Home    General Stuff    General Chat
#1

Drugs are bad? Mkay

Archive: 86 posts


Following the Global Commission on Drugs Policy's report that the "War on Drugs" is an ineffective, damaging and harmfull waste of money, that criminalises users, while cementing organised crime gangs hold on the global drugs supply.... What is everyone's thought's on Global Drugs Policy?

The US in particular comes under heavy critism in the report - seeing as how they have the largest prison population in the world - While America represents just 5% of the worlds population, they represent 25% of the worlds prison population - most of whom are in jail because of drug addiction.

When America outlawed Alcohol in the 1920's they saw a massive increase not only in organised crime (who now controlled the supply of alcohol) but also a deterioration in over-all public health - as the alcohol supplied by the gangs was of poor quality and cut with stuff like turpentine and anti-freeze. This is why there were so many blind blues players in the 1920's - they lost their sight from drinking poor quality alcohol.

Conversely - it's been more than a decade since Columbia decriminalised use and possession of most drugs - and has since that time seen a decrease in every empirical measurement used to calculate drugs harm to society. From public health, crime and prison population - all have seen a dramatic improvement since they decided to decriminalise drugs.

By decriminalising drugs - you take the power away from the organised gangs - and also kill their revenue supply... while simulatanouesly ensuring that the drugs that users use is not contaminated or cut with anything nasty.


To me, it's a no brainer - Prohibition has failed in all of it's objectives - decriminalisation has been a proven success. Isn;t it high time the governments of the world made a stand against organised crime and legalised drugs?

Isn't it a shame that it's always "Ex"-politicians - and "Former" heads of drug advisory councils that tend to give this kind of advice - once they are powerless to do anything about it - Can't have our leaders talking sense while they're in office, can we? - that's against the rules!

You can read the report yourself here (http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report)
2011-06-03 10:24:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Legalise, regulate and tax the hell out of them.

It won't happen, because politicians are too stuck up about the issue. Remember this? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6087824/Chief-drugs-adviser-sacked-by-Home-Secretary.html) It seems like logic and scientific proof aren't as important as propaganda and making an example out of someone.

I'm glad they finally figured out the "War" on drugs was a complete failure. As a certain Mr Tupac Shakur once said, "Instead of war on poverty, they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me."
2011-06-03 11:58:00

Author:
Mr_T-Shirt
Posts: 1477


"I loved when Bush came out and said, "We are losing the war against drugs." You know what that implies? There's a war being fought, and the people on drugs are winning it."
Bill Hicks


For me it's a question of freedom.
Why should it be legal for me to kill myself with a "legal drug" like Alcohol - which if the drug policy was applied evenly would be a class A drug... and yet it's illegal for me smoke cannabis; which is FAR less harmfull, both to myself and to society in general?

I mean, I've smoked ALOT of cannabis - and have never commited a crime (other than the crime of smoking cannabis);
Where-as one night I drank 3 litres of Cider - had a complete black-out - and when I came to I was in a police cell being charged with Section 14 - reckless discharge of a fire-arm.
You lose control of your faculties far easier with alcohol than you do with cannabis.
I know that if I were walking down a street and saw a group of drunks on one side and a group of stoners on the other - I would avoid the drunks - because they would be far more likely to do something stupid or attack you.

But Alcohol is a nice "safe" drug, isn't it? I mean, it even endorses sporting events, right?!

But would alcohol still be safe if you were drinking it 100% pure? No - it's poison.
Or if you were buying it from some criminal gang off a street corner who water it down with turpentine or anti-freeze?
No of course it wouldn't be.

The only reason alcohol is "safe" is because when you see the label on a bottle that says for instance 5.5% alcohol - you can be sure that the alcohol content will be about 5.5% - and that it'll be drinkable alcohol - and not paint thinner.
There are no checks or balances in the illegal drugs trade - but there would be if it were legalised. Making it far safer for users.

Nothing was ever made safer by putting it into the hands of criminals.

Annually: The Global Drugs trade is worth more than the Global Tourism trade.
So if you want to make sure that your international criminal gangs maintain a healthy profit stream - for gods sake keep drugs illegal! - they'd be pretty much powerless without that revenue
2011-06-03 12:09:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Have you ever seen a documentary called "The Union?" It's a very interesting, balanced look on what you were talking about right there.

Take a look at it here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007#) if you want.

Yep, alcohol is far, far worse than cannabis and yet it still remains illegal. Ridiculous. It's backfired badly on underage drug use as well. Whereas you will get ID'd in a shop for buying alcohol, a dealer will have no discretion on who they sell to, they don't care if you're not old enough yet!
It's SO much easier for a minor to buy any illegal drug compared to buying alcohol.

P.S. I hope this thread doesn't get locked up for going against site rules. If we can have a balanced, mature conversation about the matter, I think it could be very interesting & informative.
2011-06-03 13:47:00

Author:
Mr_T-Shirt
Posts: 1477


I'm struggling to find "anyone" who seems to be against the decriminalisation/legalisation of drugs... it's so obviously the right thing to do.

The only people who seem to be against it are the actual law-makers

I honestly think they must either be on some drug-overlords payroll - or they are being threatened with death/kidnap/with-holding of party funds in order to keep them illegal and allow the status quo, which so obviously favours organised crime, to continue.
2011-06-03 14:10:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Despite all the laws/penalties/policing etc, it's amazing just how much easier it would be, like you said, for a young person to buy illegal drugs than it would be to buy alcohol. And, tbh, I don't see how that's ever really going to change. Obviously some drugs can be extremely dangerous and legallisation should probably be a pick and choose thing but the benefits are definitely there for certain drugs.



Have you ever seen a documentary called "The Union?" It's a very interesting, balanced look on what you were talking about right there.
I'll second that, The Union is definitely a must see if you're at all interested in the topic.


P.S. I hope this thread doesn't get locked up for going against site rules. If we can have a balanced, mature conversation about the matter, I think it could be very interesting & informative.
We can hope.
2011-06-03 14:12:00

Author:
SR20DETDOG
Posts: 2431


The US in particular comes under heavy critism in the report - seeing as how they have the largest prison population in the world - While America represents just 5% of the worlds population, they represent 25% of the worlds prison population - most of whom are in jail because of drug addiction.

We also have one of the most lenient penal systems on the planet. Maybe if prison were tougher: no cable tv, no weights, etc. then maybe less people would go. The prison system in the U.S. is sorry. It's corrupt and it's a training ground for criminals. I think they should be chained to big rocks, given hammers, and make little rocks out of big rocks. Prisoners have more rights than ordinary citizens it seems.


Legalise, regulate and tax the hell out of them.

It won't happen, because politicians are too stuck up about the issue. Remember this? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6087824/Chief-drugs-adviser-sacked-by-Home-Secretary.html) It seems like logic and scientific proof aren't as important as propaganda and making an example out of someone.


I agree 100% with legalizing marijuana, then like you say, tax, tax, tax. That's what they do with alcohol and tobacco. Now, I'm not a user, but I can understand the medicinal values of it and Hemp is a very versatile product that was wrongfully criminalized. Hold on, I just read an article about that a couple of weeks ago. I'm going to find it and put it here. It's very interesting. Talks about how William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper baron, and others conspired to criminalize hemp for their own personal gain.
2011-06-03 14:39:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


I've not seen The Union - but I'll be certainly watching it soon.

It really should be a case now of politicians explaining exactly why they want to continue with an aboslutely failed policy - and go against the advice of every expert who knows what they're talking about.
It's a political, rather than a social or criminal issue, because they are clearly keeping it illegal for political reasons.


Edit: as for America's "leanient" prison system. America routinely hands out much longer custodial sentances than even authoritarian regimes (not to mention the death penalty). Around 1/4 of all arrests are for drug offenses - and half of those are for cannabis offenses. Do you think it's "lenient" to arrest someone just for smoking a joint? - Would you arrest someone for drinking a glass of wine? - it's the same difference
2011-06-03 14:39:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


I think it is simply perspective. I feel once the older generation or so is gone and replaced by the next one or 2, I think it will be legalized, controlled and taxed. I personally don't have an issue with it. However, I also feel there are some it should be illegal for them to have alcohol and others that should not be allowed to have recreational drugs. They've proven they just can't deal with it and have literally destroyed their lives with one or the other. ...sorta like me and LBP.

Wow.. I actually agree with Macnme on something? Scary huh? lol
2011-06-03 14:54:00

Author:
jwwphotos
Posts: 11383


Wow.. I actually agree with Macnme on something? Scary huh? lol

I know, right?!

It must be the drugs!
2011-06-03 15:02:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Now, I'm not a user, but I can understand the medicinal values of it

Yes, this is one of the many issues the documentary "The Union" focuses on. If they want to keep cannabis illegal for your average Joe, fine. But someone who needs it to get through their day without pain? C'mon, are you really going to deny them their right to medicate themselves!?

It's not like they're doing it for a 'buzz,' they do it because without it, there days consist of pain and suffering. It's all fine and dandy for your white-bread politician to stick his nose up at the subject, but I'm amazed they even DARE take it away from suffers of cancer, AIDS and MS. Life's already dealt them a bad hand, they don't need you to make it any worse for them.

Seriously, watch the documentary "The Union" I linked in a previous post, it explains it much better than I do here.
2011-06-03 15:07:00

Author:
Mr_T-Shirt
Posts: 1477


Decriminalising it would take away the "User" stigma.
Would you call anyone who has ever had a drink of alcohol at some point in their lives a "user"? - Why not? Alcohol is a dangerous drug aswell. It just happens to be a "legal" dangerous drug, that we are actively encouraged to use (through advertising).

You'd still have problems with addicts - just as you still have problems with alcoholics - but all of the associated problems most addicts face - such as where they're going to get their next fix, and the dangers to health from taking "unknown" substances rather than getting it from a reputable supplier - would be removed.
Can you imagine how much worse the alcohol problem would be if you forced everyone who fancied a beer to buy it from some criminal who makes it in his basement with anti-freeze, rather than a Bar or Shop?

Has anyone ever been to Amsterdam?
It's a fantastic City - one of my favourite cities in the world... but the law has gotten stupidly crazy now.

They've banned the smoking of tobacco from places of work - and you are only allowed to smoke cannabis in designated "Cannabis Cafes";
Which means if you smoke a half tobacco/half cannabis joint - on the street, the cannabis would be illegal, but walk through a doorway into a cannabis cafe - and now it's the tobacco that is illegal
Utterly idiotic bureaucracy in action
2011-06-03 15:19:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Has anyone ever been to Amsterdam?
It's a fantastic City - one of my favourite cities in the world... but the law has gotten stupidly crazy now.

They've banned the smoking of tobacco from places of work - and you are only allowed to smoke cannabis in designated "Cannabis Cafes";
Which means if you smoke a half tobacco/half cannabis joint - on the street, the cannabis would be illegal, but walk through a doorway into a cannabis cafe - and now it's the tobacco that is illegal
Utterly idiotic bureaucracy in action

I'm going in the next few months! ^_^

There's a bit of an issue rising at the moment though with the cannabis cafe's. Some people are trying to implement in a rule so the tourists are not allowed entry into them, so cannabis is still as illegal for a tourist from the country they came from.

The rule isn't in effect yet, and it's still unclear wether or not it will ever pass, but it's a worrying thought.
2011-06-03 15:44:00

Author:
Mr_T-Shirt
Posts: 1477


The thing is, it wouldn't actually stop people from smoking cannabis (as the "War on Drugs" demonstrates) - but it would certainly stop most of their tourism trade. 2011-06-03 15:56:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


I have neither used drugs or used alcohol (yes unusual for someone of my nation...) but I have been around people that were doing both and I would much rather be with someone who was calm and happy (As long as I wasn't getting any fumes), than the drunk who could easily harm me or himself.
Cannabis ain't near as bad.

However, what is the stance on much worse drugs? Seems all has been spoken of is cannabis.
Dangerous drugs would still be illegal, surely? Still leaves a massive market for the drug traders with cocaine, heroin, e, etc.
2011-06-03 17:14:00

Author:
KQuinn94Z
Posts: 1758


I've actually supported legalizing cannabis/marijuana for a while now, but s for harder drugs... haven't really made my mind up on wherever they shouls be legal or not yet really. Feel free to convince me either way.2011-06-03 17:23:00

Author:
Veyneru
Posts: 115


100% absolutely they should all be legalised.
Making them illegal only helps one group of society - the organised criminals. It hurts the rest of society, by giving unscrupulous dealers a product to sell - and forcing the people addicted to that substance to fund the black market economy.

Lets take heroin as an example.
Heroin is administered legally and safely every day by doctors around the world... the patients feel absolutely no side-effects from the use of this "demon drug".
Famous heroin users from history include Thomas de Quincey, Byron, Shelley, Coleridge, and Dickens. All used heroin without it impacting on their work or social lives.

Most deaths occur from heroin due to over-dosing or infection. Because when you buy it from an unscruplous back street dealer who has cut it with stuff like brick dust... that does tremendous damage when it gets into your blood stream. Heroin users may be used to using a certain quality of heroin - cut to maybe 5% or 10% heroin and the rest is just filler. Then one time you get some 'pure grade' heroin at 40% or 50% pure, but take the same amount as they would for 5% stuff - and then you over-dose.

All substances are toxic at a high enough dose... even water.

If you were to drink the equivolent volume of a 6 pack of beer with alcohol that was 50 or 60% pure - there's a chance it could kill you.
Alcohol should be a class A drug. in it's purest 100% form it's a lethal poison.
Even in it's watered down form people all around the world die from over-dosing on alcohol every day.. but for some reason we just completely ignore it or deny that it's a problem because we see the consumption of alcohol as recreational.
But the sale of alcohol is not "legal" - it is controlled... children aren't allowed to buy alcohol and only licensed premises are legally permitted to sell it.

At least if heroin was legalised then users could be assured of a uniform quality of the substance... it wouldn't be a gamble with their lives each time. And if they developed an addiction problem then they could be provided help at source - instead of being encouraged to slide deeper into addiction by unscrupulous dealers.

There is no justification for prohibition. It is a harmfull policy.
2011-06-03 19:59:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


OH....MY.....GOODNESS!! I don't have time to respond now, but when I get home, it's on like Donkey Kong.

Mac, you have taken my goat, and after I so kindly returned it to you.

this right here:"Lets take heroin as an example.
Heroin is administered legally and safely every day by doctors around the world... the patients feel absolutely no side-effects from the use of this "demon drug".
Famous heroin users from history include Thomas de Quincey, Byron, Shelley, Coleridge, and Dickens. All used heroin without it impacting on their work or social lives."

is BS.
I'm out the door now, so later tonight i'll bombard you with boring statistics and blah blah blah, and just know it's all in good fun, nothing personal. Later.

Ok, I'm back, now where was I? oh, ok.



Edit: as for America's "leanient" prison system. America routinely hands out much longer custodial sentances than even authoritarian regimes (not to mention the death penalty). Around 1/4 of all arrests are for drug offenses - and half of those are for cannabis offenses. Do you think it's "lenient" to arrest someone just for smoking a joint? - Would you arrest someone for drinking a glass of wine? - it's the same difference
I don't know where you get your information from but according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics the number of sentenced prisoners was roughly 2.3 million and of those, roughly 475,000 were from drug offenses. A little less than 1/4. And According to the new BJS report, "Drug Use and Dependence, State and Federal Prisoners," 12.7 percent of state inmates and 12.4 percent of federal inmates incarcerated for drug violations are serving time for marijuana offenses. 12 percent is far less than the Half you claim. You don't go to prison for smoking a joint. Half the country would be in prison and when I say half, I'm exaggerating. The marijuana offenses are for transporting for distribution reasons, growing large quantities, selling. Heck, they just busted a guy in my county who had a 100 acre pot farm. Housing these inmates cost taxpayers billions of dollars a year. This is a huge problem. Make prison harder.


100% absolutely they should all be legalised.
Making them illegal only helps one group of society - the organised criminals. It hurts the rest of society, by giving unscrupulous dealers a product to sell - and forcing the people addicted to that substance to fund the black market economy.

Lets take heroin as an example.
Heroin is administered legally and safely every day by doctors around the world... the patients feel absolutely no side-effects from the use of this "demon drug".
Famous heroin users from history include Thomas de Quincey, Byron, Shelley, Coleridge, and Dickens. All used heroin without it impacting on their work or social lives.


Umm, What!? Maybe you mean Morphine? Oh Wait, I just stumbled upon this. "Heroin Maintenance - Law and Policy
(law - heroin maintenance) "Many countries believe (erroneously) that the international drug conventions prohibit the use of heroin in medical treatment. Furthermore, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has exerted great pressure on countries to cease prescribing heroin for any medical purpose. Nevertheless, a few countries, including the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Iceland, Malta, Canada and Switzerland, continue to use heroin (diamorphine) for general medical purposes, mostly in hospital settings (usually for severe pain relief). Until recently, however, Britain was the only country that allowed doctors to prescribe heroin for the treatment of drug dependence."

Wow, learn something new everyday. You were right, I concede on this point. But, I would have to argue that the Poets/authors you listed, did opiates in a different time. Heroin, a chemical derivative of the opium poppy was first synthesized in 1874 by C. R. Alder Wright. Byron died in 1824, Thomas de Quincey died in 1859 and Shelley (not sure if you mean Mary Shelley) died in 1851, Coleridge died 1851, and Dickens died in 1870. Hmmm? They all died before Heroine was invented, so I doubt seriously that they did Heroine. Opium on the other hand, I have no doubt. But Opium is Not Heroin.

100% of all drugs legalized!? Yeah, let's legalize crack, that'd be a good idea. Or how about crystal meth? PCP? These drugs are illegal for a reason. They are not "recreational" drugs. These are hardcore, destroy families, kill people drugs.

Oops, wife just walked in with a "honey do" list, so I'll leave you with that and await your rebuttal kind sir.
2011-06-03 21:34:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


Personally, I think some "drugs" should be legalized for medical and economic reasons, though there should be a thorough set of laws governing them too. While we're at drugs and not discussing how many are inside prisons for this and that, I'll just post this:
EDIT:
Video is (probably) against forum policy, so I shall refrain from posting it.
2011-06-04 20:42:00

Author:
moonwire
Posts: 1627


Drugs are called "drugs" because of their affects on people's minds and their bodies. Any chemical than can and/or will affect you in a short amount of time (caffeine, narcotics, sugar, etc.) can be called a drug.

Now I don't believe drugs should be fully legalized, nor should they be banned outright. We've seen both sides of this in recent history: the Prohibition in the United States in the 1920's (that helped form mafias and gangs, leading to criminal-ran trade that endangered the government), and the counterculture of the 60's (which resulted in millions unemployed and many killed). Neither solution is exactly that favorable, and there's no clear benefit from either as well. But here's how I look at it:

When you take a drug, there's always a risk involved. When you smoke something or drink something, there's always that factor that can put you in harms way. Like it or not, drugs don't hold up much of a positive image, due to their tendencies to... "kill" users, if overdosed or overused. I choose not to get involved in drugs because of my own personal reasons, and I don't harshly criticize those who do. But just remember that whenever a drug is used, there's always a risk involved.

Currently, the marijuana craze is causing quite an uproar over here. Voters struck down a previous attempt to legalize marijuana in California, but I can assure you that the option will reappear on the ballad next year. Though, when you look at it in a bigger picture, it's never going to pass; the state government might pass the proposition, but the federal government will strike it down. Marijuana is listed as a Schedule 1 drug under federal law, but it has been decriminalized in California. So, while you can smoke it and local enforcement won't crack down, just remember that the feds might arrest you later on.

I'm just borderline between legalization and making drugs illegal. I don't like the effects they have on people, but if they want to smoke or drink it, they should have the right to do so...

As long as it doesn't get anyone killed in the process.
2011-06-04 21:20:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack
Posts: 5757


Well said Outlaw. I agree.


EDIT:
Video is (probably) against forum policy, so I shall refrain from posting it.
message me the link. Wait. What's the video about?
2011-06-05 00:55:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


We also have one of the most lenient penal systems on the planet. Maybe if prison were tougher: no cable tv, no weights, etc. then maybe less people would go. The prison system in the U.S. is sorry. It's corrupt and it's a training ground for criminals. I think they should be chained to big rocks, given hammers, and make little rocks out of big rocks. Prisoners have more rights than ordinary citizens it seems.



I agree 100% with legalizing marijuana, then like you say, tax, tax, tax. That's what they do with alcohol and tobacco. Now, I'm not a user, but I can understand the medicinal values of it and Hemp is a very versatile product that was wrongfully criminalized. Hold on, I just read an article about that a couple of weeks ago. I'm going to find it and put it here. It's very interesting. Talks about how William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper baron, and others conspired to criminalize hemp for their own personal gain.

Wait... America... lenient? Oh, you're from Texas. Things make so much more sense now :/

... Don't you love it when reality conforms to stereotypes? /sigh

Considering that alcohol is worse then any other drug, and the only reason it hasn't been banned is because it is a couple thousand years old, and pretty much everyone has drank it... It makes no sense to ban drugs but not beer. Well, except that beer has been turned into a legitimate business

But with all those people saying we should not waste money... and since pretty much any place that doesn't make drugs a mandatory prison sentence doesn't have the high crimes rates of the US that makes us spend even more money down a hole...

I'd never take drugs myself, but I just can't see how people who try to make drugs illegal also drink... well, ok, it's a class issue since everyone drinks including corporate bigwigs and pretty much only hippies and "lowlifes" smoke other stuff so we go after the one the poor kids are using... but really, alcohol is wrse then pretty much any other drug.

... seriously... America... one of the most lenient prison systems? I can't get the inanity of that statement out of my head :/
2011-06-05 01:28:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882


Wait... America... lenient? Oh, you're from Texas. Things make so much more sense now :/

... Don't you love it when reality conforms to stereotypes? /sigh

Considering that alcohol is worse then any other drug, and the only reason it hasn't been banned is because it is a couple thousand years old, and pretty much everyone has drank it... It makes no sense to ban drugs but not beer. Well, except that beer has been turned into a legitimate business

But with all those people saying we should not waste money... and since pretty much any place that doesn't make drugs a mandatory prison sentence doesn't have the high crimes rates of the US that makes us spend even more money down a hole...

I'd never take drugs myself, but I just can't see how people who try to make drugs illegal also drink... well, ok, it's a class issue since everyone drinks including corporate bigwigs and pretty much only hippies and "lowlifes" smoke other stuff so we go after the one the poor kids are using... but really, alcohol is wrse then pretty much any other drug.

... seriously... America... one of the most lenient prison systems? I can't get the inanity of that statement out of my head :/

Man, I'm laughing. I love ya Rock! I agree with you about alcohol though. We have a culture that endorses and encourages drinking. On the outside it's frowned upon but It's everywhere you look: t.v. ads, print media, sports endorsements, etc. etc. etc. I can't stand when I'm listening to the radio and the DJ takes a caller and it's "you won the super awesome tickets, what else you gonna do?" and the caller goes, "I'm gonna partay!!! and get tore up! Woo Hoo!" and the DJ is "Alright! I can't wait to get my drink on too." it's ridiculous.

Why don't you think our prison systems are more lenient than other countries? You know what lenient means right? Inclined not to be harsh or strict; merciful, generous, or indulgent. If you mean the sentence itself is harsh, with number of years sentenced, death penalty (which I'm opposed to. Don't think it's our place to take a life) etc, I might lean to your side.
2011-06-05 05:47:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


My only concern about legalisation of pot (I'll deal with other drugs in a sec) is really simple: driving.

As it stands, we do not currently have a simple and noninvasive roadside test for marijuana intoxication. This is a problem. Driving means operating a several thousand kilo lethal hunk of metal at high speeds. For this very simple reason we have laws about doing so while intoxicated--or, indeed, distracted; witness the recent (and LONG OVERDUE) trend of laws banning cellphone use while driving. Heck, even Mythbusters demonstrated that talking on a cellphone is incredibly distracting when driving.

Don't give any tired arguments about pot making you more perceptive. It doesn't. Reaction times are drastically slowed, and reaction time is what matters when driving.

Given where I live, and given that I'm a 1) chef, 2) former raver, and 3) hedonist, you can probably make an educated guess as to my general feelings about pot. And while I support decriminalisation for even large amounts (hey, there are people who buy a couple ounces at a time for personal use only), I cannot support full legalisation unless and until we have a very serious national discussion about driving while stoned. Happily, we already have in Canada an excellent system already in place for marijuana sales on the day it does become legal; alcohol sales are a provincial monopoly throughout the country, and having a shelf devoted to pot instead of whiskey (not gin. don't you dare make less shelf space for my gin. also protip, try Victoria Gin, it's spectacular) would make a lot of sense, given that there would obviously be similar age restrictions on pot as with alcohol. Not that they'd be any more effective than current alcohol laws (and one imagines the triple-test underage exclusion of in-home, parental permission, parental supervision for alcohol consumption would also apply here).

'Harder' drugs are more of a concern. Pot is not inherently addictive in the same way that e.g. cocaine and heroin are, and don't have the associated problems which come with addiction. Even ecstasy (MDMA) isn't addictive in the same way, due to how it acts on serotonin (cocaine works on dopamine which replenishes much faster in the brain, and I can't remember the mechanism for heroin). And there is no way on God's green earth that methamphetamine should be legalised; that drug is, as far as I'm concerned, even worse news than heroin in terms of what it does to people. The prevalence of meth ('tina&apos in the queer community is responsible in many ways for the increase in HIV transmission rates over the past few years.
2011-06-05 21:16:00

Author:
roux-
Posts: 379


I've lived in California all my life, and have seen first hand the effects of drugs on people, even losing friends who have succumbed to addiction. But even seeing this, I can tell you now that I am 100% sure marijuana should be legalized. The area I live in has had a large pot problem for a while now, and the only reason for it is the illegal status of marijuana. Dealers have no scrutiny in who they deal to, as long as they get paid. I've run into dealers who sell to elementary school kids, and it sickens me. If pot was legalized, I'm sure this problem would be stopped. The general public has been scared into believing how bad "drugs" by propaganda or years now, and it bugs me when I talk to people that believe marijuana is "highly addictive" and kills thousands of brain cells when smoked. The bad rep marijuana has got is what caused the legalization of marijuana to fail in California.

The "War on Drugs" is simply a feel good war we fight for people to feel good when they read about successful drug busts and major drug traffickers getting busted, but we are going in the opposite direction on how to stop this drug problem. The public hates marijuana so much because the war on drugs needed a target that everyone knew about and was affected by, and so they chose to criminalize marijuana. They took the healthiest of drugs, the one that never killed anyone and has almost no long term effects, and they gave it a bad name. That’s not to say that marijuana has no negative effects, especially in excess, but it is not nearly as bad as the American government makes it out to be. Of course, this begs the question, “If marijuana isn’t bad for you, why is it illegal and alcohol and tobacco aren’t?” One could go even deeper and question the legality of caffeine. The fact of the matter is that this just doesn’t make sense. Tobacco kills thousands of people every year, and alcohol destroys lives, and yet these are still legal. It’s stupid, but it’s the law. If we would legalize and tax pot, we would be much better off.

Looking into why weed is illegal in the first place, it was an outright lie ([http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/])to Congress that made them illegalize it. The lies spread about marijuana through the press caused people to fear it in the 1930's, and the repercussions of this are still seen today.

I'm going to end my ranting here to be polite to you all, but I can go on for hours about this subject, but I'll end my post here.
2011-06-06 04:44:00

Author:
booXely
Posts: 654


To further your point, that very lie is what makes the 'Just Say No/war on drugs' nonsense so ineffective. We tell teenagers "All drugs are evil! One puff of a joint and you will jump off a roof! Pot is just as bad as PCP and heroin and cocaine mixed together!"

Then they go smoke a joint after school one day, eat an entire box of cookies, and conclude that they are being lied to. And then try everything else, some of which can in fact be incredibly dangerous.

I mean, I've 'experimented' (what a stupid word' with pretty much everything under the sun. And you know what? Pretty much all of it is fun. The moment we start telling teenagers (as I intend to whenever I find a decent husband and such) "Drugs can be fun, and they can make you feel really good. They can also totally screw up your life, so here's the experiences I have had, and we're here for you to help you with whatever choices you make."

Time and time and time again, study after study, as well as basic observation, has proven that more education leads to less risky behaviour. Whether this is proper sexual health education and provision of contraceptives (especially barrier methods! especially!) or full and frank disclosure about drugs, more education means fewer teen pregnancies and overdoses. It is utter nonsense that people continue to wilfully spread ignorance and lies, as though not talking about something makes it not exist.
2011-06-06 06:09:00

Author:
roux-
Posts: 379


Roux, you make a great point re: pot & driving. It's as much of a problem as drinking and driving, only it's that much harder to crack down on. I cringe every time my friends who would "never drink and drive, duh" blaze and get behind the wheel despite my protests.

But, I'm not convinced legalization alone is going to make that problem worse. You can be sure that if the government were in control of the pot supply, some of the revenues would be rerouted towards social programs and education on it's use, just like we have with booze. At the end of the day, it's not the RIDE check that's stopping most people from boozing and cruising, it's education.

I think we can expect gradual acceptance work its way up to legalization of cannabis at least here in Canada...maybe not for years or decades yet, but hell, it was part of Elizabeth May's platform and she was elected (in BC mind you), so the times are a-changin'.
2011-06-06 06:30:00

Author:
Thegide
Posts: 1465


Time and time and time again, study after study, as well as basic observation, has proven that more education leads to less risky behaviour. Whether this is proper sexual health education and provision of contraceptives (especially barrier methods! especially!) or full and frank disclosure about drugs, more education means fewer teen pregnancies and overdoses. It is utter nonsense that people continue to wilfully spread ignorance and lies, as though not talking about something makes it not exist.

Interesting point about education you've made there. I obviously can't speak for others but my school did a great job of educating students about the risks of the internet and, well, an okay job of sex education. Yet I recall spending only one lesson (50mins) being taught about drugs. That just seems downright pathetic to me, that's not nearly enough time to even start scratching the surface. We once spent 2 days learning about cyber bullying and even had extra guest speakers come in.

If they devoted the same time and effort to drug education as they did to other equally important subjects I personally think teenagers would have a very different view on drugs. Hell, they might not even feel the need to 'experiment', since it would take away most of the mystery that surrounds drugs. I'm sure curiosity of the unknown is what draws a lot of people in.
2011-06-06 06:32:00

Author:
SR20DETDOG
Posts: 2431


To further your point, that very lie is what makes the 'Just Say No/war on drugs' nonsense so ineffective. We tell teenagers "All drugs are evil! One puff of a joint and you will jump off a roof! Pot is just as bad as PCP and heroin and cocaine mixed together!"

Then they go smoke a joint after school one day, eat an entire box of cookies, and conclude that they are being lied to. And then try everything else, some of which can in fact be incredibly dangerous.

Which also leads to the argument that weed is a gateway drug and if you do weed, you will soon start doing harder drugs. I find this conception entirely untrue. The problem I see brings us back to the dealers and the illegal status of marijuana. With pot being illegal, dealers that deal harder drugs like cocaine and heroin also have to carry pot. This means that people (even teenagers) that only buy pot from this dealer are exposed to the harder drugs this dealer will carry with them.
2011-06-06 06:56:00

Author:
booXely
Posts: 654


@ Biorogue;
What I said was that drug offenses accounted for 1/4 of all convictions - and that half of those convictions were for cannabis.
Half of 25% is 12.5% - you are confirming what I said.
& To clarify - Heroin is a brand name opium product... it IS the same drug as opium. Heroin is just a processed form of opium. Heroin is now a shorthand for Opium derivatives as much as Hoover is a shorthand for Vacuum Cleaner, or JetSki is for personal watercraft.


& Cannabis is not a gateway drug.
Most "Hard-Drug" users started out on Alcohol and Cigarettes... they are the "real" gateway drugs.

You may not realise it... but legally prescribed drugs kill something like 300% more people than all the illegal drugs deaths put together.

By any barometer you care to measure it by - as of RIGHT NOW - legal drugs kill more than illegal drugs. But illegal drugs are still the big problem?

And when you think that most of the problems with illegal drugs is caused BY THE FACT THEY ARE ILLEGAL - rather than any inherent harm or predisposition to turn people into criminals caused by the drug itself.
Make something illegal and the price will drastically increase. This massive price hike cause by it's illegality (the higher the penalty, the higher the price) - it what fuels nearly all crime associated with it - either by gangs fighting each other for the control of the market - or by the users trying to raise funds to feed their habit.
Making it legal and AFFORDABLE (no point taxing it to the eyeballs if all you are doing is recreating the blackmarket for it) would eliminate the "social crime" aspect - meaning people wouldn't be getting shot and robbed over it.
Then there's the health aspect - that legally controlled drugs would be of a guaranteed quality and purity - they wouldn't be cut with nasty filler - which is what cause most deaths and over-doses.

There's no two ways about it - it is the illegality of the drug that is the problem... not the drugs themselves.


As for the drug-drive argument... I don't see how keeping them illegal is going to improve that problem at all.



Drug experimentation has caused an "improvement" in all of our lives... and if you think I'm wrong - then throw out just about every book, song or piece of music written in the last 100 years... because most of the 'good' ones were all a direct result of the drugs that those people took.
Even going back through history - Van Gogh - was off his face on Laudenum (a mix of alcohol and opium). Just about every great artist, writer, singer or song writer has experimented with drugs - to the improvement of their art.
Drug experimentation opens your mind to new experiences more so than just about anything else... maybe why most people who have never tried drugs are so boring
2011-06-06 11:31:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


There's no two ways about it - it is the illegality of the drug that is the problem... not the drugs themselves.

As for the drug-drive argument... I don't see how keeping them illegal is going to improve that problem at all.

Not exactly. Many drugs hinder and/or impair rational thought, making them dangerous when you're performing a more complicated task, like driving from place to place or working a power tool. Alcohol and tobacco might be the gateway drugs, but it's not like the other drugs they're trying are any safer. They're called "gateway" for a reason: they're the drugs that get you into more serious, dangerous drugs...

It's not like making them all perfectly legal is gonna solve this problem either. You're only asking for trouble if you get someone on an LSD trip behind the wheel of a car. Drugs (alcohol or likewise) cause accidents and deaths, whether we like it or not. Alcohol is a problem, but it's something that we can at least monitor. There aren't any accurate methods of testing to prove that someone had just been smoking a joint or took a shot. The science just isn't there to facilitate it. And, either way, you're still driving intoxicated, so you're still going to jail.


Drug experimentation opens your mind to new experiences more so than just about anything else... maybe why most people who have never tried drugs are so boring

... so I can call my really cool friends (and myself for that matter) boring then? :/

I can't deny that there have been many artisans and other pop culture folk that have taken drugs... but there's always their drawbacks. Their personal life suffers. Family and loved ones become more estranged. Health declines. Depression and thoughts of suicide become more prevalent. Sure, the initial high you get would feel quite good, but is it worth the aftermath?

That, and saying that drugs "open up your mind to new experiences more so than just about anything else"... that is an outright lie. I haven't smoked anything my whole life, and I can't say that my life is boring. My church, school, summertime fun, retreats, camping, cool events, competitions- if I can't say those change my life, then I can't say that I ever lived. In fact, the most significant thing that's changed my life doesn't involve drugs whatsoever... and it's right on this site. I can say that I don't take drugs, but I can't say that my life is more boring because of it. In fact, I think it's quite refreshing to have your mind on other things besides scheduling your next smoking session.
2011-06-06 14:26:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack
Posts: 5757


"I know this is not a very popular idea. You don't hear it too often any more … but it's the truth. I have taken drugs before and … I had a real good time. Sorry. Didn't murder anybody, didn't rape anybody, didn't rob anybody, didn't beat anybody, didn't lose – hmm – one ******* job, laughed my *** off, and went about my day. Sorry. Now, where's my commercial? "
- Bill Hicks


It's something they try and play down... but the reason why many people take drugs - the same reason why they drink alcohol - is because it's fun.
There's nothing more boring than a straight lace buzz-kill. And many normal activities - such as horse riding - are far more dangerous statistically than many "hard drugs"... but the point is, you aren't going to see any anti-horse-riding commercials filling you full of misinformation and skewed statistics from inaccurate reports about the evils of horse-riding are you?!.


And "Drugs Open Your Mind" is not a lie - how would you know it was a lie if you have not experienced it for yourself? - I'm speaking from 1st hand experience & I can tell you that it's 100% true. Until you've gone through the looking glass/down the rabbit hole, you won;t know what's on the other side.
Do you think Jim Morrison would have founded The Doors, or even called his band "The Doors" if not for the drugs? - do you think their experimental style would have evolved had they all been sober?
Would the Beatles have written Sgt.Peppers?
Todays society would be a cultural wasteland without the direct influence of mind-altering substances.
So isn't it a bit hypocritical of the Media to demonise drug taking on the one hand - and yet lauding the result of that drug taking as works of genius on the other?

Edit: & for thousands of years, right into pre-history, the "wisemen/shaman/holymen" have ingested toxic chemicals in order to enduce hallucinations and visions that they interpreted as divine wisdom.
2011-06-06 14:52:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Interesting thread, and the two post above illustrate opposite ends of the spectrum nicely, lol. Jim Morrisson is an bizarre choice to use as an example of the enhancing effects of drug use considering it's almost certain that he died from an overdose. Down the rabbit hole indeed.... : /2011-06-06 20:25:00

Author:
julesyjules
Posts: 1156


Stoicrow, there's so much in your statement that's not even wrong. That doesn't mean it's right, it means it misses the mark so entirely that to call it 'wrong' implies that you're even working in the same ballpark.

People don't drink alcohol because it's fun? Yes we do.

As for the link between drugs and creativity, sorry, but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Most 19th century poets were off their heads on laudanum a lot of the time--Samuel Taylor Coleridge's Kublai Khan was written on a particularly intense binge. Aldous Huxley dropped acid--go read The Doors of Perception. Ray Charles was on heroin for ages, and just listen to what he produced. Joni Mitchell, Jefferson Airplane/Starship--heck, all the psychedelic bands of the 60's and 70's.

Saying that The Beatles wrote Sgt Pepper high means they have no talent is a logical fallacy. They did have talent, the drugs took it in another direction. There are few musical groups where one can look at such a radical change in their music as happened when they released Sgt Pepper. The influence of pot and acid especially are obvious.

The entire electronic music movement is one created by and in synergy with drugs. Trance, especially, is music that is quite specifically designed to enhance the MDMA experience. Or look further back--you think the average reggae or dancehall artist isn't completely off their head on pot all the time? (I'm not talking about Shaggy. I'm talking about real reggae.)

The mistake you're making, unsurprisingly given where you live and the dominant media messages there, is that there is no use for drugs, and that use of them is a moral issue. Neither is true. All drugs make you feel different--caffeine is a drug, by the way, but of course you knew that and would never drink a cup of coffee to wake yourself up in the morning--and all drugs can be dangerous. Sure, the LD50 for GHB or heroin is rather lower than the LD50 for caffeine or nicotine or tetrahydrocannabinoid, but that doesn't in and of itself mean there is a problem. Anything to excess is damaging, anything without safety precautions is damaging. Fundamentally there is no difference between drug use and horseback riding. They are both activities, they both have risks and benefits, and they can both be fun (watching a sunrise on mushrooms, e.g.) or terrifying (being on top of a horse who has suddenly decided a gallop is a great idea right now).

I understand that you have been saturated with Just Say No messages in the USA, and therefore to an extent you are not responsible for that portion of your opinion. You are responsible, as a thinking human being, for educating yourself about the truth of a given matter, and not merely parroting what you are told.
2011-06-06 21:26:00

Author:
roux-
Posts: 379


Interesting thread, and the two post above illustrate opposite ends of the spectrum nicely, lol. Jim Morrisson is an bizarre choice to use as an example of the enhancing effects of drug use considering it's almost certain that he died from an overdose. Down the rabbit hole indeed.... : /

Of course, noone has ever died from nice legal alcohol? (also, alcohol probably played it's part in his overdose aswell - but alcohol doesn't count does it?!)


Don't believe drugs can change your perception on things? Read On (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/tim-lott-i-took-lsd-when-i-was-15-and-my-life-will-never-be-the-same-again-523021.html)

Also - the font Webdings was allegedly inspired after Bill Gates went on a 3 day LSD binge in 1978 just after the IBM Basic Compiler Presentation.
Now Bill Gates... there's a guy who has obviously done NOTHING with his life
2011-06-07 07:57:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Macnme, correct me if i'm wrong, but you seem to be telling people that they should do drugs?

Look, i'm no saint, but if someone doesn't want to, don't try to force them. Drugs may have been used in the past to inspire/create, but that doesn't mean they are the key for doing so.
I personally think it's a pretty lazy to think "Hmm...writers block, better trip!"

The bottom line is, hard drugs do ruin lives. I'll be honest with you here, I smoke cannabis and only cannabis...i've never tried any other substance other than alcohol & probably never will. I don't like the idea of being killed through an overdose...And don't say "You can OD on alcohol!" because, although i'm aware of this, I have my limits and i'm responsible enough to stick to them.

Now, this makes me think that maybe harder drug users will have their limits too? Well, maybe they do, but from what I know, the withdrawal and craving symptoms of harder drugs are far more intense and destructive to the body compared to alcohol. Yes, alcohol does have symptoms too, but compared to a meth addict losing his teeth and his skin falling off, i'd say it's the lesser of two evils.

I can definitely see the advantages of legalising all drugs, and i'm probably wavering on the side of agreeing completely. I just find it hard to see a government who will gladly hand out black tar heroin and LSD. You might say by making them more accessible, you'd be risking having more people use them.

I dunno...it's a tough one, I've got my heart set on one thing though, legalise cannabis! lol.
2011-06-07 23:01:00

Author:
Mr_T-Shirt
Posts: 1477


Also - the font Webdings was allegedly inspired after Bill Gates went on a 3 day LSD binge in 1978 just after the IBM Basic Compiler Presentation.
Now Bill Gates... there's a guy who has obviously done NOTHING with his life

And that's significant in this argument because...? I don't see any major hits being typed-up in that bulls*** font anytime soon. Oh, and whoever said he was high when he invented the home computer? Besides, they use the word allegedly for a reason: it hasn't been proven. So it's as false as it is true.

I don't know what you're trying to prove, but just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it's the truth. Plus, not all songwriters get high to make their hits:


“Believe me, you can live a lot better life without trying some of the things like pills and other drugs, because it’s almost certain death to be addicted to them. I’m a very lucky man. God spared me—I mean it was a miraculous salvation, my being alive.”
Johnny Cash 9/72

We don't have Jason Mraz smoking a joint before each of his performances. Michael Jackson didn't have to get high to make his smash hits. And, well, if you wanna see the long-term effects of drugs, just take a look at Ozzy Osbourne; he's permanently stoned.

I don't care if you or other dedicated drug users went on with your daily lives, but this is a family site. A family site focused on a family game. Kids already have a hard time dealing with all of this "drugs are AWESOME" crap and "you ain't cool if you don't do drugs" at school and in public. Let's at least spare them that pressure on them over here.

Whatever happened to the old community that I used to know and love?
2011-06-08 00:06:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack
Posts: 5757


"
And "Drugs Open Your Mind" is not a lie - how would you know it was a lie if you have not experienced it for yourself? - I'm speaking from 1st hand experience & I can tell you that it's 100% true. Until you've gone through the looking glass/down the rabbit hole, you won;t know what's on the other side.
Do you think Jim Morrison would have founded The Doors, or even called his band "The Doors" if not for the drugs? - do you think their experimental style would have evolved had they all been sober?
Would the Beatles have written Sgt.Peppers?
Todays society would be a cultural wasteland without the direct influence of mind-altering substances.
So isn't it a bit hypocritical of the Media to demonise drug taking on the one hand - and yet lauding the result of that drug taking as works of genius on the other?

Edit: & for thousands of years, right into pre-history, the "wisemen/shaman/holymen" have ingested toxic chemicals in order to enduce hallucinations and visions that they interpreted as divine wisdom.

You can post example after example of people who have done incredible things while under the influence and I can post example after example of people, famous and not, who have ruined their lives and their family's lives because of drug use. I have a family member addicted to coke. He's lost two wives, countless girlfriends, his kids, and others, due to this. He's been arrested countless times, been in rehab 12 times. Robbed my grandmother, his mother, while she was at a church retreat. We haven't shut him completely out, we help him when we can, but it gets old after 20 years of this pound ampersand question mark at sign. He's done nothing creative in his life. I could list countless others. Lindsay Lohan, Charlie Sheen. Heck, look at Dr. Drew's Celebrity Rehab.

I think the people's lives that have been destroyed due to drugs and alcohol, far outweighs the list of people whose lives were in enriched.
Anyway, I guess we're at a stalemate. You won't change my mind and I won't change yours. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
2011-06-08 07:34:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


So are you saying that alcohol should be banned outright?

You seem to recognise that there is no real difference between alcohol dependence and any other form of hard drug dependence... and I'm not saying that everyone that takes drugs turns into a creative genius.
But there is a disparity in the law - when a relatively harmless drug - such as cannabis - has harsh legal penalties applied to it - when other more harmful drugs, like tobacco and alcohol - are legally available.
Alot of the problems associated with the illegality of drugs - such as the price - are what create the need to steal. Maybe if coke was legal then your grandmother wouldn't have been robbed?

When someone does something stupid while drunk (alcohol is related to more criminal acts than any other drug) - do we blame alcohol and the entire alcohol producing industry? Or do we blame the single individual who did the stupid act because they couldn't handle their drink?
Blame the individual - rather than society at large.

& Surely you can admit to the need for reform of the law as it stands?
If not - what is your argument for keeping the status-quo - when even the global drug advisory body admits that it has completely failed in all of it's stated objectives?


I'm not saying people should take drugs - any more than I'm saying people should drink alcohol. I'm saying if you want to do that, then you should be allowed to, with no legal repercussions. It's your life, you should be allowed to live it as you wish.
And that legally available, controlled sale of drugs is far more preferable to illegally available, uncontrolled sale of drugs.

Many children find it easier to get their hands on illegal drugs than alcohol... because there are controls on the sale of alcohol - you need ID and need to buy it from a legal vendor. A drug dealer won't ask you for ID.
2011-06-08 07:41:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Many children find it easier to get their hands on illegal drugs than alcohol... because there are controls on the sale of alcohol - you need ID and need to buy it from a legal vendor. A drug dealer won't ask you for ID.

Are you sure? Because I can just swipe a beer out of the fridge right now and get it over with.
2011-06-08 14:13:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack
Posts: 5757


Are you sure? Because I can just swipe a beer out of the fridge right now and get it over with.

So long as the owner of the beer doesn't beat you like a ginger step-child

Which proves another point.
When a child gets into their parents alcohol cabinet - who gets the blame... The Alcohol Industry as a whole? The Child? or The Parent?

Why is it that Alcohol gets a free ride in the "blame" stakes - when the entire drugs industry (and "drugs" is an all encompassing term for many completely different substances) gets the collective blame for every idiot that does something stupid?
2011-06-08 14:43:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Alot of the problems associated with the illegality of drugs - such as the price - are what create the need to steal. Maybe if coke was legal then your grandmother wouldn't have been robbed?


you think he was high when he robbed her!? He was stone cold sober. He stole everything out the house so he could get his next fix. That's what drugs do, they consume you and control you to the point you'll do anything to get that next high. That's why we have 2 dollar crack wh*%@s out on the streets. I'm not talking just the hardcore drugs either. I've had my problems with substance abuse, albeit it was alcohol and tobacco. Crap! don't have time to finish this argument. Got to take my daughter to volleyball. Let's just say I respectfully disagree. later.
2011-06-08 14:52:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


you think he was high when he robbed her!? He was stone cold sober. He stole everything out the house so he could get his next fix. That's what drugs do, they consume you and control you to the point you'll do anything to get that next high. That's why we have 2 dollar crack wh*%@s out on the streets. I'm not talking just the hardcore drugs either. I've had my problems with substance abuse, albeit it was alcohol and tobacco. Crap! don't have time to finish this argument. Got to take my daughter to volleyball. Let's just say I respectfully disagree. later.


Right, so he was sober (if he was sober, then how can you blame the drugs?)... and didn't have enough money for his next fix.
Well that was presumably because of the HUGE price of illegal drugs - caused by their prohibition. If you outlaw chocolate - not only would the price triple or quadruple (at the very least) - but also the quality would go right down... and you would have criminal gangs organising it's supply, and chocoholics robbing and stealing in order to fund their habit.
Also, When it's illegal, you cannot be sure where your next "fix" will come from, meaning that you have to spend time chasing dealers and getting ripped off by them... rather than having a cheap, constant and LEGAL supply.

If it were legal, then he would A) be able to afford it and B) have the time to hold down a job instead of having to spend his time hunting for his tipple of choice.

Of course - some people are just ******-bags - no amount of drugs or sobriety will change that fact.

But, The reason why you don't have large numbers of people stealing in order to fund their alcohol habit is because alcohol is cheap and readily available. The lessons learned from alcohol prohibition have clearly not been learned when it comes to drugs prohibition.
2011-06-08 15:21:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


You're right... alcohol is the most abused drug in the world.
But when people develop alcoholism, do the governments of the world call for a crack down on alcohol producers?
No, the blame is shifted onto the individual that has developed alcoholism... it's their fault for developing alcoholism.

But when someone develops a (illegal) drug addiction - they call for a crack down on producers, importers and sellers. It's no longer the individuals fault.

Why the disparity?

But just look how much WORSE the alcohol problem got when it was made illegal!
The problem was exasperated by prohibition - not improved.

Mexico is a war zone because of the WAR on drugs... it's the WAR stance that causes that.. not the "Drugs".
Legalising drugs would remove that problem.
When alcohol was prohibited, it also created a "War-Zone".

If you ban any substance that people actually want to buy, then a criminal organisation will pop-up to meet that demand... no matter how many of these organisations you crush, the need to buy will always be there - and following the rules of supply and demand - someone will supply to meet the demand. The only solution is to legalise and regulate.


What we have now is the worst excesses of drugs prohibition...

The global illegal drugs trade is worth more annually than the global tourism trade. None of that money is taxed, and goes straight into the pockets of drugs barons and terrorists.
That's right, prohibition funds terrorism.

Where do you think the Taliban are getting the funds to wage a decade long war with the country that spends 20 times it's closest rival on military spending?

I'm saying, instead of spending Billions on waging an unwinnable war against drugs... accept that drugs are something that exist, legalise them, tax them - regulate and control their sale. You would then see a decrease in crime, criminal organisations would have their funding stopped, and there would be an over-all improvement in public health. Not to mention that all that money would now be floating around in the "real" economy, instead of the black market.

The worst thing that could happen to a drug baron is legalisation... now when you've got the criminal overlords saying "Please Keep This Law", you should be asking yourself who the law is actually helping/hindering.
2011-06-09 07:48:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


For anyone that is truly interested in this subject, there was a debate on Australian TV yesterday (perfect timing ), I haven't watched it yet myself because I had to go. But it can be seen here (http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/series/big%20ideas). Should be interesting to see what they have to say.2011-06-09 07:54:00

Author:
SR20DETDOG
Posts: 2431


Proof that a more liberal approach may work? (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html)


"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," - "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does.
2011-06-09 08:51:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


weed not war2011-06-10 18:58:00

Author:
Shhabbazz
Posts: 746


I thought today would be the perfect day to revive this thread...especially since Amy Winehouse died today.

Sorry, but I'm mad as hell that someone as talented as her is dead.

Kids! Stay away from them at all cost...no matter what anyone says to you. <3
2011-07-23 21:07:00

Author:
TheCountessZ
Posts: 537


Wow.. I actually agree with Macnme on something? Scary huh? lol

Someone get Big Dog on the phone, it's the big one.

@Countess: She was just a mainstream pop-artist, a great man called Garret Fitzgerald died earlier this year and it wasn't as big as a popstar's death.

It's her fault she isn't around anymore, Alice Cooper took action on his addiction when he noticed how bad they were for him, and he's still going.
2011-07-23 21:17:00

Author:
Tecnoguy1
Posts: 206


Come see, everyone! We have a real-life know-it-all in our midst!

That's why I'm mad, Tecnoguy1. Also, you said she was just a "mainstream pop-artist". That's why I knew about her.
2011-07-23 21:56:00

Author:
TheCountessZ
Posts: 537


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ead-KYIImoE2011-07-23 22:19:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728


holy crap! when did this happen? I didn't even hear about it2011-07-24 01:51:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


holy crap! when did this happen? I didn't even hear about it
Just a few hours ago.
2011-07-24 02:17:00

Author:
Ayneh
Posts: 2454


Duh..... Drugs suck, only noobs use them!!! 2011-07-24 03:03:00

Author:
zzmorg82
Posts: 948


Duh..... Drugs suck, only noobs use them!!!
Did you...

did you even read the thread?
2011-07-24 03:20:00

Author:
Arkei
Posts: 1432


Come see, everyone! We have a real-life know-it-all in our midst!

That's why I'm mad, Tecnoguy1. Also, you said she was just a "mainstream pop-artist". That's why I knew about her.

Well, the fact still stands, it's her fault, and I'm not at all surprised.
2011-07-24 10:07:00

Author:
Tecnoguy1
Posts: 206


*Ahem*

Why don't we wait for a cause of death report?
How do we know she didn't commit suicide?

Sorry to be the voice of reason :blush:


I mean, Hendricks died at 27 from choking on vomit induced by mixing alcohol and sleeping pills - both legally available.

One thing I can tell you with certainty - she didn't die of a Cannabis overdose.


Also, none of you would even know her name were it not for her drug themed breakthrough hit "Rehab";
Hypocrite Much?
2011-07-24 10:44:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


what is it with the ripe young age of 27? Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, Jim Morrison, Brian Jones, and Janis Joplin -- All 272011-07-24 13:50:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


Musicians also die at other ages as well... there is nothing special about the age 272011-07-24 13:55:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


I know that. I'm just saying it's weird is all.2011-07-24 14:13:00

Author:
biorogue
Posts: 8424


*Ahem*

Why don't we wait for a cause of death report?
How do we know she didn't commit suicide?

Sorry to be the voice of reason :blush:

What out for some main-stream popfan that might rip your head off for saying boo to their hero.
2011-07-24 16:13:00

Author:
Tecnoguy1
Posts: 206


Nothing of value was lost.2011-07-25 08:08:00

Author:
Bremnen
Posts: 1800


Bah, I really don't see the point in alterate your perception of reality with substances...being them drugs or alcohol.
Just a vile way to escape from reality imho.
You can recreate yourself if you're bored in so many ways.
And you can be trasgressive in so many other creative ways...

Drugs and alcohol are fail.
Said that, I don't mind if they legalize them, so everyone who wants to abuse them and die will leave this world and make it a better place.

Sorry for the rudeness but when I see all the attention given to spolied brats instead of innocent people, I really figure out that the world is going down the toilet.
2011-07-25 08:30:00

Author:
OmegaSlayer
Posts: 5112


Bah, I really don't see the point in alterate your perception of reality with substances...being them drugs or alcohol.
Just a vile way to escape from reality imho.
You can recreate yourself if you're bored in so many ways.
And you can be trasgressive in so many other creative ways...

Drugs and alcohol are fail.
Said that, I don't mind if they legalize them, so everyone who wants to abuse them and die will leave this world and make it a better place.

Sorry for the rudeness but when I see all the attention given to spolied brats instead of innocent people, I really figure out that the world is going down the toilet.

Couldn't agree more.

When you look at the children of today, I don't really see much hope in the future, only the people who have a drive will get a decent job.

Everyone else, well, they'll be left with the left-overs I suppose.
2011-07-25 09:14:00

Author:
Tecnoguy1
Posts: 206


"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."
Socrates (469 BC–399 BC)

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on
frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond
words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and
respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise
[disrespectful] and impatient of restraint" (Hesiod, 8th century BC)

"What is happening to our young
people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They
ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions.
Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"
Plato (424 BC – 347 BC)
2011-07-25 10:02:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Bah, I really don't see the point in alterate your perception of reality with substances...being them drugs or alcohol.
Just a vile way to escape from reality imho.
You can recreate yourself if you're bored in so many ways.
And you can be trasgressive in so many other creative ways...

Drugs and alcohol are fail.
Said that, I don't mind if they legalize them, so everyone who wants to abuse them and die will leave this world and make it a better place.

Sorry for the rudeness but when I see all the attention given to spolied brats instead of innocent people, I really figure out that the world is going down the toilet.

Expand your mind bro.


Couldn't agree more.

When you look at the children of today, I don't really see much hope in the future, only the people who have a drive will get a decent job.

Everyone else, well, they'll be left with the left-overs I suppose.

It's better to die than to have an office or factory job.
2011-07-25 10:50:00

Author:
Bremnen
Posts: 1800


Expand your mind bro.

I'm more open minded than you think.
I really don't mind if someone smokes a pot or drinks a beer once in a while, though making a lifestyle out of it...nah, it's idiocy...even if you want to address a shamanic way of life, the lack of particularity of the moment, the routine of the addiction, would spoil all the spiritual meaning.



It's better to die than to have an office or factory job.

I might even agree with that...but why paying money to destroy yourself slowly while you can do it creatively for free and in a quicker way?
2011-07-25 11:09:00

Author:
OmegaSlayer
Posts: 5112


So - as it turns out - Amy Winehouse did not take any illegal drugs on the night she died, according to the coroner's report. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14635384).
Alcohol was present in her system - but of course no one is going to call for Alcohol to be banned - no matter how many deaths it is implicated in. (http://www.worldometers.info/alcohol/)

This fact, however, was considerably under-reported - considering the open speculation that she had died of a drug over-dose in the wake of her death. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018126/Amy-Winehouse-dead-Ketamine-ecstasy-cocaine-bought-night-before.html)*
It's no wonder the general public have such a skewed view of drug use

*Don't read the DailyMail kiddies - it's bad for your eyes, and your brain
2011-08-26 22:27:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


So... you're saying... lion leaf is bad? 2011-08-26 22:44:00

Author:
tanrockstan34
Posts: 1076


Never tried Lion Leaf TBH - but can't be any more dangerous than alcohol.

I just find it very duplicitous - that based on NO evidence at all, they can speculate that "It was definitely the drugs that killed her!" -
And yet, when there is evidence that alcohol could be to blame they lead with "?alcohol was present, but it cannot be determined as yet if it played a role in her death."

Just weeks before they were considering tightening the drug laws - because of the misreporting about her cause of death based on no evidence.
But when there is evidence that it may be an alcohol related death - they shift the blame away from alcohol?

Why is there the apologist tone when reporting alcohol related deaths? - But a condemning tone when reporting drug related deaths?

Why the duplicity?

Of course, it's got nothing to do with the fact that Brewery's are major contributers to all political parties and advertise widely in newspapers
2011-08-26 23:49:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Lion leaf is from a LBP level... it is fictional. DX2011-08-27 00:06:00

Author:
tanrockstan34
Posts: 1076


Weird.
Lion Leaf is actually a "cannabis substitute" - not as potent and not subject to the same restrictive laws.
I've seen it for sale in those Legal High Head Shops.
It's not as fictional as you think
2011-08-27 00:09:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


...Because we all don't dance to the beat of just one drum
What migh tbe right for you, might not be right for some
But the law is the law, and it saddens me to say-
"Do drugs, and it's off to jail, you bum!"

Anywhom, I don't care what people do. Just do it legally. Write up a bill. Call your local congresman. Stage a demonstration. But for god's sake, STOP WHINING!
2011-08-27 01:42:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


...Because we all don't dance to the beat of just one drum
What migh tbe right for you, might not be right for some
But the law is the law, and it saddens me to say-
"Do drugs, and it's off to jail, you bum!"

Anywhom, I don't care what people do. Just do it legally. Write up a bill. Call your local congresman. Stage a demonstration. But for god's sake, STOP WHINING!

"Whining" would imply that it's an illegitimate complaint.
Millions of cannabis users being persecuted by the law is a legitimate complaint. Especially if you weigh up the actual cost/harm to society - compared with alcohol (by far the most damaging substance to society that we have).

If the law is unjust - then is it right to disobey it?

What good do you think "writing a letter" will do - when they ignore the advice of their own drug advisory council?

What we need is an "I Am Spartacus" moment - where millions of people all gather - and spark up a big fatty boombatty as one united people. Better bring a mountain of munchies too

"If the words 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on."
Terence McKenna
2011-08-27 02:09:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Interesting topic...

I think it's ridiculous that alcohol, being as harmful as it is, stays legal while less harmful things like cannabis are banned :/
Oh how stupid people can be...
2011-08-27 10:56:00

Author:
TNSv
Posts: 302


I already said stage a demonstration. Go do whatever you need to. Just don't break the law. That is what makes a protest illegitimate. Keep within the confines of the current laws, and stage a demonstration.2011-08-27 19:06:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


I already said stage a demonstration. Go do whatever you need to. Just don't break the law. That is what makes a protest illegitimate. Keep within the confines of the current laws, and stage a demonstration.


Tell that to Ghandi, or Rosa Parks, or the East Germans who crossed the Berlin Wall, or the Protesters in Egypt/Syria/Iran/Saudi Arabia/China etc etc. Just about every major advancement in social justice (such as the abolishment of slavery) started with an act of civil disobedience.
2011-08-27 19:27:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


Those were all people who were being dealt a great GREAT injustice. Cases of crimes against humanity. Drug laws, while I agree, are a little harsh, are hardly a crime against humanity. You cannot compare the legalization of marijuana to the abolition of slavery or civil rights because you aren't personally suffering from lack of your weed. If you were, I am sure you could get a prescription.2011-08-29 03:53:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


Well, it depends on what you define as "personally suffering";

Is being denied an aspect of your freedom a "personal suffering" or a "great injustice"? ;
To what extent should someones personal freedoms be encroached?
What about a cannabis smokers "civil rights"? - or do they not count?
What about Rastafarians? - You are denying them their own religious freedoms?

Cannabis in particular has been politicised - it has nothing to do with "right or wrong/ "good or bad/ "harmful or harmless" - and everything to do with fooling the electorate and securing votes. (and hypocritically, the past few American Presidents have admitted, but not openly, that they too have experimented with cannabis. Kind of negates the whole "Cannabis will kill your ambition"/"Cannabis is a harmful gateway drug" argument)

If the act of fulfilling your personal freedom was causing harm to someone, then you could argue that removing that freedom was justified.
But as has been plainly illustrated through-out this thread - alcohol is far more harmful, both to the individual and to society at large, than cannabis could ever hope to be.

Surely you can see that imprisoning or punishing someone for experimenting with or using a "harmless drug" (in comparison to alcohol) - is itself a "great injustice" and causes "personal suffering".

Why should I be denied the pleasure of smoking a joint out in the fresh air and sunshine (without fear of being unjustly persecuted by the law)? When someone who has a personal preference for alcohol is allowed to? Just because I happen to prefer a more harmless drug than the one the authorities would prefer I used?
When the risk factor that the person partaking in alcohol will commit some kind of criminal act once inebriated is FAR higher than someone who is high on cannabis?

And the social cost of policing, arresting, convicting and imprisoning those cannabis users is money that could be FAR more effectively used tackling "actual crime".

I just want the freedom to live my life how I want to live it - without getting "hassled by the man".



How can ANY government justify this insane law?

Especially (refer to OP) - when the global advisory body on drugs policy is saying as much.

Or do you think you know more about it than they do?
2011-08-29 04:26:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


I agree with a lot of what you said, but I feel that matters of personal specific freedoms should be settled in court. Matters of life and death should be handled with vigilantism.

As for your religious freedoms argument, should a person be able to sacrifice a cat or a dog for religious reasons? Even though the law calls that animal cruelty, should they be exempt? Absolutely not. For a law to work, it must have either NO exceptions, or it should not be a law. In this way, drug laws are flawed. But flawed as they may be, we, the enlightened, should fight them with honesty, civility, and common sense.

I, as a sober, straight edge former employee of a drug rehab clinic, do not believe in pot laws as they stand. Nor do I see any way to police it fairly. But I still do not see an urgent need to break the laws to amend them.

If you live in Scotland, just hop on a boat and come over here to the US. You can get a prescription for marijuana if you have minor back pain. It is that easy. That way, you can get your bud, and you and I can stop this debate. Win win.
2011-08-30 00:18:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


This has probably been stated already but no matter if something is outlawed people will still find ways to engage in that activity. If production stops on said products people will produce their own. Look at Prohibition and Speakeasys. It is the whole tell a child not to do something and they're more likely to do it in the end concept.2011-08-30 05:29:00

Author:
tanrockstan34
Posts: 1076


I'd sooner hop back over to Amsterdam, where you can just buy it in a specialist cafe, without having to pretend there is something wrong with you for wanting to smoke it

Imagine having to ask a doctor for a prescription of Alcohol?
What possible medical reason could you have for wanting to ingest it?

Cannabis was made illegal through a process of defamation and fraud from vested interests who had finincial motivations for seeing it made illegal. If the same evidence was used today to try and make it illegal, it would be thrown out.
If you don't feel there is a pressing need for America to change it's drugs laws, then look at it's budget, and look at how much is spent on prisoners, and then look at how many of those prisoners are in jail just for cannabis use/possesion.
America loves money right? Well, there's a quick easy way to get some.

I mean, how do they square that circle?
Official Line 1: "Cannabis is BAD for you, it's ILLEGAL, take it and FACE THE CONSEQUENCES!"
Official Line 2: "Cannabis is MEDICINAL, if there is something wrong with you take some and it'll make you feel BETTER!"

They just can't admit that it's also a recreational and social habit. If you go to Amsterdam, and go to one of the Cannabis Cafe's, it just a far more friendly and fun atmosphere than going to a pub. Everyone is friendly, relaxed, chilled out and up for a laugh... In just about any pub in Scotland there'll be at least 1 massive fight a week - if not a night.
But there's nothing wrong with alcohol is there - CANNABIS is the real evil

See, you also have to set my views on cannabis in the context of Scotland - Alcohol is a massive problem here - a blight on society - that legalisation of cannabis could solve. But the only way they want to tackle it is by making alcohol more expensive.
2011-08-30 15:07:00

Author:
Macnme
Posts: 1970


I am all for an alcohol to marijuana trade off. Make one illegal, and legalize the other one. Too bad no politician in his right mind would suggest making alcohol illegal HERE again...2011-08-30 21:37:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd6oJjx8ze0

Bump for some reason.
2011-08-31 01:04:00

Author:
poorjack
Posts: 1806


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy-y-uamSiE2011-08-31 12:56:00

Author:
Ayneh
Posts: 2454


I already said stage a demonstration. Go do whatever you need to. Just don't break the law. That is what makes a protest illegitimate. Keep within the confines of the current laws, and stage a demonstration.

Civil disobedience goes right back to the Greeks. Socrates (I think it was him? it's been mumblemumble years since law classes in high school) even stated explicitly that it is the duty of all reasonable men to disobey unreasonable laws.


I thought today would be the perfect day to revive this thread...especially since Amy Winehouse died today.

Sorry, but I'm mad as hell that someone as talented as her is dead.

Kids! Stay away from them at all cost...no matter what anyone says to you. <3

I realize this is rather late, but you do know that drugs were not found in the autopsy, yes?


...
Also, none of you would even know her name were it not for her drug themed breakthrough hit "Rehab";
Hypocrite Much?

An excellent point.

The funny thing about all this, of course, is how many of you mistake the use of drugs (and again let's not forget that caffeine and nicotine for example are both drugs, and are used recreationally all the time) as a moral issue. Which is almost a uniquely American attitude, rather directly traceable back to the Puritans who settled your country.

Drug use is amoral. That means the concept of using drugs (and, again, a lot of things people ingest every day are drugs--caffeine, for example, and there have been some interesting arguments suggesting that in many ways sugar could be considered a drug due to how it acts on the system beyond its purely nutritive value. Ditto chocolate and the theobromine it contains.) has no moral component; morality and drugs are orthogonal. And frankly I find it sickening how many of you judge others for harmless intoxication. Get off your high horse, and realize that you too ingest drugs on a regular basis.
2011-09-22 22:52:00

Author:
roux-
Posts: 379


LBPCentral Archive Statistics
Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz
Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.