[DRAFT] No Recreational Drugs

[Karakis]

No. Just -No. All you are doing is adding layer upon layer of bureaucratic nonsense. None of what you are doing with your piling on of additional naive bureaucracy will do a damn thing towards "preventing abuse". The one and only thing you are accomplishing is to make the lives of Doctors, Pharmacists, and Patients more difficult, more time consuming, and more expensive. Drop the three doctors thing. It Is Idiotic, wasteful, and pointless.

OOC: Look, I'm through with listening to you. If you don't like it, don't vote for it. But stop calling my ideas idiotic. It's unnecessary and doesn't fix the problem. This is my first time proposing a law and i'm trying to hammer out the bumps as I go. If you'd like to help, that's great. If you wouldn't, please stop posting here.

[Kaboomlandia]

No. Just -No. All you are doing is adding layer upon layer of bureaucratic nonsense. None of what you are doing with your piling on of additional naive bureaucracy will do a damn thing towards "preventing abuse". The one and only thing you are accomplishing is to make the lives of Doctors, Pharmacists, and Patients more difficult, more time consuming, and more expensive. Drop the three doctors thing. It Is Idiotic, wasteful, and pointless.

OOC: Look, I'm through with listening to you. If you don't like it, don't vote for it. But stop calling my ideas idiotic. It's unnecessary and doesn't fix the problem. This is my first time proposing a law and i'm trying to hammer out the bumps as I go. If you'd like to help, that's great. If you wouldn't, please stop posting here.

I suggest you listen to the people that are critiquing your idea. Grays Harbor and Separatist Peoples are both experienced authors who are able to spot the flaws in your proposal. You don't want to lose that help.

[Grays Harbor]

No. Just -No. All you are doing is adding layer upon layer of bureaucratic nonsense. None of what you are doing with your piling on of additional naive bureaucracy will do a damn thing towards "preventing abuse". The one and only thing you are accomplishing is to make the lives of Doctors, Pharmacists, and Patients more difficult, more time consuming, and more expensive. Drop the three doctors thing. It Is Idiotic, wasteful, and pointless.

OOC: Look, I'm through with listening to you. If you don't like it, don't vote for it. But stop calling my ideas idiotic. It's unnecessary and doesn't fix the problem. This is my first time proposing a law and i'm trying to hammer out the bumps as I go. If you'd like to help, that's great. If you wouldn't, please stop posting here.

Mandating three doctors for prescriptions is idiotic. And quite frankly, I believe it is necessary as long as you continue with your insistence on including such naivety.

OOC: There is no thread ownership in the GA. You don't get to decide who can post what where.

[Karakis]

I suggest you listen to the people that are critiquing your idea. Grays Harbor and Separatist Peoples are both experienced authors who are able to spot the flaws in your proposal. You don't want to lose that help.

OK, but I started posting here so that I could get help with editing a proposal, not to be called an idiot. And, I would just like to point out this started out as a way for me to create a law against recreational drugs. That is what I really want help with. I don't even care about this anymore. I just want help fixing my original proposal so that it is classified as a law to ban recreational drugs. So, Grays Harbor and Separatist Peoples, I now speak directly to you two: if you will help me to make a law banning recreational drugs, I will completely drop everything about the medical drugs. Deal?

[Separatist Peoples]

"No. The C.D.S.P. doesn't ban most recreational drug usage. I cannot support measures to ban it."

[Karakis]

Fine, but that's what this topic is about, so you may be better off just leaving. Grays Harbor, what about you?

[Separatist Peoples]

Fine, but that's what this topic is about, so you may be better off just leaving. Grays Harbor, what about you?

Bell sighs, rubbing his temples. "Ambassador, you cannot require I leave. And if you asked, I would refuse. For or against, this has some significant issues, and I'll happily point them out until they are fixed or this is abandoned."

[Karakis]

Tell me how this sounds.

In order to prevent the abuse of harmful and dangerous recreational drugs this law:
DEFINES a drug as a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.
BANS the sale of any drug for recreational purposes
ASSERTS that any person or group wishing to use a drug for non-medical purposes must obtain a Non-Medical Drug Use Permit (NMDUP)

LIMITS the use of NMDUP's to scientific testing
CREATES a committee to regulate the release of NMDUP's

LIMITS the sale of all drugs to licensed pharmacists
EXEMPTS alcohol

URGES that nations create their own laws to regulate the sale/use of alcohol

EXEMPTS caffeine

ASSERTS that caffeine will be regulated when in it's pure form

[Kaboomlandia]

Hold it. Your "BANS" clause crosses the line into Recreational Drug Use.

EDIT: Also, please put your new draft in the OP where it will be easy to find and critique.

[Karakis]

Hold it. Your "BANS" clause crosses the line into Recreational Drug Use.

I don't think you read the previous posts thoroughly enough: I said that recreational drug use is what I wanted to create a law about in the first place.

[Shazbotdom]

"I'm sorry but if this does come to a vote, I WILL run a campaign against this in an instant."

Mr. Antuan D. Flaberghast
Shazbotdom Ambassador to the WA

[Karakis]

Why?

[Kaboomlandia]

Are you sure this doesn't cross the line between RDU and Healthcare?

[Shazbotdom]

"Lets break it down, shall we?"

In order to prevent the abuse of harmful and dangerous recreational drugs this law:

"Good so far."

DEFINES a drug as a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.

"This also covers items such as Alcohol, Caffeine and Tobacco."

BANS the sale of any drug for recreational purposes

"So you ban Caffeine and Tobacco with this one..."

ASSERTS that any person or group wishing to use a drug for non-medical purposes must obtain a Non-Medical Drug Use Permit (NMDUP)

"Really? Permits?"

LIMITS the use of NMDUP's to scientific testing

"See above"

CREATES a committee to regulate the release of NMDUP's

"Name of the Committee?"

LIMITS the sale of all drugs to licensed pharmacists

"I am rather sure that all, if not the majority of, member nations have Pharmacists are the only ones that can sell Prescriptions."

EXEMPTS alcohol

"......No comment"

URGES that nations create their own laws to regulate the sale/use of alcohol

"Isn't this done already?"

EXEMPTS caffeine

"Should probably have been with the above 'Exempts'."

ASSERTS that caffeine will be regulated when in it's pure form[/list]

"Why Exempt it in the previous clause if you are going to then regulate it here? And regulate it how?"

[Grays Harbor]

Fine, but that's what this topic is about, so you may be better off just leaving. Grays Harbor, what about you?

I cannot support any wholesale ban. We have an objection to any one size fits all ban.

[Karakis]

Are you sure this doesn't cross the line between RDU and Healthcare?

Possibly, but I think a little crossover is necessary. I'm also pretty sure that any crossover is so minuscule that it will be overlooked this time.

[Karakis]

"Lets break it down, shall we?"

In order to prevent the abuse of harmful and dangerous recreational drugs this law:

"Good so far."

DEFINES a drug as a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.

"This also covers items such as Alcohol, Caffeine and Tobacco."

BANS the sale of any drug for recreational purposes

"So you ban Caffeine and Tobacco with this one..."

ASSERTS that any person or group wishing to use a drug for non-medical purposes must obtain a Non-Medical Drug Use Permit (NMDUP)

"Really? Permits?"

LIMITS the use of NMDUP's to scientific testing

"See above"

CREATES a committee to regulate the release of NMDUP's

"Name of the Committee?"

LIMITS the sale of all drugs to licensed pharmacists

"I am rather sure that all, if not the majority of, member nations have Pharmacists are the only ones that can sell Prescriptions."

EXEMPTS alcohol

"......No comment"

URGES that nations create their own laws to regulate the sale/use of alcohol

"Isn't this done already?"

EXEMPTS caffeine

"Should probably have been with the above 'Exempts'."

ASSERTS that caffeine will be regulated when in it's pure form[/list]

"Why Exempt it in the previous clause if you are going to then regulate it here? And regulate it how?"

You are possibly the most helpful person so far.
Does this sound better:

In order to prevent the abuse of dangerous and harmful drugs for recreational purposes, this law:
DEFINES a drug as a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.
BANS the sale of any drug for recreational purposes
ASSERTS that any person or group wishing to use a drug for non-medical purposes must obtain a Non-Medical Drug Use Permit (NMDUP)

LIMITS the use of NMDUP's to scientific testing
CREATES a committee to regulate the release of NMDUP's

LIMITS the sale of all drugs to licensed pharmacists
EXEMPTS caffeine

[Flibbleites]

Does this sound better:

Why bother asking when you're just going to submit it anyway?

Speaking solely as a three-time resolution author, I'm going to give you a piece of advice. Writing a resolution is a marathon, not a sprint.

Bob Flibble
WA Reprsentative

[Grays Harbor]

LIMITS the sale of all drugs to licensed pharmacists

And you just made it so all over-the-counter drugs such as alergy medicines, headache medicines, and anti-diarheal medicines, for example, now need to be prescription only. Good show. That is the problem with one size fits all, it tends to fit nobody.

And this has been submitted.

[Karakis]

OOC: I didn't mean to submit it. I wrote it in the submission spot first then clicked submit by mistake

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: I didn't mean to submit it. I wrote it in the submission spot first then clicked submit by mistake

OOC: you can submit a GHR asking it be removed. If you get it removed yourself, you will avoid a ding by the mods. If the mods catch it, you get your first strike of three before getting a WA ejection.

[The United Korean Lands]

OOC: I didn't mean to submit it. I wrote it in the submission spot first then clicked submit by mistake

OOC: you can submit a GHR asking it be removed. If you get it removed yourself, you will avoid a ding by the mods. If the mods catch it, you get your first strike of three before getting a WA ejection.

As per the beginning of this thread, it would be the second of three.

[Karakis]

OOC: you can submit a GHR asking it be removed. If you get it removed yourself, you will avoid a ding by the mods. If the mods catch it, you get your first strike of three before getting a WA ejection.

As per the beginning of this thread, it would be the second of three.

Wait, what?!

[Karakis]

OOC: I didn't mean to submit it. I wrote it in the submission spot first then clicked submit by mistake

OOC: you can submit a GHR asking it be removed. If you get it removed yourself, you will avoid a ding by the mods. If the mods catch it, you get your first strike of three before getting a WA ejection.

Two things:

1. What is that?
2. How do I submit one?

[Flibbleites]

OOC: you can submit a GHR asking it be removed. If you get it removed yourself, you will avoid a ding by the mods. If the mods catch it, you get your first strike of three before getting a WA ejection.

Two things:

1. What is that?
2. How do I submit one?

click me, click me!