"See the problem?"

Yes, you're not very bright and made a retarded assertion, that once completely destroyed, has left you reeling and unable to form a coherent rebuttal.

Guess what not-too-bright-guy, there is no coherent rebuttal. You don't get to tell ME I can't do something because YOU are too weak to do that same something responsibly.

Period.

"Opiates aren't particularly equivalent, there are multiple receptors"

No, there aren't. ALL opiates are converted into morphine in the body. The concentration and metabolites vary, but it all ends up as morphine.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

THAT is the tenth amendment. It says you are COMPLETELY, IRREFUTABLY, UTTERLY WRONG.

Don't bother replying, you are wrong and there's nothing left to say about it.

I see no equivalent situation regarding "illegal" drugs, so why, apart from answering his question, does a restriction on antibiotics matter?

And more importantly than that, it is not the USE of antibiotics, it is the MISUSE of antibiotics, which moots your observation totally.

So, no, the government does not get to step in to stop my USE of drugs, but if I MISUSE those drugs, the government can very rightly step in and deal with it.

In that case, the drug being used is irrelevant, as it is the BEHAVIOR that is the problem, not the substance.

So again, you are wrong, there is no reason for the government to step in, not even in the case of antibiotics.

Bullshit.

I'm a fool, you titled your post and I read it anyway.

Sadly, you were right and now I feel silly for reading it.

I genuinely don't care WHO gets saved or how many people go uninjured.

The prohibition on drugs is a direct and clear violation of my rights. There is no discussion, and no amount of "saving people", or rather, no number that isn't bordering on astronomical, makes it a worthy trade off.

You get modded down because you forget that part of this discussion, not that said moderation is correct.

http://www.med.umich.edu/opm/newspage/2003/cocaineheart.htm

"They've recently found that it isn't the cocaine causing the heart attacks."

No.

They found that cocaine causes heart attacks, and the failure to make the doctors aware of the cocaine use results in the standard treatment being counterproductive.

They did not, in any way, form or fashion, find that "it isn't the cocaine causing the heart attacks".

"The cocaine (powder or rock) can give the symptoms of heart attack without the victime actually having heart problems."

The symptoms of a heart attack in this case ARE heart problems, so your comment here makes it clear you simply didn't understand the article as well as you thought you did.

"Of two drugs to have legal, these two are among the most dangerous and addictive there are"

This is only true because of their easy availability. From a purely pharmacological standpoint, they are VERY far down the list. I don't think your observation in really useful in any practical way as it compares apples and oranges.

More importantly, your entire line of reasoning is not helpful. The incessant "what about cigarettes and alcohol" whinging completely misses the point. This is a personal rights issue, plain and simple, and it DOES NOT MATTER that tobacco and alcohol are legal, the fact that something else is illegal is an infringement on my liberties, and your observation of the hypocrisy of the system is nice, but ultimately irrelevant.

More importantly, I seriously doubt pointing out hypocrisy is going to do anything at all to improve the situation, and with the increasing move to criminalize tobacco use may ultimately end with those drugs being made illegal as well, NOT with the decriminalization of drugs that are illegal now.

"Anyone who still thinks that drug-related problems are caused by their prohibition is an idiot."

Well, I'm a professional in this area, and I have to say your observation is moronic.

If there was a stronger word than moronic, one that would indicate a need for society to sterilize you to prevent you from furthering your genepool and prevent your offspring from reducing the collective intelligence of the world I would use it.

Fuck I don't even have to be a professional to observe that you're drawing your conclusions from a FUCKING TELEVISION SHOW. You lose the right to comment on that basis alone.

That said, your comment betrays your ignorance. Most people who abuse drugs (NOT use recreationally, but ABUSE) have underlying mental health problems. This has been established conclusively and is not open for debate.

Criminalizing drugs has turned what should be a public health problem into a criminal one, and it's not a good change.

Do yourself a favor, get educated or shut the fuck up. And DO NOT attempt to claim you re educated, you wouldn't have said "watch intervention" as though that were an intelligent observation if you were educated.

"We need our young people to know that we are more than willing to throw them into oblivion if they get high even once"

So only one mistake, no second chances for YOUNG people?

Well, I say we need our imbeciles to know we are more than willing to ridicule them for their overwhelmingly stupid commentary, such as your for instance.

"A person can become (psychologically) addicted to anything."

No, that's called dependence, or abuse, not addiction.

That being said, only people who don't know WTF they're talking about even use "addiction", professionals retired the term years ago, and now use "dependence" or "abuse".

In other words, if you use the word "addicted", that is proof you don't know WTF you're talking about.

"Odd how we've gotten along for so long without the medication and professional counseling eh? "

You've never talked to anyone outside your field regarding mental health have you?

Regardless, your opinion is moronic.

"My mom has been hospitalized twice for depression with several weeks of suicide watch under her belt...realized its just a cycle that will continue because she is so ashamed of her pathetic loser ass kid, and she prefers offing herself to being the parent of such a loser and there is really no point in fighting it"

FYP.

"You've never talked to anyone outside your field about anything regarding the internet have you?"

You've never accepted the diagnosis that you're mentally retarded despite proving it daily, have you?

"Ah, so you don't realise it. Hey I can do this kinda crap too!"

No, because it's not true. I can't "realise" something that isn't true, so no, you fail.

Again.

"This is a website devoted to FLOSS, but not solely devoted to FLOSS!"

No it isn't. It's just a website that has some OSS content. Claiming it is "devoted" without any evidence apart from your opinion, which you're proven to be worthless because you're a liar, doesn't make it so.

"You are such a girl"

Wow, not only are you a liar, but you're a bigot and a misogynist. How fucking pathetic.

And I thought you couldn't make yourself look any worse.

"Got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning, did we?"

NO, I just hate the menagerie of stupid fucks that make declarations like that idiot did, while the audience KNOWS he's talking out of his ass but approves anyway because he's pandering to their biases.

"I vote your post Rant of the Week, and as a bonus, your sig gets the Bad Taste Sig of the Month Award. "

Who cares? I certainly don't give a fuck about your opinion, so why did you share it with someone you know would only enjoy how much it pisses your loser ass off?

Fuck off now, thanks.