Legalize needle-exchanges for addicts in Texas?

[Wild Cobra]

The problem you have here is that I freely admit when I am wrong.


THat particular case was you hanging your hat on a spelling mistake, when cornered.

JUST LIKE YOU ARE DOING HERE, YOU DUMB ASS.

I was wrong in what I originally said. I meant something I stated incorrectly. That's no different, I corrected my words.

You never admitted to my recollection that you were wrong in that smog/ozone thing.

[RandomGuy]

Here is my contention, poorly worded before. I say that there are less pregnancies to unmarried high school girls in the 70's than today. I will add the specificity of unmarried and of high school age. We can add Jr. high if you like. Stop with the studies that include married women and those who are 19 and 20 years old.

Fallacy: Burden of Proof

Description of Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:


Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.

In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise.

Either provide some solid data to support your claim, or it can be and should be, logically rejected.

That is the nice way to say:

Back it up, or get the out, hack boy.

[RandomGuy]

I was wrong in what I originally said. I meant something I stated incorrectly. That's no different, I corrected my words.

You never admitted to my recollection that you were wrong in that smog/ozone thing.

Does this support your statement about teen pregnancy?


It doesn't?


How unsurprising.


The lack of evidence continues. Quit trying to change the subject, it makes you look worse.

[Wild Cobra]

You don't get it Random. I don't care what you think. I have looked for studies that support the criteria I laid out, but the internet is just information overload. I have not found statistics on unmarried women with unwanted pregnancies in Jr. High or High School. They all include other groups that skew the data. A married 18 year old women very likely has a child at 19, yet is counted in the teem statistics you find.

[TeyshaBlue]

I can't find the data that I just know must be there! It's so obvious! My God. It must be lib s censoring the internet!

[Wild Cobra]

Teysha, you are welcome to look through that information overload.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

needle exchange for addicts? This isn't anything that excites me one way or another. However, if it keeps the ing idiots out of the emergency rooms with hepa is, aids, etc. then fine, by all means give the morons clean needles.

I agree with this 100%. Enabling drug addicts isn't a good thing, but if giving them free needles makes them less of a burden on tax payers and makes them spread less disease, then it's a no brainers.

I still say legalize all drugs and tax the out of what you can. If people are going to pay "crack prices" for crack, we're better off using that as a source of revenue rather than letting it empower cartels.

[TeyshaBlue]

I don't see how giving away needles is enabling. They are going to use needles period, whether they are clean or not. Might as well make 'em clean and reduce the other tax payer burdens ala DuncanownsKobe above.

[TeyshaBlue]

Teysha, you are welcome to look through that information overload.

"Im not going to do your research for you." ---WC

[RandomGuy]

You don't get it Random. I don't care what you think. I have looked for studies that support the criteria I laid out, but the internet is just information overload. I have not found statistics on unmarried women with unwanted pregnancies in Jr. High or High School. They all include other groups that skew the data. A married 18 year old women very likely has a child at 19, yet is counted in the teem statistics you find.

I found what you need to prove or disprove your ed theory. If I wanted to, I could stick it into an excel spreadsheet, run some statistical analysis, and ferret it out for you.

I'm not going to. I will tell you what I found pretty much disproves your moronic theory, even without that.

You can't prove your statement. End of story.

[RandomGuy]

I don't see how giving away needles is enabling. They are going to use needles period, whether they are clean or not. Might as well make 'em clean and reduce the other tax payer burdens ala DuncanownsKobe above.

I agree.

All giving away clean needles does is increase the usage of cleen needles.

In the end, even if it does increase drug usage, it decreases the societal costs of that drug usage, by decreasing the worst health care costs.

, let's even grant that clean needles is enabling addicts, ignoring the fact that they will use dirty needles to get their fixes, regardless.

A few more addicts is a price I am willing to pay for having a healthier group of addicts that aren't using expensive health care.

+a small number of addicts
-a large decrease in consumed health care
===============================
Lower costs to society, and lower taxes.

Yeah, I went there. Dirty needles equals higher taxes and higher health insurance premiums. If you get rid of the needle programs you are for higher taxes and higher health insurance premiums.

Suck it.

[RandomGuy]

I agree with this 100%. Enabling drug addicts isn't a good thing, but if giving them free needles makes them less of a burden on tax payers and makes them spread less disease, then it's a no brainers.

I still say legalize all drugs and tax the out of what you can. If people are going to pay "crack prices" for crack, we're better off using that as a source of revenue rather than letting it empower cartels.

Eyup.

All Prohibition did was put money in the hands of Al Capone and the like.

We tried this with alchohol and got enough information to figure out whether this kind of policy ultimately works, IMO.