly gets rid of ANY crime ignoring the crime it creates itself by making drug use a crime. ::)

I do admit there are issues on both sides. Drugs can cause problems. I'm not debating that. However I AM debating that the current "War on drugs" is 100% ineffective and pointless. That I know absolutely and I can argue against absolutely.

I never condoned legalizing all drugs. Different drugs would be treated differently. Marijuana would be treated differently than Cocaine. Steroids differently than LSD. Ect..ect. However when it comes down to it...People SHOULD have the personal choice to take the drugs they want and not have to go through the black market to get them which only causes more problems than there was to begin with.
Despite your Bashing, Marijuana is not a soft drug being linked to Paranoid Schizophrenia and Schizophrenia and other mental illnesses this is usually from prologed use and the Netherlands are looking for a loophole to stop its legality.Despite Steroid rage i agree with what most you have written.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 14, 2006, 10:41:22 PM
I'm not going to answer everything you said, only that which I consider contentious as these quotes are getting huge.

Quote
"Different culture" is itself a copout. In reality most European countries have the same "Culture" as America does given the Internet and T.V....Europeans are extremly americanized.

I find that incredibly strange, have you even been to europe? There is a huge cultural difference.  There is very little american influence in britain and europe.  America is a novelty but the culture in europe is far different.

I don't think I really need to describe just how much worse the US is than european countries.  Just look at how fat, stupid and murderous people are in america by population and you'll see why I point out that offering them the olive branch of "choice" is not a cut and dry decision.  I mean sure, there are a lot of good people too.  But who is afraid of someone who can think for themselves?  Its the stupid people that are the scary ones.  Its just a shame that so many stupid people go out in a blaze of glory taking innocents with them.

Quote
Hence the princible of "Harm reduction". Anyone who knows anything about the war on Drugs knows that it doens't accomplish what it was set out to do...Prevent people from using drugs. The fact is..People WILL do drugs regardless of their legality. Making them illegal meerly creates more problems as i've mentioned before. "Harm reduction" is the princible of acceptance, That people WILL do these drugs and that trying to stop them is futile. Trying to educate them on the best choices and giving them the tools needed to safely do these things is the best approach.

Indeed, but just how effective do you think harm reduction can be carried out?  To me even if this were on the cards there would have be huge amounts of money piped into studies to determine this and even then there would be no true idea just how it might turn out.  You can test something theoretically till the cows come home but you can never be sure.  I can give you examples if you like..

Quote
No. I know numeorus people who have smoked marijuana and are 100% coherent. The only time I see people acting incoherent is after a few drinks of alcohol.

So do I, but I also know people who have been not so lucky

Quote
If Marijuana is addictive then by the same definition so is the Internet,So are video games,So is exercise,So is eating healthy...Should we ban them all too? Let's go ahead and ban everything people enjoy because they tend to do it more often because they ENJOY doing it..That'll work! ::)

Don't over simplify.  I could quite easily outline the differences on why the internet is a poor analogy against marijuana.  But as I said, I wasn't really interested in debating marijuana that heavily.  It is a fairly harmless drug.  The war on drugs is hardly centred on marijuana.
   
Quote
This goes back to civil liberties. Alcohol is legal because people have the right to put whatever substance into their bodies. Marijuana is illegal because people don't have such a right. See the hypocrisy?

Of course I see the hypocracy!  My point exactly!  I just don't see it as a viable pro legalisation argument, if anything I believe alcohol should be made illegal.

Alcohol is a fantastic example of what happens when a dangerous substance is given state endorsement by being legal.  (and it is dangerous to society, like I said, its a menace).  You might think that such a gesture (something being legal) isn't sanctioning its use but to many of the more simple minded people it is.  They are the problem.

Quote
So this is proof it has NOTHING to do with saftey but everything to do with politics.

Couldn't agree more, I have never liked alcohol and I don't drink by choice because I don't agree that it should be socially enforced to do so (and it virtually is, the trouble I have being a non drinker is immense) or that it should be legal at the expense of other drugs.  Don't really know whether legalisation of other drugs will make this better or worse, I just think it is far from obvious and a dangerous decision to make.  Not to mention one that no politicians in majority have the guts to make.

Quote
People have been thrown into Prison for LIFE simply for selling marijuana.

What do you want me to say?  Yes thats really stupid.  But face facts, they knew it was wrong and they did it.  You don't get sent to jail for life for smoking a bud (in civilised countries).  You get sent to jail for trying to profit from it and treat it like a commodity rather than a substance you respect and use for your own private enjoyment. 

Quote
I'm far from narrow minded...I have heard all of the argument for and against drug criminilization and the fact is it makes no sense to criminalize the drugs.

It makes sense, just its not abundantly clear.  Like I said, on the whole the public is ignorant.  You legalise a drug and its state endorsed (maybe not straight away but sooner or later it will have its effect).  Once the stigma is gone irresponsiblity is bound to occur.  There are just really too many idiots walking this planet.

Quote
I never condoned legalizing all drugs. Different drugs would be treated differently. Marijuana would be treated differently than Cocaine. Steroids differently than LSD. Ect..ect. However when it comes down to it...People SHOULD have the personal choice to take the drugs they want and not have to go through the black market to get them which only causes more problems than there was to begin with.

People should do have the right to choose.  First we would have to rid the world of idiots to be safe from the ones who make poor choices.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:10:27 PM
I take it you have never taken high amounts of anabolics,I was spat in the face and my anger overcompensated into a slug fest everything would have been fine if my partner was not in the club leaving me stranded, I was 270 and pissed use your imagination.

I would of probably done the same thing you did WITHOUT steroids. So would you of. You can't blame the steroids for your anger.


I have seen guys on huge amounts of test ticking time bombs i call them grenades ,not so long ago one of these meathead raped and killed a girl and pleaded steroid rage and there was literature and medical findings that found he was indeed under steroid rage he got a reduced sentence.

1.Source?

2.Even if it's true...The medical literature is flawed as i've pointed out earlier. Actuall studies conclude "roid rage" doesn't exist. There is medical literature saying creatine causes cancer,But as we all know that's more B.S.


Studies you say do not increase steroid rage i bet do not involve human clinical trials or chimps our closet non human speceis instead you use guienee pigs what a fucking joke.


You haven't even read the studies I posted have you? OR read my posts.

THE STUDY FIRST MENTIONED USED RODENTS AND IT CLAIMED ROID RAGE EXISTED!.

The STUDY I POSTED USED ACTUALL HUMANS WHO SELF ADMINISTERED  HIGH DOSES OF STEROIDS. THAT STUDY concluded there was no roid rage.


You had been a perfect witness because you have absouloutly no idea what your talking about.
Why do not try take a couple of grams of Test wash them down with some A bombs and go out in a social setting and see if you become irratable and increased agression.
Off the roids i am a very quiet shy guy when i drink i change into a happy sociable confident guy.I also had a friend who was on was being tail gated by 3 guys in a truck he gave them the finger and pulled into the parking lot the truck followed my freind got out and the truck took of in fear,He told me that he knew exactly what he was going to do to each guy and had to sit in his car for half an hour to calm down.You my friend has not been around the scene very long and you are very niave.


Anecdotes prove NOTHING. Claiming you or your friends experiences don't prove a single thing. Posting actuall studies that I can refute is a step in the right direction but you haven't done that.

Want thousands of anecdotes? Go over to Steroidology.com and read some posts from people who use HIGH amounts of steroids. Hardly any claim to experience roid rage.

Look at Pro Bodybuilders. The rate of Violent crimes among pro bodybuilders is LOWER than among the normal population. Explain that. ALL of them are using high amounts of steroids,Why aren't they all "roid raging" and commiting crimes at a high rate?

 ::)


There are countless cases of Teens going off in society in violent rages and convictions that follow.
Anyone that claims steroid rage have a legitamate defence you should work for the prosecutor and show them your guinee pig experiments.
On study evaluations included medical, behaivoral, and drug use assesments while high incidence of mood disorders and substance abuse was foundYour quote and this does not take into account much higher doses that bodybuilders take.

1.There are countless cases of teens going off into society in violent rages WITHOUT ANABOLIC STEROIDS. MORE so than those with steroids. In relaity there are only a few cases of teens commiting crimes where steroids were blamed.

2.I didn't use guinnie pig experiments. The people claiming Roid rage existed did. You never even read my posts.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:14:31 PM
One thing I notice about the USA: is every atheist a liberal and every Christian a conservative?   ???

It seems like some beliefs are just part of the package of a greater belief system (or lack thereof).  Not to bring religion in this thread, but I'm just curious about it.

Anyway, I don't claim to know that legalizing all drugs will be a great system, but I do know the current system is absolutely useless and complete shit.  Just look around you for all the evidence of that.

In any case, I couldn't give a fuck about the law when it comes to drugs.  I'll put whatever I damn well please in my body.


Generally atheists are more intelligent than the normal people. Also Generally liberals are more intelligent than conservatives. So obviously the two will go together.
Conservatives think in "herd instinct" meaning they don't rationaly think but only do what they are told by their leaders. Liberals think outside of the Box. Liberals are responsible for ALL of the liberties we hold dear in America and the rest of the world. Liberals are responsible for freeing the slaves,De-segregation,Voting rights for women,Scientific progress..Christian conservatives tend to try to block scientific thought,Does the church jailing people who said the world went around the sun or these crazy "Anti evolution" trails prove that?

"Conservative thought" is based on no change. Based on doing what our parents did and any stray from that is bad..Even if it's good. ::)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:16:41 PM
Despite your Bashing, Marijuana is not a soft drug being linked to Paranoid Schizophrenia and Schizophrenia and other mental illnesses this is usually from prologed use and the Netherlands are looking for a loophole to stop its legality.Despite Steroid rage i agree with what most you have written.



Marijuana is absolutely a soft drug. "Hard drugs" have a high potential for abuse,Highly addictive,Deadly..ect.

Marijuana...
1.Does not have high potential for abuse.
2.Not highly addictive if addictive at all.
3.Has never killed anyone in medical history.


The suppositions of marijuana causing paranoia are flawed. Post medical studies showing this and i'll refute them and show how they are flawed.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 15, 2006, 12:27:07 PM
Marijuana kills your braincells. That's it.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:29:40 PM

I find that incredibly strange, have you even been to europe? There is a huge cultural difference.  There is very little american influence in britain and europe.  America is a novelty but the culture in europe is far different.

I don't think I really need to describe just how much worse the US is than european countries.  Just look at how fat, stupid and murderous people are in america by population and you'll see why I point out that offering them the olive branch of "choice" is not a cut and dry decision.  I mean sure, there are a lot of good people too.  But who is afraid of someone who can think for themselves?  Its the stupid people that are the scary ones.  Its just a shame that so many stupid people go out in a blaze of glory taking innocents with them.

I lived in Germany for 8 years. I know how Americanized europe is.


Indeed, but just how effective do you think harm reduction can be carried out?  To me even if this were on the cards there would have be huge amounts of money piped into studies to determine this and even then there would be no true idea just how it might turn out.  You can test something theoretically till the cows come home but you can never be sure.  I can give you examples if you like..

Logically it would work. There isn't a reason why it would not.

Here is an example...

People have unsafe sex.

Attempts to stop sex have failed.

Why attempt to stop it anymore?

Why not just accept that people will do it and try to stop unsafe sex rather than sex.

Give out free condoms.

Educate people on STD's.

Ect..Ect...

This is the logical solution.



Of course I see the hypocracy!  My point exactly!  I just don't see it as a viable pro legalisation argument, if anything I believe alcohol should be made illegal.

That's as stupid as thinking marijuana should stay illegal. Don't you remember Prohibition? It was an absolute failure. That's why alcohol was then decriminalized after prohibition BECAUSE it was a failure.

Prohibiting alcohol doesn't work...

Prohibiting Marijuana doesn't work..

Prohibiting steroids doesn't work..

ect...


What do you want me to say?  Yes thats really stupid.  But face facts, they knew it was wrong and they did it.  You don't get sent to jail for life for smoking a bud (in civilised countries).  You get sent to jail for trying to profit from it and treat it like a commodity rather than a substance you respect and use for your own private enjoyment.

People would not be able to use drugs if it weren't for the people who sold them firstly..

Secondly...Saying that "they knew it was illegal and they still did it so they deserve the punishment" is a fallacy. It's like saying "The people helping the underground railroad knew it was illegal but still did it,So they deserved to be hung!".

Absurd reasoning....


It makes sense, just its not abundantly clear.  Like I said, on the whole the public is ignorant.  You legalise a drug and its state endorsed (maybe not straight away but sooner or later it will have its effect).  Once the stigma is gone irresponsiblity is bound to occur.  There are just really too many idiots walking this planet.

People already use drugs. Lot of people. Assuming more would use if it were legalized is baseless. If someone wants to use,They will..legal or not. That's as simple as it is.

Since they WILL use regardless,Why not just regulate it to make sure it's safer and stop creating a black market around it that causes violent crime and even more problems?


People should do have the right to choose.  First we would have to rid the world of idiots to be safe from the ones who make poor choices.

I should not have to worry about what some person will do if he uses drugs. It's Un-American to punish everyone just because a select few are stupid. It's also Un-American to punish people based on what they "might do" as i've already explained.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:32:24 PM
Marijuana kills your braincells. That's it.



Bzzt....Wrong!!!!


Marijuana like drugs actually causes braincells to GROW!

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20051015/fob7.asp

Quote
High Times for Brain Growth: Marijuana-like drug multiplies neurons

Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: monster triceps on March 15, 2006, 12:37:10 PM
No, it makes your braincells dead.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:40:39 PM
No, it makes your braincells dead.


lol...
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Oldschool Flip on March 15, 2006, 12:40:47 PM
I have to agree with Apollo on just about everything he's posted. The fact that legalizing drugs could have an adverese affect in the US is bunk. A good example is the legalization of marijuana for medicinal use in Califorinia. What was the result? The first year it was instituted there was a backlash by many hard core right winged opponents because of the percentage of "users" legally obtaining the drug. However in years past that number has "not" increased by a fraction of 1% compared to previous years. What else has happened? Because of the cost most police officers, courts and jurisdictions won't prosecute anyone with less than ounce on their person because it just ties up time and money. Now since that's happened the cost of marijuana has gone down and their are less "gangs" distributing them because access is easy to the public. It's not profitable for them to risk getting busted by the Feds for such a small return. By the same token businesses took upon themselves to institute a random mandatory drug test to oust any users. The percentage of people being fired for marajuana use was also low. So even though it was readily available and cheap enough to buy, only the "users" were the ones still buying.  
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 12:44:34 PM
I have to agree with Apollo on just about everything he's posted. The fact that legalizing drugs could have an adverese affect in the US is bunk. A good example is the legalization of marijuana for medicinal use in Califorinia. What was the result? The first year it was instituted there was a backlash by many hard core right winged opponents because of the percentage of "users" legally obtaining the drug. However in years past that number has "not" increased by a fraction of 1% compared to previous years. What else has happened? Because of the cost most police officers, courts and jurisdictions won't prosecute anyone with less than ounce on their person because it just ties up time and money. Now since that's happened the cost of marijuana has gone down and their are less "gangs" distributing them because access is easy to the public. It's not profitable for them to risk getting busted by the Feds for such a small return. By the same token businesses took upon themselves to institute a random mandatory drug test to oust any users. The percentage of people being fired for marajuana use was also low. So even though it was readily available and cheap enough to buy, only the "users" were the ones still buying.  


(http://www.e-dem.info/products/icons/e-democracy%20symbols/colour/jpg/I%20agree.jpg)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 01:29:17 PM
I will give the conservatives credit on some things - for example their economic policy.  As history has shown us, based on human nature the more right wing a system is, the better it generally works.  But can I respect a conservative for this?  No.  Their good economic thinking is just the result of the same brainwashing that makes them consider evolution to be a myth.  Brainwashing is brainwashing.  I don't care if somebody is right or wrong as long as they think for themselves.


Actually right wing systems are incredibly unstable and unsuccessful, History shows us this. The more right wing a system is..The more unsuccessful it will be.
National Socalism is a far right wing system...Look at how unsuccessful it was.
Historically speaking...Soceties move toward more liberal systems. America today is 10 times more liberal than it was 50 years ago. 100 times more liberal than it was 200 years ago. Most countries are this way.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 15, 2006, 02:03:08 PM
A freethinker on getbig - I'm impressed.

Canada is not necessarily better than the USA because it is more liberal, or the USA of now may not necessarily be better than the USA of yesterday for that reason either.  There are many far more socialist states out there which are far worse off than countries which are not.  Government oppression is often a big factor.  There may be more to meets the eye.

USA isn't necessairly better BECAUSE it's further right than Canada. What is USA better at? War? USA could beat Canada in a War so USA is better?

In Canada people have more civil liberties.
In Canada crime rates are Lower.
In Canada everyone gets healthcare.
In Canada the poverty rate is lower.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 15, 2006, 06:46:52 PM
I lived in Germany for 8 years. I know how Americanized europe is.

Go to australia, that is americanised..

Quote
That's as stupid as thinking marijuana should stay illegal. Don't you remember Prohibition? It was an absolute failure. That's why alcohol was then decriminalized after prohibition BECAUSE it was a failure.

People would not be able to use drugs if it weren't for the people who sold them firstly..

Quote
Secondly...Saying that "they knew it was illegal and they still did it so they deserve the punishment" is a fallacy. It's like saying "The people helping the underground railroad knew it was illegal but still did it,So they deserved to be hung!".

I didn't say they deserved it - What I said was, they were quite clear on their intentions and quite clear about the punishment.  They took a risk.  Ideally, the risk would not be there, but as it is thats the way it goes.  Most of us wouldn't risk our lives for some very hard earned high risk cash.  Some people do, they are foolish.  Whether the law should be there or not.  You're a complete and utter gimp if you risk your life to make money in this way.  You might be a hero if you pull it off but shit, if you're asking me to be sensitive to someone who knowingly exchanges their freedom for a chance to make big then I'm afraid you're going to be disappointed.

I also said that people trafficking mass amounts of drugs have very little respect for the drugs themselves and are merely eager to profit.   I don't have any respect for anybody who is not treating drugs with the utmost respect. 

Quote
People already use drugs. Lot of people. Assuming more would use if it were legalized is baseless. If someone wants to use,They will..legal or not. That's as simple as it is.

Absolutely not.  Assuming there wouldn't be more is baseless, the law for many is there as the line.  Take away the line and there is likely to be journeys into the territory of drugs by (unexperienced) people. 

Quote
Since they WILL use regardless,Why not just regulate it to make sure it's safer and stop creating a black market around it that causes violent crime and even more problems?

Current users are not the problem.  For them, the law doesn't mean much anyway.

Quote
I should not have to worry about what some person will do if he uses drugs. It's Un-American to punish everyone just because a select few are stupid. It's also Un-American to punish people based on what they "might do" as i've already explained.

Idealistic points of view have no place here.  We're talking outcomes, what is going to happen.  You shouldn't have to worry, but you will.  As I said, rid the world of stupid people and you have brought yourself closer to not having to worry.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 15, 2006, 06:59:53 PM
I have to agree with Apollo on just about everything he's posted. The fact that legalizing drugs could have an adverese affect in the US is bunk. A good example is the legalization of marijuana for medicinal use in Califorinia. What was the result? The first year it was instituted there was a backlash by many hard core right winged opponents because of the percentage of "users" legally obtaining the drug. However in years past that number has "not" increased by a fraction of 1% compared to previous years. What else has happened? Because of the cost most police officers, courts and jurisdictions won't prosecute anyone with less than ounce on their person because it just ties up time and money. Now since that's happened the cost of marijuana has gone down and their are less "gangs" distributing them because access is easy to the public. It's not profitable for them to risk getting busted by the Feds for such a small return. By the same token businesses took upon themselves to institute a random mandatory drug test to oust any users. The percentage of people being fired for marajuana use was also low. So even though it was readily available and cheap enough to buy, only the "users" were the ones still buying. 

A medicinal marijuana program is not an example of why legalisation would not have an effect on the mainstream population.  Infact any example using marijuana is useless.  Marijuana is not a socially dangerous drug.

You seem to forget a key fact about your country.

It is

Full of stupid people in majority (see last election results).

Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 15, 2006, 08:17:55 PM
Let's just hope the next religious nut who wins the election is an intelligent man in other areas.

Somewhat of a paradoxical statement.. :)

We can only hope




Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: 240 is Back on March 15, 2006, 08:29:32 PM
Its just a shame that so many stupid people go out in a blaze of glory taking innocents with them.

I will agree with you on the point that American TV/movies/etc all seem to glorify those that go out in a blaze of glory.  I think if they made it a tad less glorious, we'd see less people taking the 'suicide by cop' option, or shooting up their school/workplace until they're taken down.

I know the US isn't perfect, but I think I'd prefer it to most other places on earth.  Yeah, our govt does get its hands dirty, but we elected them, and the same shit goes on in every other country in the world.  And while the US isn't the safest place around, they do let us pack heat to defend ourselves.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: 240 is Back on March 15, 2006, 08:31:36 PM
In Canada people have more civil liberties.

In Canada crime rates are Lower.

A country that won't let you possess a firearm to protect your family.  Unreal.  Lower crime rate or not, there are still violent people, who in numbers or with blunt weapons can end you and your family should fate lead them to your door. 

So how does CAN have more civil liberties?
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 15, 2006, 10:37:37 PM
A country that won't let you possess a firearm to protect your family.  Unreal.  Lower crime rate or not, there are still violent people, who in numbers or with blunt weapons can end you and your family should fate lead them to your door. 

So how does CAN have more civil liberties?

Believe it or not, if you live in a country like say australia or britain, never does the fact that there is not a protective firearm there ever come to mind. 

I mean I'm sure this another debate entirely but the legality of owning of a firearm clearly has an effect of increasing the murder rate (or at the very least shootings).  People still commit crime in australia, they just don't habitually use guns to do so and they don't end lives for VCR's :)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 15, 2006, 10:58:42 PM
You do bring up an interesting point.  It seems like if you're in the US fathoming the idea of no protective gun in the house living in another country is quite hard.

Whereas here, we probably look at the US and think how can you live with such lethality in every home?

Its a shame that its too late to change that fact in the US, its keeping up with the joneses now.  Hope it never becomes acceptable here.  It is definitely one of those situations where civil liberty has a clear detrimental effect on society.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: ricosauve on March 16, 2006, 09:41:43 AM
lol!

The American government is so moronic when it comes to weed.  Some people SMOKING A JOINT would get five years in jail.

In Canada, grow-ops in my city have been busted and all they get is house arrest lol.  Canada used to be bad but at least now they have common sense.  They need to punish distributors somehow because there is still social stigma surrounding weed.  But knowing there is no true "crime" when it comes to buying/selling drugs (ESPECIALLY weed), they don't give much punishment.

Hey DEA: newsflash - all your efforts don't even put a dent in drug use.  Stop trying, get your heads our of your damn asses, and find a system that WORKS if you want to curb drug use.  Ruining lives of users and dealers doesn't do that.  Get a damn clue.

Maybe spend taxpayer dollars chasing actual criminals.  Just a thought.

could not agree more, but The DEA it is a LAW INFORCEMENT ENTITY (they already know this), we need to address the Law makers r at fault here.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Matt on March 16, 2006, 12:12:33 PM
could not agree more, but The DEA it is a LAW INFORCEMENT ENTITY (they already know this), we need to address the Law makers r at fault here.

Good point about that.  They are just doing their job.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 12:08:23 AM
No, I said that Canada is not necessarily better than the USA because it is more left (re-read, although my wording may not have been the best).

The USA of 2005 may not be better than the USA of 1960 just because it is further left either.  There are other variables at play - social change for instance.

Think about the reasons why USA of today is better than USA of 50 years ago. What reasons are they? Most of them will be due to social change to the left.

Your worldview seems to be one which I've come in contact frequently from my experience with American atheists.  While I agree completely with some of it, some I do not.  I think you are probably a lot like me in that you would probably function well under any system, and probably extremely well under socialism.  This however, is not the same for everyone.  It is not that I don't like socialism, it's that from my experience with human nature, people reply to the incentives capitalism has to offer - the incentives other social systems lack.

I don't like socalism I like capitalism. However this really doesn't have much to do with drug legalization now does it? I never said that I liked far left wing soceties either.


As an example, I've been renting my house to four of my friends who live here with me in order to curtail my bills.  I was extremely lenient with payment schedule and even though they knew exactly what the rules and deadlines were, they continued to take advantage of me because I was being nice and putting friendship before business.  They had no incentive to pay on time since I didn't force it on them (capitalism DOES force incentives, unlike socialism).  Well that ended.  I laid down the law and emphasized the rules - and guess what?  Now they pay on time, every time.  The reality is - being "nice" and trying to do my part to put in place a system where everyone was happy only resulted in them leeching off me.  Likewise in a socialist system, where is my incentive to work hard only to have the government take my earnings in tax and give it to those who want to abuse our social welfare system?  Moreover, where is the incentive of a person on welfare to find employment since he is already enjoying a free ride?

I don't know why you think I support economic socalism. I don't. All I was saying is that generally the great changes that has benefited our society in the last 2 centuries has been due to changes to the left.

Secondly..Have you ever been on Welfare? I am doubting it. What incentive does a person have to get off of welfare? How about having a BETTER LIFE?
Welfare doesn't buy you everything. People on welfare would want to get a job so they can buy the things they want not just get the things they need.
Alot of people do take advantage of welfare but that doesn't mean welfare is invalid. Let's use an example. Say a women has children and then their father leaves without paying child support so the mother is forced to take care of the children all alone. Let's say the mother gets sick and can't work to take care of the children. Do we allow those children to simply be without food or medicine or other essentials since they were delt a bad hand in life? I don't think so. Our society has an obligation to take care of those less fortunate espically within our own society.
How about a man who is injured and can't work,Can't buy insurance..Needs medicine. What does he do? Who pays for his medicine? No one? Should we just let him die?
 ::)


The reality is - most people will only work hard and be productive if they have something on the line.  If there are no incentives to be productive, they won't be productive.  You and I may be exceptions and as such it is easy to assume socialism works - in practice, I don't think it does at all in purist form.

Who brought up absolute socalism? It wasn't me.


I would argue that both capitalists and socialists, whatever their ideological viewpoint, desire to have a high standard of living, a high quality of life for the greatest number of people (basic utilitarianism).  They just have entirely different views about which economic system, markets vs. central planning, is most capable of delivering this stated outcome.  In any case, economists, whatever their ideological stripe, generally agree that real (inflation-adjusted) GDP per capita is the closest, least bad measure of material well being and quality of life that we have for an economy (in spite of its numerous weaknesses as a measure), not necessarily median income or mean income
or anything else.

I don't see how any of this has anything to do with the topic.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 12:31:36 AM
Go to australia, that is americanised..

I know.

People would not be able to use drugs if it weren't for the people who sold them firstly..

Ever hear of "Supply and demand"? As long as there is a Demand for something there will be a Supply..Legal or Illegal. It's a law of economics.

In the 1930's during prohibition there was a DEMAND for alcohol. The public wanted it. People wanted to drink it.

Guess what? Bootleggers wanted $. So they saw a market opportunity to make $. By supplying the demand..By brewing Alcohol and selling it.

Thus the criminalization of alcohol produced a "black market" of alcohol and guess what else came along with it? ORGANIZED CRIME.

Guys like Al Capone would not of ever existed were it not for prohibition. Al Capone made his $ with gambling,prostitution and alcohol rackets.(All prohibited in the 30's)

So along with Organized crime...Prohibition also creates a "Black market" around the prohibited substance. Guess what that means? No regulations! People could produce alcohol without regulations and people would still buy it since that's all there was. Meaning the alcohol was ALOT more dangerous being unregulated. The conditions it was created,What was in it..All much more dangerous and inpure.

Disputes... How do 2 "Groups" both of whom produce illegal substances resolve a dispute between the two? Normaly if the substances were legal they would resort to legal means to resolve issues..I.E. Lawsuits.
When the substances are NOT legal..They results to ILLEGAL means to resolve disputes..I.E. Does the St. Valentine's Day massacre ring a bell?


I didn't say they deserved it - What I said was, they were quite clear on their intentions and quite clear about the punishment.  They took a risk.  Ideally, the risk would not be there, but as it is thats the way it goes.  Most of us wouldn't risk our lives for some very hard earned high risk cash.  Some people do, they are foolish.  Whether the law should be there or not.  You're a complete and utter gimp if you risk your life to make money in this way.  You might be a hero if you pull it off but shit, if you're asking me to be sensitive to someone who knowingly exchanges their freedom for a chance to make big then I'm afraid you're going to be disappointed.

Alright then...I guess Harriet Tubman was a "Gimp". ::)


I also said that people trafficking mass amounts of drugs have very little respect for the drugs themselves and are merely eager to profit.   I don't have any respect for anybody who is not treating drugs with the utmost respect.

Fair enough. However I agree, Most drug dealers are scumbags who actually BENEFIT from the drugs being illegal. If they were legal the drug dealers would not even exist, Nor would the violent crime surrounding the illegal drug trade.
The gang drug dealers or the south American drug lords would vanish overnight of the substances they traffic were decriminalized and companies started to produce them. So would all of the violent crime surrounding the illegal drug trade(Slavery,Murder,Bribery,Corruption...)


Absolutely not.  Assuming there wouldn't be more is baseless, the law for many is there as the line.  Take away the line and there is likely to be journeys into the territory of drugs by (unexperienced) people.

I don't feel like discussing that right now so let's ASSUME that drug use would increase if drugs were decriminalized. That's just a necessary evil that would have to be delt with when it happens. I would much rather drug use to increase in exchange for ending violent drug lords reigns,Ending most gangs who are financed by dealing drugs,Ending the massive amount of deaths due to impurity of blackmarket drugs,End the massive amount of "gang wars" over drug selling territory...All of which would vanish overnight if we made drastic changes to our policy on drugs.


Current users are not the problem.  For them, the law doesn't mean much anyway.

Exactly. If someone wants to use...A drug being illegal doesn't make a difference. Seriously now...If you WANTED to use a drug and your friend handed it to you...Would you use it? Even if it's illegal? Of course you would. The drug being illegal doesn't make a difference on the amount of people who will use it.
The amount of illegal drugs coming into this country would not change much if large companies in our country produced them or large poppy plantations in the middle east or coca plantations in south america produced them.


Idealistic points of view have no place here.  We're talking outcomes, what is going to happen.  You shouldn't have to worry, but you will.  As I said, rid the world of stupid people and you have brought yourself closer to not having to worry.

All you're producing are "Idealistc outcomes". You're assuming that outlawing substnaces prevents people from using. This is false. You're assuming that what we're doing now works..it doesn't. You're assuming that if we change..Everything will fall apart,All evidences shows it won't.

Want to talk about "Idealistc outcomes" Let's talk about how idealistic people were when they outlawed marijuana! Now THAT'S idealistic!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 12:33:49 AM
A country that won't let you possess a firearm to protect your family.  Unreal.  Lower crime rate or not, there are still violent people, who in numbers or with blunt weapons can end you and your family should fate lead them to your door. 

So how does CAN have more civil liberties?


On the contrary Canada is home to several million firearms owned privatly.


Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 12:36:03 AM
Believe it or not, if you live in a country like say australia or britain, never does the fact that there is not a protective firearm there ever come to mind. 

I mean I'm sure this another debate entirely but the legality of owning of a firearm clearly has an effect of increasing the murder rate (or at the very least shootings).  People still commit crime in australia, they just don't habitually use guns to do so and they don't end lives for VCR's :)

Gun prohibition is the same as Drug prohibition..It doesn't work.

If a gang member wants a gun,He will get one...Usually illegally already.

Criminals who use firearms for the most part are using illegally possessed firearms they bought on the street. Outlawing firearms will only do one thing....Make the good guys without guns(Who obey the laws) and the bad guys(Who of course break the laws) will have guns...By breaking the law!

Talk about idealistic...."Ohh,Maybe the criminals will obey the gunlaws!" ::)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 12:45:08 AM
You do bring up an interesting point.  It seems like if you're in the US fathoming the idea of no protective gun in the house living in another country is quite hard.

Whereas here, we probably look at the US and think how can you live with such lethality in every home?

Its a shame that its too late to change that fact in the US, its keeping up with the joneses now.  Hope it never becomes acceptable here.  It is definitely one of those situations where civil liberty has a clear detrimental effect on society.


On the contrary there isn't any evidence more firearms=More violent crimes by firearms. In many cases there are countries that have several times more firearms than other countries where the country with the less firearms has more crimes from firearms.

Firearms don't kill people..People kill people.

Remember the marine motto? "Without me my firearm is nothing,Without my firearm I am nothing." Without a human pulling the trigger,Firearms are completly safe. They only become dangerous when put into dangerous hands.
This is proof that the problem of the high firearm death rate in America is not due to guns but due to people.

Gun prohibitions only change the equilbrium from the good law abiding citizens from having guns to them not having guns and the criminals from having them since the criminals don't care about the laws and will get guns illegally anyway.


The 2nd amendment says...

Quote
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



Our forefathers thought of this idea to insure we have civil liberties. Why? Well allow me to quote Thomas Jefferson...


Quote
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.


Would the Government fear the people more if they are unarmed or if they possess over 200 million firearms? 8)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 17, 2006, 02:07:54 AM
Quote
All you're producing are "Idealistc outcomes". You're assuming that outlawing substnaces prevents people from using. This is false. You're assuming that what we're doing now works..it doesn't. You're assuming that if we change..Everything will fall apart,All evidences shows it won't.

Want to talk about "Idealistc outcomes" Let's talk about how idealistic people were when they outlawed marijuana! Now THAT'S idealistic!

I never said anything worked, rather what I said was that there were compelling reasons for both sides.  I never once said I was pro either side.  I also never said that the world would end, what I said was there are significant bodies of people who would treat this as a license to disrespect drugs to a level that could be detrimental on society.  I accept that these people would likely be first time users rather than "old hands" but assumably there would be marginal increase at the outset from current users should drugs made be available.  Some people will get caught up with the tide.

Nothing idealistic..

Idealistic is bringing civil liberties into this discussion when you have little else to back yourself.  I'm presenting an argument for such a debate with potential social outcomes.  I think in the end there could be a strategic solution to this but I personally believe that both sides are somewhat ignorant to each other (generally anti-drug worse).

(An example of when you have little else to back yourself is when you talk about alcohol.  Two ways of looking at it, either its an example of hypocracy or its an example of how irresponsible society is given a civil liberty).  Either way you look at it things could be very dim if drugs were abused like alcohol is.

Why?

Because drugs are way more fun!
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 17, 2006, 02:24:22 AM
I never said anything worked, rather what I said was that there were compelling reasons for both sides.  I never once said I was pro either side.  I also never said that the world would end, what I said was there are significant bodies of people who would treat this as a license to disrespect drugs to a level that could be detrimental on society.  I accept that these people would likely be first time users rather than "old hands" but assumably there would be marginal increase at the outset from current users should drugs made be available.  Some people will get caught up with the tide.

The only arguments from the side of pro-prohibition are refutable and I think i've demonstrated that.

Idealistic is bringing civil liberties into this discussion when you have little else to back yourself.  I'm presenting an argument for such a debate with potential social outcomes.  I think in the end there could be a strategic solution to this but I personally believe that both sides are somewhat ignorant to each other (generally anti-drug worse).

I have more than Civil Liberty to back my argument and I've demonstrated that several times. Haven't you been reading it?
Civil liberties however are the most compelling argument. Consider Slavery. In the mid 1800's before slavery was outlawed the slave owners said that the "Economic and social outcome of outlawing slavery would be disasterous." However the fact of the matter is...When civil liberties are being stomped on, We need to WORK AROUND any possible problems that arise when we give people civil liberties. Sure...Freeing millions of slaves would cause damage to the economy. So what? Who cares? I'd rather take a blow to society or the economy than infringe on others civil liberties.


(An example of when you have little else to back yourself is when you talk about alcohol.  Two ways of looking at it, either its an example of hypocracy or its an example of how irresponsible society is given a civil liberty).  Either way you look at it things could be very dim if drugs were abused like alcohol is.

It's an example of Hypocrisy. I've stated that over and over. People have the civil liberty to drink alcohol..Period. The hypocrisy is where the govt allows it but not marijuana for instnace.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 17, 2006, 02:36:15 AM
Gun prohibition is the same as Drug prohibition..It doesn't work.

If a gang member wants a gun,He will get one...Usually illegally already.

Criminals who use firearms for the most part are using illegally possessed firearms they bought on the street. Outlawing firearms will only do one thing....Make the good guys without guns(Who obey the laws) and the bad guys(Who of course break the laws) will have guns...By breaking the law!

Talk about idealistic...."Ohh,Maybe the criminals will obey the gunlaws!" ::)

You're probably right, it cannot be directly attributed to amount of guns owned.  It probably can be attributed to social progression in an environment where are guns are acceptable though.  There is a reason why your murder rate is so much larger. ::)

Hah, honestly ... you think you're not idealistic and you're quoting the 2nd amendment. 

That must have really hurt me calling you idealistic, you've tried (unsuccessfully) to pin it back on me several times now.  Never will win that one, not whilst you're pimping civil liberty :)

Civil liberty or not I feel a whole lot safer here than over in the US - and guess what? according to the statistics I am a whole lot safer.  Oh but maybe guns should be legal in australia, that would make me even safer ::)
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 17, 2006, 02:52:32 AM
The only arguments from the side of pro-prohibition are refutable and I think i've demonstrated that.

No you've quite correctly admitted that there are unknown variables and there will be victims should legalisation occur.  At this point we are only in disagreement as to whether the amount of victims and effect on society outweighs what is happening now.  I don't pull to either side but I think the example of alcohol shows that it is likely to be quite detrimental to society.

Quote
I have more than Civil Liberty to back my argument and I've demonstrated that several times. Haven't you been reading it?
Civil liberties however are the most compelling argument. Consider Slavery. In the mid 1800's before slavery was outlawed the slave owners said that the "Economic and social outcome of outlawing slavery would be disasterous." However the fact of the matter is...When civil liberties are being stomped on, We need to WORK AROUND any possible problems that arise when we give people civil liberties. Sure...Freeing millions of slaves would cause damage to the economy. So what? Who cares? I'd rather take a blow to society or the economy than infringe on others civil liberties.

It is true, you have given more arguments for the case.  However you cannot at any stage make them stick.  It all falls back to civil liberty.  Take a blow to society for your own personal gain? That much is evident, but its remarkably selfish don't you think. 

Quote
It's an example of Hypocrisy. I've stated that over and over. People have the civil liberty to drink alcohol..Period. The hypocrisy is where the govt allows it but not marijuana for instnace.

I don't know how many more times I need to explain my take on this, you are correct it is hypocrisy but it is not an argument FOR drug legalisation.  Nobody in their right mind would determine that an evil justified another.  Only one who was (selfishly) buried into the idea of his/her liberty rather than the good of society. 

The hypocrisy is at government level yes, my point is (and always has been) that pro drug legalisation people make childish use of this concept by calling it hypocrisy and then knowingly using it to justify another hypocrisy - (failing that they fall back on civil liberty which is exactly what you did early on in this discussion).
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 18, 2006, 01:32:01 AM
You're probably right, it cannot be directly attributed to amount of guns owned.  It probably can be attributed to social progression in an environment where are guns are acceptable though.  There is a reason why your murder rate is so much larger. ::)

Our society...Not the number of firearms.

Hah, honestly ... you think you're not idealistic and you're quoting the 2nd amendment.

And?

Civil liberty or not I feel a whole lot safer here than over in the US - and guess what? according to the statistics I am a whole lot safer.  Oh but maybe guns should be legal in australia, that would make me even safer ::)

It probably would considering criminals will get guns regardless of their legality.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 18, 2006, 01:39:56 AM
No you've quite correctly admitted that there are unknown variables and there will be victims should legalisation occur.  At this point we are only in disagreement as to whether the amount of victims and effect on society outweighs what is happening now.  I don't pull to either side but I think the example of alcohol shows that it is likely to be quite detrimental to society.

Alcohol is alot more damaging than Marijuana is. I have stated this several times but you don't listen...I have said that different drugs would be treated differently. For instance I'm not condoning one being able to sell cocaine at the local gas station...Marijuana? Sure.


It is true, you have given more arguments for the case.  However you cannot at any stage make them stick.  It all falls back to civil liberty.  Take a blow to society for your own personal gain? That much is evident, but its remarkably selfish don't you think.


It doesn't all fall back onto civil liberity. It falls back onto economics also.

Marijuana is the 4TH LARGEST CASH CROP in the united states! The FOURTH LARGEST!
DESPITE the federal govt spending over 20 billion a year trying to criminalize it.

However i've also already explained how the civil liberity example is solid...You didn't even address the slavery example.


I don't know how many more times I need to explain my take on this, you are correct it is hypocrisy but it is not an argument FOR drug legalisation.  Nobody in their right mind would determine that an evil justified another.  Only one who was (selfishly) buried into the idea of his/her liberty rather than the good of society.


1.I'm not using hypocrisy as an argument for legalization..Just a point.

2.You say that it's ok to take away civil liberties as long as society as a whole benfits? Then how about slavery? In the 1800's Society as a whole benefited from the exploitation of slaves. I assume you would be Pro-Slavery since it benefited society and taking it away would of hurt the economy and society.


The hypocrisy is at government level yes, my point is (and always has been) that pro drug legalisation people make childish use of this concept by calling it hypocrisy and then knowingly using it to justify another hypocrisy - (failing that they fall back on civil liberty which is exactly what you did early on in this discussion).

That makes no sense...How would legalizing marijuana be hypocrisy?

Also i've explained how 1.The civil liberity argument is solid and 2.It's far from the only argument as i've demonstrated.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: rocket on March 18, 2006, 01:56:42 AM
Alcohol is alot more damaging than Marijuana is. I have stated this several times but you don't listen...I have said that different drugs would be treated differently. For instance I'm not condoning one being able to sell cocaine at the local gas station...Marijuana? Sure.

No arguments here, I'm not against weed and have said numerous times that marijuana is not really what I'm talking about.

Quote
It doesn't all fall back onto civil liberity. It falls back onto economics also.

Marijuana is the 4TH LARGEST CASH CROP in the united states! The FOURTH LARGEST!
DESPITE the federal govt spending over 20 billion a year trying to criminalize it.

However i've also already explained how the civil liberity example is solid...You didn't even address the slavery example.

I don't recall any slavery example.. Its time consuming to answer you so I may have missed it.  It looks like its coming up later in this post anyway.

Quote
1.I'm not using hypocrisy as an argument for legalization..Just a point.

Its not a point, its an attempt to win the argument with faulty logic.  It might work with someone who does not pay attention but its not going to work with me (or the people who make the decision to take on amendments) so why bother even bringing it up.

Quote
2.You say that it's ok to take away civil liberties as long as society as a whole benfits? Then how about slavery? In the 1800's Society as a whole benefited from the exploitation of slaves. I assume you would be Pro-Slavery since it benefited society and taking it away would of hurt the economy and society.

See now you're getting ridiculous. 

Taking away slavery does not endanger lives.  Infact in the whole it is significantly effective at making it "fair" for the mainstream to conduct their lives rather than a select few.  Society didn't benefit from slavery, a section of society did. 

Having drugs illegal is a far more complex situation and I don't think its necessary to go any further. 

Quote
That makes no sense...How would legalizing marijuana be hypocrisy?

We're not talking about marijuana specifically and we have never been.  Several times I've made it clear whilst I dislike marijuana personally it is not the crux of this discussion.  I have gone so far as to state that marijuana is not a socially damaging drug. 

Sometimes you forget that I'm neither for or against drug legalisation.
Title: Re: roid rage may be lasting, but reversible
Post by: Johnny Apollo on March 18, 2006, 02:05:59 AM

Its not a point, its an attempt to win the argument with faulty logic.  It might work with someone who does not pay attention but its not going to work with me (or the people who make the decision to take on amendments) so why bother even bringing it up.

If someone is doing something clearly hypocritical..Pointing out the hypocrisy makes them take a second look at their actions.


See now you're getting ridiculous. 

Taking away slavery does not endanger lives.  Infact in the whole it is significantly effective at making it "fair" for the mainstream to conduct their lives rather than a select few.  Society didn't benefit from slavery, a section of society did. 

Having drugs illegal is a far more complex situation and I don't think its necessary to go any further.

A select few benefit from drugs being illegal too. Namingly the DEA and the lobbyists. Politicans also benefit because it's a "war" they can pretend to fight that brings in voters.


Sometimes you forget that I'm neither for or against drug legalisation.



I don't see what you mean by that.