Topic: What do you think of the cocaine vaccine? Should it be mandatory for all children to take?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #5,148
article
After taking the vaccine cocaine no longer works on the person taking it. You can snort/smoke/inject it, but it is attacked by your own immune system.
If every kid were given it as a child they would never become addicted to cocaine, which would solve a lot of problems.
At the very least I think it should be offered as a way to reduce your sentence if caught with cocaine. No need to worry about them re-offending.
After taking the vaccine cocaine no longer works on the person taking it. You can snort/smoke/inject it, but it is attacked by your own immune system.
If every kid were given it as a child they would never become addicted to cocaine, which would solve a lot of problems.
At the very least I think it should be offered as a way to reduce your sentence if caught with cocaine. No need to worry about them re-offending.
mexxx !Mex505FZAw joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #90,755
No. I highly recommend enjoying cocaine/crack at least once in your life.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,756
Ridiculous. People will just change drug/use more. Mandatory vaccination would be an incredible evil. End the war on drugs.
mexxx !Mex505FZAw replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,757
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,758
Looks like it will be good for a laugh if nothing else.
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,760
@90,756 (C)
> Ridiculous. People will just change drug/use more
You could keep using larger amounts, but you would be sick long before you got high. As for different drugs, it would take time to popularize them as much as cocaine, they might not be as good, and a vaccine could come out for them as well.
> Mandatory vaccination would be an incredible evil.
I disagree. It would stop people from becoming addicted to cocaine.
> End the war on drugs.
I'm all for legalizing marijuana, and decriminalizing all drugs. But hard drugs are still dangerous, and vaccines would prevent a lot of harm.
Unlike other methods of combatting drug abuse, this is a much better alternative. No need to go through costly rehabilitation on the addicts, or more likely the government/family's dime. No need to be locked up an paid for by the state, no need to find and destroy drug crops. Once the vaccine is out, it is given to any addicts. Problem very cheaply solved.
> Ridiculous. People will just change drug/use more
You could keep using larger amounts, but you would be sick long before you got high. As for different drugs, it would take time to popularize them as much as cocaine, they might not be as good, and a vaccine could come out for them as well.
> Mandatory vaccination would be an incredible evil.
I disagree. It would stop people from becoming addicted to cocaine.
> End the war on drugs.
I'm all for legalizing marijuana, and decriminalizing all drugs. But hard drugs are still dangerous, and vaccines would prevent a lot of harm.
Unlike other methods of combatting drug abuse, this is a much better alternative. No need to go through costly rehabilitation on the addicts, or more likely the government/family's dime. No need to be locked up an paid for by the state, no need to find and destroy drug crops. Once the vaccine is out, it is given to any addicts. Problem very cheaply solved.
grg !!fERIbUB8u joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,764
Cocaine is alright. Plenty of successful people take it. The only place it causes a problem is on the bottom rungs of society, but that's mostly a cultural thing.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,765
@90,758 (D)
Apparently they took 10 times the normal dose, and didn't overdose, but still amusing to picture them trying.
Again, this wouldn't be a problem if people never tasted coke in the first place. Maybe they are willing to take a hit, but when that doesn't work they aren't desperate enough that they are going to pay to take very large doses that won't even work.
Eventually drug dealers will just have to stop selling it.
Apparently they took 10 times the normal dose, and didn't overdose, but still amusing to picture them trying.
Again, this wouldn't be a problem if people never tasted coke in the first place. Maybe they are willing to take a hit, but when that doesn't work they aren't desperate enough that they are going to pay to take very large doses that won't even work.
Eventually drug dealers will just have to stop selling it.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 21 minutes later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #90,776
@previous (A)> Apparently they took 10 times the normal dose, and didn't overdose, but still amusing to picture them trying.
Yeah, I kind of imagined Charlie Sheen plowing his way through briefcases full of coke with a desperate kind of confusion.
On a more serious note, I wonder if this could cause problems for other similar drugs that are used medicinally. Also, there is already a good amount of push-back from people about current vaccines given to children. A mandatory system would be costly and difficult to enforce. Aside from the fact that we have little idea what long-term effects TA-CD might cause on developing children, the current study found that it isn't entirely effective -- reporting that "About a quarter of those who received the vaccine did not make sufficient antibodies at all."
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 27 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #90,779
@previous (D)
> Also, there is already a good amount of push-back from people about current vaccines given to children.
A few idiots who have been continually been proven to be idiots. "IT CAUSES AUTISM LULZ"
> A mandatory system would be costly
It would be cheaper than what we are doing now, and this would get many people to opt-in and pay for themselves. It would be another part of your child's routine vaccines.
It would be a much cheaper alternative in criminal cases- A vaccine is much less costly than a prison sentence. It could be offered to merely reduce prison sentance and would be taken often voluntarily, and still save a lot of money.
> and difficult to enforce.
I suspect even if it was just suggested, many parents would go ahead with it.
> Aside from the fact that we have little idea what long-term effects TA-CD might cause on developing children, the current study found that it isn't entirely effective -- reporting that "About a quarter of those who received the vaccine did not make sufficient antibodies at all."
Eh, it will improve. In the meantime it's something at least.
> Also, there is already a good amount of push-back from people about current vaccines given to children.
A few idiots who have been continually been proven to be idiots. "IT CAUSES AUTISM LULZ"
> A mandatory system would be costly
It would be cheaper than what we are doing now, and this would get many people to opt-in and pay for themselves. It would be another part of your child's routine vaccines.
It would be a much cheaper alternative in criminal cases- A vaccine is much less costly than a prison sentence. It could be offered to merely reduce prison sentance and would be taken often voluntarily, and still save a lot of money.
> and difficult to enforce.
I suspect even if it was just suggested, many parents would go ahead with it.
> Aside from the fact that we have little idea what long-term effects TA-CD might cause on developing children, the current study found that it isn't entirely effective -- reporting that "About a quarter of those who received the vaccine did not make sufficient antibodies at all."
Eh, it will improve. In the meantime it's something at least.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #90,781
@previous (A)
I don't really disagree with you on any particular point. I am just throwing out possible stumbling blocks it might hit along the way.
I'm still curious about its effect on other, similar drugs too.
I don't really disagree with you on any particular point. I am just throwing out possible stumbling blocks it might hit along the way.
I'm still curious about its effect on other, similar drugs too.
TheSheep !kJ.A4PF7.k joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 57 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,788
This is retarded, even for me who ain't a drug addict.
I wouldn't let anyone vaccinate neither me or possibly my kids, just to ensure them the freedom of choice I had.
If they wanna try, let them try...I think the best way to learn is with trial and error...
I wouldn't let anyone vaccinate neither me or possibly my kids, just to ensure them the freedom of choice I had.
If they wanna try, let them try...I think the best way to learn is with trial and error...
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,805
@90,765 (A)
> Maybe they are willing to take a hit
You obviously have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
> Maybe they are willing to take a hit
You obviously have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,808
> cocaine is obviously bad for you
> hurr a vaccine is bad
Oh, okay.
> hurr a vaccine is bad
Oh, okay.
Green !pFNWNYROxA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,819
Inb4 it mutates into a killer virus.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,822
@previous (Green !pFNWNYROxA)
Or a zombie plague.
I for one am going to get my panic buying done early.
Or a zombie plague.
I for one am going to get my panic buying done early.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,853
psychopath !PAHVpsycho joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,858
Why not just eliminate the drug laws? The narcos would dissipate quite shortly and so would their violence if drugs were available for purchase in pharmacies.
http://www.blogdelnarco.com/2011/03/video-en-donde-descuartizan-un-hombre.html <--Shit like this would go away rather fast.
http://www.blogdelnarco.com/2011/03/video-en-donde-descuartizan-un-hombre.html <--Shit like this would go away rather fast.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,896
Nah, I like cocaine.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 35 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,918
@90,805 (G)
@90,805 (G)
> >Maybe they are willing to take a hit
> You obviously have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
So no one tries coke for the first time? Lolwat.
@90,805 (G)
> >Maybe they are willing to take a hit
> You obviously have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
So no one tries coke for the first time? Lolwat.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,919
@90,819 (Green !pFNWNYROxA)
Addiction is a killer virus.
@90,822 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I'd rather have a few zombies roaming around then some crackheads.
Addiction is a killer virus.
@90,822 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I'd rather have a few zombies roaming around then some crackheads.
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,921
@90,858 (psychopath !PAHVpsycho)
Because this would also cut demand for coke, thus eliminating violence related to it.
Legalizing altogether would mean more users. If you can pick it up at Walgreens more people will use. Right now many people don't have a connection, or are too scared about getting caught. Legalizing would mean someone, on a bad day, might try it. From there, addiction.
Because this would also cut demand for coke, thus eliminating violence related to it.
Legalizing altogether would mean more users. If you can pick it up at Walgreens more people will use. Right now many people don't have a connection, or are too scared about getting caught. Legalizing would mean someone, on a bad day, might try it. From there, addiction.
TheSheep !kJ.A4PF7.k replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,924
Born this Furry !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,933
psychopath !PAHVpsycho replied with this 15 years ago, 17 seconds later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,934
@90,921 (A)
> Legalizing altogether would mean more users.
Nope. It would get rid of the thrill associated with it being a forbidden fruit.
> If you can pick it up at Walgreens more people will use.
Just because they can sell it, doesn't mean they would want to. Them selling cocaine to the wrong people would give them a bad reputation.
> Legalizing would mean someone, on a bad day, might try it. From there, addiction.
People get addicted now. At least if it were legal, people wouldn't fear asking for help with their addiction, since they wouldn't risk arrest.
> Legalizing altogether would mean more users.
Nope. It would get rid of the thrill associated with it being a forbidden fruit.
> If you can pick it up at Walgreens more people will use.
Just because they can sell it, doesn't mean they would want to. Them selling cocaine to the wrong people would give them a bad reputation.
> Legalizing would mean someone, on a bad day, might try it. From there, addiction.
People get addicted now. At least if it were legal, people wouldn't fear asking for help with their addiction, since they wouldn't risk arrest.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 21 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,949
@previous (psychopath !PAHVpsycho)
> Nope. It would get rid of the thrill associated with it being a forbidden fruit.
Just like how alcohol legalization stopped alcohol use? People will take it because coke gets them high, they wont give a fuck about whether they are a "rebel" or not. A vaccine is the only thing that will stop people.
> Just because they can sell it, doesn't mean they would want to. Them selling cocaine to the wrong people would give them a bad reputation.
A new store could pop up selling coke, in fact I'm sure several would. They would have the incentive to advertise and push it. Convincing a person to try it just once would be enough to get them for life.
> People get addicted now.
A typical fallacy. Just because some people already use it does not mean legalizing would be harmless. more people would use it.
> At least if it were legal, people wouldn't fear asking for help with their addiction, since they wouldn't risk arrest.
You can already seek treatment without worrying about arrest for exactly this reason. A doctor cannot tell on your, and rehab centers deal with this all the time. Police do not steak out narcotics anonymous meetings.
In Canada they dealt with heroin use properly. They did't legalize it, but they prescribed it to addicts- the addicts could go to a clinic and get free heroin, without having to worry about purity.
- They treated it like a disease
- No one got arrested
- It saved them money when people were no longer comitting crimes which cost law enforcement a lot of money to investigate
- They save lives and money when people didn't get rushed to the hospital and end up leaving the bill unpaid.
- It reduced funding for illegal gangs.
- Addicts could live normal lives, and had all the resources they needed to wean off of heroin.
> Nope. It would get rid of the thrill associated with it being a forbidden fruit.
Just like how alcohol legalization stopped alcohol use? People will take it because coke gets them high, they wont give a fuck about whether they are a "rebel" or not. A vaccine is the only thing that will stop people.
> Just because they can sell it, doesn't mean they would want to. Them selling cocaine to the wrong people would give them a bad reputation.
A new store could pop up selling coke, in fact I'm sure several would. They would have the incentive to advertise and push it. Convincing a person to try it just once would be enough to get them for life.
> People get addicted now.
A typical fallacy. Just because some people already use it does not mean legalizing would be harmless. more people would use it.
> At least if it were legal, people wouldn't fear asking for help with their addiction, since they wouldn't risk arrest.
You can already seek treatment without worrying about arrest for exactly this reason. A doctor cannot tell on your, and rehab centers deal with this all the time. Police do not steak out narcotics anonymous meetings.
In Canada they dealt with heroin use properly. They did't legalize it, but they prescribed it to addicts- the addicts could go to a clinic and get free heroin, without having to worry about purity.
- They treated it like a disease
- No one got arrested
- It saved them money when people were no longer comitting crimes which cost law enforcement a lot of money to investigate
- They save lives and money when people didn't get rushed to the hospital and end up leaving the bill unpaid.
- It reduced funding for illegal gangs.
- Addicts could live normal lives, and had all the resources they needed to wean off of heroin.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 10 seconds later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #90,950
cocaine makes you smarter, so fuck no
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #91,058
@90,949 (A)
> They save lives and money when people didn't get rushed to the hospital and end up leaving the bill unpaid
But Canada has socialised healthcare.
> They save lives and money when people didn't get rushed to the hospital and end up leaving the bill unpaid
But Canada has socialised healthcare.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #91,059
No. But at least it provides hope for cocaine addicts who desperately want to quit.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #91,271
@91,058 (L)
Yes, so an addict overdoses and ends up at a hospital costs them money. This program saved them money this way.
In America, or other countries, addicts can leave without paying their bill and it costs the government and/or hospital a lot of money. Either way it ends up the cost of the citizens.
Yes, so an addict overdoses and ends up at a hospital costs them money. This program saved them money this way.
In America, or other countries, addicts can leave without paying their bill and it costs the government and/or hospital a lot of money. Either way it ends up the cost of the citizens.
Green !pFNWNYROxA replied with this 15 years ago, 34 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #91,298
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #91,422
> it's for the greater good
You know that's what Grendelwald said about subjugating muggles.
You know that's what Grendelwald said about subjugating muggles.