(June 28, 2013 at 2:06 am)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: I know there are people who can use recreational drugs and not get addicted. I also know there are people who are predisposed to addiction (it's genetic). Scientists have had a lot of trouble trying to pinpoint what exactly causes addiction and very recently there's research showing it's biological in basis and caused by the drug. Not all drugs are created equal, drugs that you take for medication now have been through trials to see their potential for misuse. Some are more likely to cause addiction than others, in other words. And addiction, when you first take a drug, before you get addicted you're in control, once you are addicted you feel horrible without the drug. It is a form of suffering. You may be convinced that people want to suffer when they choose to do this, I am more convinced that addiction is a medical condition where someone really cannot control if they want to take a drug or not, the urge is just overwhelming. If everyone used drugs in moderation and addiction is such minor and rare thing, then there's really no need to fuss over this, but people don't. And prescription drug serve a purpose, it's a benefit vs risk thing, and they are the most misused, not the illegal ones.

Yet we sell alcohol to every Tom, Dick, and Harriett that comes into a convenience store or gas station. Why is that?

Here's an article that may be helpful.

(June 27, 2013 at 8:35 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: my position is that i'm not sure if it will stop all the illegal drug trade, and even if it does, we're just trading one for the other. the drugs are bad for people. so we're looking at more addiction and health issues.

Funny how that's the exact opposite of what happened in Portugal when they decriminalized.

---

(June 27, 2013 at 9:05 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: And supposing there's a possibility we could get rid of the cartels, would you be in favour of pursuing them or giving up and legalize?

Why not do both? Murder, kidnapping & robbery are still illegal last time I checked.

I think we need to look at the drug situation through more realistic lens rather than the idealistic idea that all drugs will be legalized. Our society is not prepared for that. Hell, there are millions of people against the legalization of pot, and what is pot gonna do to anybody?

The war on drugs and say no to drugs campaigns were basically misguided and insincere. They tried to say that all drugs are exactly the same, they're all dangerous they're all bad for you. When it's clearly not. There was a fake study saying ecstasy will give you a big hole in your brain, it was government funded. Then this whole gateway drug thing about marijuana. Well it worked out really well, didn't it?

And now people who want to legalize drug are doing the exact same thing. They're saying all drugs are equally safe. No they're not. Alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. Cigarettes actually cause lung cancer. Ecstasy does kill your brain cells but doesn't really cause addiction. Drugs are not all the same. Of all the crimes committed while intoxicated, alcohol related ones are the majority. Drunk driving is a real problem, and some people get violent tendencies when on alcohol. Can you say the same for other drugs? No.

Society has never really viewed recreational drugs scientifically. It's mostly a taboo/societal norm thing. For a long time parents would get mad at kids who do weed, but drink alcohol themselves. When alcohol is more harmful. So things like prohibition and war on drugs, it's more about people's idea of drugs, than what the drug actually does.

And no, addiction isn't a conspiracy trumped up by the war on drugs, I have worked with ppl with addiction, and there are a lot of centres for rehab. I mean, it's real ok? People do go into withdrawal if they stay off their drugs for too long.

Not a single country has legalized hard drugs. Do you not think that it's rather impractical to jump into this without knowing what to expect? Yea, thanks for bringing up portugal. They decriminalized and it worked for them. Decriminalization is not just to get rid of the illegal drug trade, it's because I think it's wrong to jail people who are sick. And it doesn't cause more drug use. Also, why is everyone so sure that once we legalize the very rich and powerful cartels will just up and disappear?

The Czech Republic has legalized (or at least decriminalized) everything, including meth.

(June 28, 2013 at 2:46 pm)festive1 Wrote: The Czech Republic has legalized (or at least decriminalized) everything, including meth.

only decriminalization, which i think should be done for all drugs anyway.

(June 28, 2013 at 9:10 am)Doubting Thomas Wrote: To a certain extent, but it does tend to hurt society to a certain extent when someone becomes addicted. Drugs like crack cocaine or methamphetamine are highly addictive, and there's not really any such thing as an occasional user. It's also highly unlikely that a crack or meth user is going to remain gainfully employed for long, so they either have to resort to public assistance or crime. This is why I generally don't have a problem with marijuana, because it is not addictive like the harder drugs are. You never hear of anyone going to rehab for a marijuana addiction. It's apparently able to enjoy it recreationally without having it interfere with your life.

First I would just like to point out the addiction doesn't necessarily mean you stop being productive, there are different levels of addiction. There are many high functioning alcoholics that drink themselves into a stupor every night, but show up on the job the next day sober and ready to work. But I agree that there are also many unproductive addicts as well. The problem is that many addicts are afraid to seek help because they are fearful of being arrested for their drug use. Decriminalization will at the least take care of a large amount of problems that current addicts face, but it still allows for cartels to create an unregulated product that can hurt the consumer.

(June 28, 2013 at 9:10 am)Doubting Thomas Wrote: The other problem I have with hard drugs like methamphetamine is that the production of meth results for 9 lbs. of toxic waste for every 1 lb. of drug manufactured. All this toxic waste will have to be dealt with, though it could be argued that drug companies being regulated with what they do with their waste is better than a couple of rednecks brewing it up in their trailer park and then throwing the toxic waste outside on the ground or pouring it down the sink.

Exactly, with legalization comes regulation.

---

(June 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: The war on drugs and say no to drugs campaigns were basically misguided and insincere. They tried to say that all drugs are exactly the same, they're all dangerous they're all bad for you. When it's clearly not. There was a fake study saying ecstasy will give you a big hole in your brain, it was government funded. Then this whole gateway drug thing about marijuana. Well it worked out really well, didn't it?

And now people who want to legalize drug are doing the exact same thing. They're saying all drugs are equally safe. No they're not. Alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. Cigarettes actually cause lung cancer. Ecstasy does kill your brain cells but doesn't really cause addiction. Drugs are not all the same. Of all the crimes committed while intoxicated, alcohol related ones are the majority. Drunk driving is a real problem, and some people get violent tendencies when on alcohol. Can you say the same for other drugs? No.

All drugs aren't the same, I don't want to give you the impression that that's what I think. But there is no group that tells you how to use drugs responsibly and for recreational use. When you buy regulated prescription medicine there are instruction on the bottle and the pharmacist also tells you. "Take with food, once in the morning and once in the evening, don't take more than 6 within 24 hours. Side effects may include nausea, headache, constipation, etc." When you get ecstasy from your dealer he doesn't give you instructions and tell you how to use it. But if you were to get ecstasy from a legalized vendor he would have to tell you. "Keep well hydrated and don't take more than 2 in a 8 hour period. Side effects may include a complete sense of euphoria and a rollover the next morning." Plus an unregulated dealer can give you impure ecstasy, and cut it with paint thinner. Under FDA regulations paint thinner would absolutely not be a valid ingredient.

(June 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: Society has never really viewed recreational drugs scientifically. It's mostly a taboo/societal norm thing. For a long time parents would get mad at kids who do weed, but drink alcohol themselves. When alcohol is more harmful. So things like prohibition and war on drugs, it's more about people's idea of drugs, than what the drug actually does.

Agreed.

(June 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: And no, addiction isn't a conspiracy trumped up by the war on drugs, I have worked with ppl with addiction, and there are a lot of centres for rehab. I mean, it's real ok? People do go into withdrawal if they stay off their drugs for too long.

I'm not saying addiction is a conspiracy, just that the assertion that if you take a drug once you will most likely become an addict. The link I posted in one of my previous posts shows that is not true.

(June 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: Not a single country has legalized hard drugs. Do you not think that it's rather impractical to jump into this without knowing what to expect? Yea, thanks for bringing up portugal. They decriminalized and it worked for them. Decriminalization is not just to get rid of the illegal drug trade, it's because I think it's wrong to jail people who are sick. And it doesn't cause more drug use. Also, why is everyone so sure that once we legalize the very rich and powerful cartels will just up and disappear?

Yes not a single country has legalized hard drugs, and we still have very prevalent and powerful cartels. There are two parts to our current drug issues. One contains the problems that come from the consumer like addiction and incarceration. The second contains problems that come from the vendor's side such as violence used in competition, and unsafe products. Decriminalization alleviates the problems of the first, but legalization alleviates both.

(June 28, 2013 at 4:54 pm)plaincents822 Wrote: All drugs aren't the same, I don't want to give you the impression that that's what I think. But there is no group that tells you how to use drugs responsibly and for recreational use.

There are harm reduction programs going on now. Basically giving ppl needles and telling them how to use things as responsibly as possible. The reason there's no info on this is because of the say NO to drugs campaign. Where it's just no, no, no, and if you ask a common person who haven't known any drug users they wouldn't really know which drug causes what. They think it's all the same. I think information can be provided without legalization.

Quote:I'm not saying addiction is a conspiracy, just that the assertion that if you take a drug once you will most likely become an addict. The link I posted in one of my previous posts shows that is not true.

I didn't make this assertion. I know it's not true. I think i said you're in control until you are not. And when the second one happens depends on the individual and is genetic in basis. It also depends on the drug, some are more addictive than others.

Quote:

(June 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: Not a single country has legalized hard drugs. Do you not think that it's rather impractical to jump into this without knowing what to expect? Yea, thanks for bringing up portugal. They decriminalized and it worked for them. Decriminalization is not just to get rid of the illegal drug trade, it's because I think it's wrong to jail people who are sick. And it doesn't cause more drug use. Also, why is everyone so sure that once we legalize the very rich and powerful cartels will just up and disappear?

Yes not a single country has legalized hard drugs, and we still have very prevalent and powerful cartels. There are two parts to our current drug issues. One contains the problems that come from the consumer like addiction and incarceration. The second contains problems that come from the vendor's side such as violence used in competition, and unsafe products. Decriminalization alleviates the problems of the first, but legalization alleviates both.

The problem with unsafe things in drugs ... drugs are by themselves unsafe. These things do make it worse. i will concede that legalization seems to be the only way to solve this problem. But you cannot pretend as if the drugs themselves do not cause dependence, and that selling it is profiting from people's dependence. [/quote]

Why would any of that matter? We sell plenty of drugs that have dependency issues - and plenty of profit is made. We sell drugs for medicinal, therapeutic, and recreational purposes. Most are regulated in some way or another. Merck, as far as I'm aware, hasn't been stockpiling small arms for their ongoing war against federal authorities (and their consumers).

As far as why rich and powerful cartels would disappear..who's to say that they would? Why would they have to? If the production of their product is protected by the laws that protect any other business transaction - and if the overheads in clandestine or distant production and then transport via-smuggling are reduced a "cartel" would be an entirely different beast. Don't you think? Keep in mind, if the folks that ran these cartels wanted to be farmers (that's what marijuana producers..for example, would be) -they'd already be farmers-. They don't, there isn't enough in it for them. I imagine a certain subset would find some other activity where the legality of the product creates huge potential profits.

Instead of talking about whether or not marijuana should be legalised,

Shouldn't we ask why we need permission to possess a plant in the first place?