Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome.

We hope you enjoy your visit to Bartiforums.com

Since 2005 we've been a place for Bart fans to come together, discuss the books and other things. Jonathan Stroud himself is also a member of our community and you have the chance to talk to him. All you need to do is register an account.

Once registering you'll have the ability to set up and customise your profile, and access the options to post replies. Registration is completely free. There are no costs for access to any part of our board.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: (Advanced Login)

Username:   Password:
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Drugs. Substances. Controlled, or Not.
Topic Started: Oct 16 2010, 11:57 PM (2,691 Views)
Sentynel
Member Avatar
Nothing But The Rain

nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 12:04 PM
Only amphetamine has effects similar to alcohol, amongst the drugs which are less harmful than alcohol? Cool, I thought other slightly less-dangerous drugs could have that effect too. But addiction sometimes can be a bit dangerous too. I mean, people who are addicted to some drugs show violent/unreasonable behaviour if denied their regular dose (but hey, kids addicted to computers and video games are known to show that too =p) or known to steal to get their hands on it.

Alcohol and amphetamines are the only ones that increase aggression/violence. Of the other well-known less dangerous drugs on the list with mood-altering effects, ecstasy/MDMA makes you peaceful and happy, and cannabis just mellows you out. There are a few others which are opioid and thus effectively anaesthetic in effect.

Of course, if you're addicted to something your behaviour trying to get your next fix is certainly unpredictable, but most of those are not that physically dependence-building. Tobacco's the worst, and how often do you hear of someone going on a rampage to get a cigarette? As you point out, in certain people it happens if they lose access to anything they like; it's not the drugs in particular.
Sentynel - Head Ninja, Admin, Keeper of the Ban Afrit, Official Forum Graphics Guy, and forum code debugger.
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Captain Internets
Member Avatar
Marid
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 12:04 PM
(but hey, kids addicted to computers and video games are known to show [violent/unreasonable behaviour if denied their regular dose] too =p)

NO THEY flooping 'eckIN' AREN'T *punches Ni in the face*
<.<
>.>
Edited by Captain Internets, Oct 19 2010, 04:01 PM.
Posted Imagesentynel is gay
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
nathanielandbartimaeus
Member Avatar
Marid
Yeah.
Also (something which I had typed earlier and had forgotten to add after I had to retype my post) in some countries/cities, smoking in public places is banned. A good law as passive smokers too get affected.
And yeah, definitely all drugs can't be marketed. Not just the dangerous ones mentioned in The Lancet graph, but other ones too which act like slow poison or cause sudden, permanent damage. Usually these are not used by people personally, but you can't trust the intention of those who buy it. But banning them is given, so this paragraph is quite unnecessary. =p

Moving away from topic (I'm a Bartiforums member after all), what do people think of death sentence? I think it is okay to practise it (but very rarely and when it is shown that the criminal has no chance of being reformed). I'll give my reasons later.


David Cat
Oct 19 2010, 03:59 PM
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 12:04 PM
(but hey, kids addicted to computers and video games are known to show [violent/unreasonable behaviour if denied their regular dose] too =p)

NO THEY flooping 'eckIN' AREN'T *punches Ni in the face*
<.<
>.>
Hehe. Has that ever happened to you Da? With you being denied computer access?
Edited by nathanielandbartimaeus, Oct 19 2010, 04:04 PM.
"If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" - Einstein
"I like quoting Einstein. Know why? Because nobody dares contradict you." - Studs Terkel.
<@Ximenez> Sentynel: But i have a life? No. Qed.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Captain Internets
Member Avatar
Marid
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 04:02 PM
Hehe. Has that ever happened to you Da? With you being denied computer access?
No tbh, last time I was without computer access for any substantial length of time, I just read books and watched TV and stuff.

Re: Death penalty: No, I don't think it's ever okay to practise it. There's always the chance that innocents could be executed by mistake, and that's just not acceptable. Also, by executing someone, you're pretty much becoming the same as them (assuming it's a murderer getting executed)

*waits for Sent's wall of text to crush me like an insect*
Edited by Captain Internets, Oct 19 2010, 04:09 PM.
Posted Imagesentynel is gay
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
nathanielandbartimaeus
Member Avatar
Marid
David Cat
Oct 19 2010, 04:09 PM
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 04:02 PM
Hehe. Has that ever happened to you Da? With you being denied computer access?
No tbh, last time I was without computer access for any substantial length of time, I just read books and watched TV and stuff.

Re: Death penalty: No, I don't think it's ever okay to practise it. There's always the chance that innocents could be executed by mistake, and that's just not acceptable. Also, by executing someone, you're pretty much becoming the same as them (assuming it's a murderer getting executed)
Hey, absolutely no death penalty unless you are 100% convinced of a person's guilt. In fact, no punishment of any sort whatsoever unless you are 100% convinced of someone's guilt. Ever heard of that phrase ( I think it could be a Tamil one, I don't remember it exactly)...went something like this: You could let off a 100 guilty persons but you can't punish a single innocent one.

Quote:
 
*waits for Sent's wall of text to crush me like an insect*

xD!
"If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" - Einstein
"I like quoting Einstein. Know why? Because nobody dares contradict you." - Studs Terkel.
<@Ximenez> Sentynel: But i have a life? No. Qed.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Captain Internets
Member Avatar
Marid
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 04:15 PM
Hey, absolutely no death penalty unless you are 100% convinced of a person's guilt. In fact, no punishment of any sort whatsoever unless you are 100% convinced of someone's guilt. Ever heard of that phrase ( I think it could be a Tamil one, I don't remember it exactly)...went something like this: You could let off a 100 guilty persons but you can't punish a single innocent one.
It's nigh on impossible to be 100% convinced of a person's guilt. Realistically, you'll have to punish on less, so said punishment should never be irreversible, on the off-chance they're innocent.
Posted Imagesentynel is gay
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Sentynel
Member Avatar
Nothing But The Rain

On the death penalty:
What David said.
Sentynel - Head Ninja, Admin, Keeper of the Ban Afrit, Official Forum Graphics Guy, and forum code debugger.
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
nathanielandbartimaeus
Member Avatar
Marid
Okay I know I went a little overboard with that "being 100% sure" thing. =p
No, I meant if there was any doubt whatsoever that a person hasn't committed a crime, I think it would be really unfair to punish him/her. But I know it is not always like that and it can't always be like that. But when it comes to awarding someone a death penalty, there must be no doubts (if there are no doubts, no death penalty obviously) . And even then, it should be in the "rarest of rare cases" (I'm quoting the Indian Supreme Court here. =p)
Sentynel
Oct 19 2010, 04:24 PM
On the death penalty:
What David said.
Short and sweet. You got it wrong Dave =p.
Sam hates being predictable, I suppose.
Edited by nathanielandbartimaeus, Oct 19 2010, 04:27 PM.
"If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" - Einstein
"I like quoting Einstein. Know why? Because nobody dares contradict you." - Studs Terkel.
<@Ximenez> Sentynel: But i have a life? No. Qed.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Captain Internets
Member Avatar
Marid
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 04:25 PM
But when it comes to awarding someone a death penalty, there must be no doubts
There are always doubts, no matter how small they might be.
Posted Imagesentynel is gay
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
nathanielandbartimaeus
Member Avatar
Marid
No, not necessarily. You can have loads of eye witnesses. You can easily prove a person's presence somewhere. You can have loads of evidence. You can have the criminal's word. You can have the words of some victims. Taken together, they can really never cast a doubt on a person's involvement.
And yeah, I meant death penalties for something only like murders (note the plural). Not otherwise. And when the person can't be expected to reform and has committed the crime with clear intent to do so. And sometimes, when keeping that person alive could prove risky.
"If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" - Einstein
"I like quoting Einstein. Know why? Because nobody dares contradict you." - Studs Terkel.
<@Ximenez> Sentynel: But i have a life? No. Qed.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Sentynel
Member Avatar
Nothing But The Rain

Eyewitness testimony is staggeringly unreliable. It's actually quite scary. And it's easy to demonstrate just how bad it is. Go to YouTube. Watch a random video on the front page (one that has a person in, anyway). Close the video. Now try and describe the person. Write it down. Open the video again and see how close you came.

Now imagine trying to do the same thing days, weeks, months later, without being forewarned you were going to have to do it. Eyewitness testimony sucks.

People confess for all sorts of reasons, too.

About the only circumstance in which you can be *entirely* sure about guilt is if somebody brutally and obviously stabs someone with multiple CCTV cameras and a horde of eyewitnesses looking on, calls the police themselves, and hands over the bloody knife while saying "I killed him." And even then there are questions about whether they're sound enough of mind to be criminally culpable to the degree required for the death penalty.


This aside, of course, David's other point is absolutely right - "Also, by executing someone, you're pretty much becoming the same as them (assuming it's a murderer getting executed)"
To quote Gandalf, here, "Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
Sentynel - Head Ninja, Admin, Keeper of the Ban Afrit, Official Forum Graphics Guy, and forum code debugger.
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
rubberchickenben
Member Avatar
Marid
They could still be framed. Or multiple personalities that disappear without a trace. One can never have complete certainty.
I wish I were a cat-dragon
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
nathanielandbartimaeus
Member Avatar
Marid
Sentynel
Oct 19 2010, 05:18 PM
Eyewitness testimony is staggeringly unreliable. It's actually quite scary. And it's easy to demonstrate just how bad it is. Go to YouTube. Watch a random video on the front page (one that has a person in, anyway). Close the video. Now try and describe the person. Write it down. Open the video again and see how close you came.

Now imagine trying to do the same thing days, weeks, months later, without being forewarned you were going to have to do it. Eyewitness testimony sucks.

People confess for all sorts of reasons, too.

About the only circumstance in which you can be *entirely* sure about guilt is if somebody brutally and obviously stabs someone with multiple CCTV cameras and a horde of eyewitnesses looking on, calls the police themselves, and hands over the bloody knife while saying "I killed him." And even then there are questions about whether they're sound enough of mind to be criminally culpable to the degree required for the death penalty.


This aside, of course, David's other point is absolutely right - "Also, by executing someone, you're pretty much becoming the same as them (assuming it's a murderer getting executed)"
To quote Gandalf, here, "Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
Yeah, I agree eyewitness testimonies aren't very reliable. You can no way justify convicting a person by just going on the words of eyewitnesses. Like you said:

"About the only circumstance in which you can be *entirely* sure about guilt is if somebody brutally and obviously stabs someone with multiple CCTV cameras and a horde of eyewitnesses looking on, calls the police themselves, and hands over the bloody knife while saying "I killed him." "
Yeah, I was precisely talking about cases like that (well, tbh, the only reason I asked this question was because I was thinking about the terrorist caught in the 26/11 attacks and how you describe the above paragraph is pretty much exactly how it happened. Though with a *lot* more evidence). Like you said, only then can one be entirely convinced of someone's role. If there is, in anyway, a doubt in the person's involvement in a crime, he/she should definitely be given the benefit of doubt.
As to a person's frame of mind, you can easily find it out.

And yeah, I agree that it is quite unbecoming of a state to take the life of a person and I morally do object to it. But, sometimes, it is better to take someone's life than to risk keeping them alive. And yeah, once again, I'm going back to the example I've just spoken about. It costs a hell *lot* of a money to keep some terrorists safe and secure in jail. Plus, there will undoubtedly be attempts to rescue them. Like in the case of this.

I again reiterate that I only mean death sentences for those whose guilt have been proven without doubt (like in the case you mentioned above; plus, like I said, only in cases of mass murder) and whose existence could cause major problems to many others.
"If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" - Einstein
"I like quoting Einstein. Know why? Because nobody dares contradict you." - Studs Terkel.
<@Ximenez> Sentynel: But i have a life? No. Qed.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Sentynel
Member Avatar
Nothing But The Rain

In America at least, execution is famously more expensive than lifetime imprisonment.
Sentynel - Head Ninja, Admin, Keeper of the Ban Afrit, Official Forum Graphics Guy, and forum code debugger.
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
Nero
Member Avatar
The Canadian
David Cat
Oct 19 2010, 04:09 PM
nathanielandbartimaeus
Oct 19 2010, 04:02 PM
Hehe. Has that ever happened to you Da? With you being denied computer access?
No tbh, last time I was without computer access for any substantial length of time, I just read books and watched TV and stuff.

Re: Death penalty: No, I don't think it's ever okay to practise it. There's always the chance that innocents could be executed by mistake, and that's just not acceptable. Also, by executing someone, you're pretty much becoming the same as them (assuming it's a murderer getting executed)

*waits for Sent's wall of text to crush me like an insect*
Dude, what the hell happened to your extreme beliefs? I thought you were totally for the death penalty? What has Sam done to you? Have you finally realized that Inheritance is total crap?


(Btw, I am against the death penalty, for reasons that David and Sam mentioned, and other reasons too)
Sentynel
Oct 19 2010, 09:05 PM
In America at least, execution is famously more expensive than lifetime imprisonment.
Yep. Please see the Green Mile.
Edited by Nero, Oct 19 2010, 09:29 PM.
Offline Profile _Quote Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Chat · Next Topic »
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3