Leaglize drugs - say what u want

PaganToris · 2002-12-21 01:59:52

Well i know people always say how bad Marijuana is should we leagalize it? i mean its just as bad as tobacco did u know that 3 cannabis joints equals a whole pack of cigaretts so should they leagalize it or not? tell me what u thnx
now coke.Crack.herawin.acid.shrooms.LSD, people who do that r just stupid idiots who need a attitude adjustment!
PLEASE TEL ME WHAT U THANK

soph · 2002-12-21 07:52:21

marijuana is far less potent than cigarettes. they dont cause cancer like cigarettes do, and your lungs can be repaired. the dangers of weed healthwise are mostly trumped up by tobacco companies.

however, they do pose a danger in that they definetly impair judgement. i dont see how we can legalize alcohol and not weed. i think that if we legalized weed, less people would smoke it. in canada and amsterdam, the weed addiction rate is lower.

personally, i dont smoke any drugs, because i dont "need" to, but anything further up the ladder should be illegal, no question.

AltToWar · 2002-12-21 11:37:32

The drug laws are so very, very wrong on so many fronts.

1: Personal drug use crimes are victimless crimes.
2: We spend more on the drug war in this country then we do education, with no effect.
3: Drug laws increase deaths from overdose.
4: Drug laws support the black market.
5: Drug laws support foreign terrorism.
6: Drug laws are totally ineffective, and criminalize it's civilians
7: Drug laws statisticly punish Minorities much more harshly.
8: Drug laws are hypocritical. Our past 2 presidents were past drug users.
9: Drug laws cause more crime then prevent.
10: Drug laws prevent people from seeking treatment.
11: Drug laws prohibit legitimate medical uses.

soph · 2002-12-21 12:39:29

alt, i agree with you on everything but 1 and 7. personal drug use can cause people to be hurt, judgement to be impaired, and personal injury. you dont want to be near someone whos high and angry.

take alcohol...drinking obviously isnt victimless once you get behind a wheel.

7: yes, but this is partially because minorities are more likely to do drugs. they tend to be poorer, and they have nothing else, so they go to drugs. i lived in a poorer area for a good part of my life (it was a new development gone awry), and i saw these things for myself. it is true that richer kids have mommy and daddy bail them out, but they stick to softer drugs, and start later.

AltToWar · 2002-12-21 12:58:45

alt, i agree with you on everything but 1 and 7. personal drug use can cause people to be hurt, judgement to be impaired, and personal injury. you dont want to be near someone whos high and angry.
take alcohol...drinking obviously isnt victimless once you get behind a wheel.
7: yes, but this is partially because minorities are more likely to do drugs. they tend to be poorer, and they have nothing else, so they go to drugs. i lived in a poorer area for a good part of my life (it was a new development gone awry), and i saw these things for myself. it is true that richer kids have mommy and daddy bail them out, but they stick to softer drugs, and start later.

alt, i agree with you on everything but 1 and 7. personal drug use can cause people to be hurt, judgement to be impaired, and personal injury. you dont want to be near someone whos high and angry.

Depending on the drug.

Most of the violence caused by drug users are those who need to find money to pay the black market. If hard drugs like heroin and crack were put in the hands of doctors and psychologists, and were dispensed to addicts on the condition of treatment, there would be no need for violent drug seeking behavior.

Marijuana does not impair reaction time when operating a vehicle. There have been no proven case where marijuana intoxication was the sole cause of a motor vehicle accident.

7: yes, but this is partially because minorities are more likely to do drugs. they tend to be poorer, and they have nothing else, so they go to drugs. i lived in a poorer area for a good part of my life (it was a new development gone awry), and i saw these things for myself. it is true that richer kids have mommy and daddy bail them out, but they stick to softer drugs, and start later.

The color of your skin and your social position mean the difference between community service and 7 years in prison.

One just has to see the statistics for drug criminals in prisons to see that there is a misbalance in the racial makeup of the population.

soph · 2002-12-21 18:45:13

now, im not saying all minorities are like this, but many use their poor background to justify being poor, and rail out against any that succeed. is that any fault of the successful?

and if youre rich enough, color doesnt matter. OJ Simpson.

Lenny Kravitz was caught high and drunk. they let him go. why? because hes Lenny Kravitz.

Now, obviously, there is a large degree of racial bias, but you cant blame it all on the system.

I have enough pothead friends to know that weed impairs your judgement. hell, it effects your instant messenger judgement too.

AltToWar · 2002-12-22 02:22:48

I have enough pothead friends to know that weed impairs your judgement. hell, it effects your instant messenger judgement too.

Weed might make you take the wrong turn, but it does not slow down the speed at which your brain transmits a signil to your foot to hit a break pedal.

Alchohol does that.

Weed just leads to bad convesation.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 11:51:02

Canada has set a deadline of early next year to legalize cannabis. Hurrah for Canada!

Over the past few years, Canada has changed its view towards drugs radically. Just five years ago, Canada had an extremely strong anti-drugs programme; one that didn't work, though. Now, they're aiming to follow the Dutch example.

And did you know, that in Holland the average age of heroin addicts is rising, and not falling, as in all the strongly-anti-drug nations?

Worth pondering.

...............
I hadn't read the posts in this thread, before the dotted line. But now I have. So... open becomes my big mouth, and onwards I go...

"Well i know people always say how bad Marijuana is should we leagalize it? i mean its just as bad as tobacco did u know that 3 cannabis joints equals a whole pack of cigaretts so should they leagalize it or not? tell me what u thnx
now coke.Crack.herawin.acid.shrooms.LSD, people who do that r just stupid idiots who need a attitude adjustment!
PLEASE TEL ME WHAT U THANK"

Good heavens. I don't think I can even drum up a comment - stupid idiots who need attitude adjustment? Try down-trodden members of society - society needs the attitude adjustment, not the drug addicts. Although... perhaps the drug dealers could do with attitude adjustments. But they're victims, too, in their way. Any criminal is.

"yes, but this is partially because minorities are more likely to do drugs. they tend to be poorer, and they have nothing else, so they go to drugs."

Ahem. Minorities tend to be oppressed via the fact that they are minorities. Such is the glory of 'democracy'. Nothing to do with being poor, though. I'm not rich. And I object to stereotyping. *gets off soap box*

"Marijuana does not impair reaction time when operating a vehicle. There have been no proven case where marijuana intoxication was the sole cause of a motor vehicle accident."

The DVLA in Britain decided that marijuana does not impair driving ability - quite the opposite: in fact, they found that the 'control' drivers did not perform as well as the drivers who had ingested cannabis. This is probably due to the 'awareness' factor; being aware that they had ingested cannabis, the drivers compensated for any loss of perception (if there is any, which is in hot dispute) by simply driving more carefully. Also... there has never been a single death due to marijuana ingestion. Every death involving the ingestion of cannabis also included another, harder drug - ie, alcohol or speed.

"think that if we legalized weed, less people would smoke it. in canada and amsterdam, the weed addiction rate is lower."

Marijuana is not physically addictive. You cannot build up a tolerance to it; and there are no withdrawals when you stop taking it - except for insomnia, but that isn't withdrawal. Rather, its a simple case of having used a relaxant - and then stopped. Hence, you are more tense - and do not sleep so well, for a little while. But its not addictive physically. Pyschologically, it is addictive. That basically only means that you enjoy it, and so you continue to use it to derive that enjoyment. And marijuana isn't legal in Holland or Canada. In Holland, the law is unchanged - however, the police have been told to 'turn a blind eye' to its use (and production). And they issue licenses for coffee shop owners. As for Canada... see above.

"marijuana is far less potent than cigarettes. they dont cause cancer like cigarettes do, and your lungs can be repaired. the dangers of weed healthwise are mostly trumped up by tobacco companies."

I'm not sure what you mean by 'and your lungs can be repaired'? Do you mean the cases where people claim it helps with lung conditions? And I'm afraid marijuana does contain carcinogens; anything that releases carbon when it burns can cause cancer - and marijuana, being an organic compound, contains carbon. And some other carcinogens, I think. But those are only active if you smoke it. Eating or drinking it is believed to be far safer than, say, drinking alcohol. And far safer than smoking cigarettes.

I'd like to say that addiction, and drug use in general, is - if wrong, and that in itself is a philosophical question, really, depending on the drug in question - a health problem. Addicts are NOT criminals, and should not be treated as such. They need to be treated for their illness, or their disorder, or whatnot. Not told that they are evil by a judge, and then locked up. :angry:

soph · 2002-12-22 12:08:56

it makes sense. when you prohibit something, it becomes more popular. weed is a gateway drug. nobody goes straight to heroin-the idea of putting a needle in your joints turns people away. since weed is less popular, the harder drugs become less popular as well.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 12:44:20

Uhh... weed is not a gateway drug. There is no evidence to support that it is, either. Sometimes, dealers use it as a gateway drug (ie, "I don't have any weed today, mate... but this stuff is even better"), but thats actually quite different. Thats just a case of an unfortunatley gullible person, who trusts someone that they shouldn't, being mislead.

soph · 2002-12-22 12:47:40

do we need a research report to prove everything? all you have to do is look at the people who start with weed. they move on. weed gets people into the world of drugs...otherwise they wouldnt be exposed to the higher end drugs, like heroin, shrooms, cocaine, etc.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 12:54:04

The true gateway drugs are the drugs our parents give us as children; "Mum, I have a headache...". Those are the gateway drugs; then, once we reach adulthood, alcohol and cigarettes. We live in a world ridden with routes to addiction; even if you can consider weed as a gateway drug, its not the gateway drug. Drugs like Calpol, and Junior Disprin, are the drugs that set the pattern: when you feel bad, pop a pill. And the drugs companies have been filling our heads with that nonesense for so many years that we don't even notice.

AltToWar · 2002-12-22 13:09:45

do we need a research report to prove everything? all you have to do is look at the people who start with weed. they move on. weed gets people into the world of drugs...otherwise they wouldnt be exposed to the higher end drugs, like heroin, shrooms, cocaine, etc.

All the more reason to legalize it.

If one does not have to go to the black market to get weed, one will not be exposed to the black market, one will not be pressured to try harder drugs.

Put Marijuana in Corner Stores and Gas Stations, Tax it heavily, and require people be 21 to use it.

Poof! Marijuana is no longer a gateway drug.

soph · 2002-12-22 13:12:50

legalize it, but dont make it "only 21"

you know how many kids become alcoholics because of the drinking age? all you have to do is send your older brother into the store to get it.

its hard to figure out how to handle it. cigarettes are legal for minors to smoke, but not to buy...this doesnt really work. does anybody know how the dutch handle marijuana selling?

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 13:57:56

I already said, but I'll repeat:

The Dutch issue licenses for coffee shops which can sell a certain amount of weed (im uncertain of the exact amount) for a certain price. The price is kept high (higher than say, the US), but the government doesn't tax it because weed is still technically illegal in Holland.

And kids don't become alcoholics because of the age limit on drinking (be it 21, 18, 19, or whatever). Its because they see their parents drinking from a young age; and they see people on TV drinking. Not because their older siblings get it for them. If there wasn't an age limit, then the kids would buy the alcohol themselves, and then there would we be? In the same position, only worse.

soph · 2002-12-22 14:42:30

Not really. Why did alchoholism in this country spike during the prohibition? its a proven psychological fact that saying banning an item makes it more appealing

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 14:54:58

Of course it does, but it could also be argued that ending that prohibition also caused a spike in alcoholism in the U.S - which I assume your talking about? I'm British, I'm afraid. Anyway, people were then free to do what they wished, without fear of action being taken against them. So they did so, with a vengeance. Hence, the drinking culture we have today.

There are always two sides to the coin.

AltToWar · 2002-12-22 15:11:07

Of course it does, but it could also be argued that ending that prohibition also caused a spike in alcoholism in the U.S - which I assume your talking about? I'm British, I'm afraid. Anyway, people were then free to do what they wished, without fear of action being taken against them. So they did so, with a vengeance. Hence, the drinking culture we have today.
There are always two sides to the coin.

2 sides to the coin.

On both sides people drank.

On one side you feuled a black market and criminalized the civilian population.

On the other side you had tax revenues and legitimate businesses.

On one side you had legal reprecussions and had to hide your habit.

On the other side is opan dialog and ways to get help.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 15:43:23

I agree. I was merely giving both sides of the argument. There needs to be a balance between prohibition and utter freedom (as regards to drug use). Its not healthy for a society to be intoxicated reguarly, no matter what substance of choice they use.

Prohibition is wrong.

The only way forward is treatment, as I said before.

Also, I forgot one other thing: the proper education of our children about drugs. Not feeding them scare-mongering lies. Like, for example: heroin kills. No, it doesn't. Unsafe conditions for heroin addicts, and lack of treatment facilities for addicts wanting to quit is the killer. Heroin overdoses (discounting suicides) only occur when the user stops using for a brief time, and then resumes at their previous dose. So we must educate people truthfully; not try to frighten them - when they find out that their 'education' was lies, they act the opposite way to that which is preferable.

CalTech2010 · 2002-12-22 15:45:38

If marijuana users locked themselves in a room, and smoked one joint every once in a while, and got high-and-happy away from society, I wouldn't see any problem in legalizing it.

However, people smoke marijuana, and the high fades after a while, and you need better stuff to keep your high. You move to a worse and worse addiction, and you need to steal from innocent people to feed your addiction. Your desperate search for a high ruins your life.

I think we should legalize marijuana, tax it 50%, and issue a license to users of any age. By taking that license, they agree to forfeit all US government health benefits, and have to pay a yearly fee to the government to renew your license.

It gets rid of the black market by putting industry in charge of production, and it gets rid of government risk by eliminating the consequences of assumed health risks down the road.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 16:01:58

Oh, come on. You don't really think that people are that immature? Plenty of people smoke cannabis and never touch anything else (hands up here), and I never would touch anything else. And who said people smoke it for the high? Its not even a high, anyway. Its... mellowness. Which is different.

And not once have I ever stolen from someone to feed my 'addiction'. If you read my previous post, (one of them, anyway) you'll see that there is no such thing as marijuana addiction.

As for issuing licenses, and forcing people to give up free health care... thats very draconian. What if the majority of the population wants to smoke it? Hardly democratic, if you do that. And highly irresponsible, too. The state has a responsibility to take care of the people who a) fund it and b) vote for the government that runs it.

CalTech2010 · 2002-12-22 16:06:21

The fact is, the majority of Americans don't smoke pot, and never will. I refuse to legalize it for a fractional minority, and then make the majority of responsible Americans pay for it through the health care system.

A heroine addict would steal your VCR that you worked for to pay for their next high, wouldn't they? I have lots of friends that smoke pot, and they have to steal from their mothers' purses to pay for it too. It's pitiful.

soph · 2002-12-22 16:13:40

would you not pay for aids treatment because it only affects a minority?

or would you instead pay for weed by giving the money to terrorists? if it was legal, the government could control the source.

Auqakah · 2002-12-22 16:21:15

No offense intended, but what is pitiful is the hard-nosed attitude that so many people have towards people less priveliged than themselves. THAT is what is pitiful. In fact, it makes one ashamed to be human, at times. :angry:

AltToWar · 2002-12-22 22:16:47

If marijuana users locked themselves in a room, and smoked one joint every once in a while, and got high-and-happy away from society, I wouldn't see any problem in legalizing it.
However, people smoke marijuana, and the high fades after a while, and you need better stuff to keep your high. You move to a worse and worse addiction, and you need to steal from innocent people to feed your addiction. Your desperate search for a high ruins your life.
I think we should legalize marijuana, tax it 50%, and issue a license to users of any age. By taking that license, they agree to forfeit all US government health benefits, and have to pay a yearly fee to the government to renew your license.
It gets rid of the black market by putting industry in charge of production, and it gets rid of government risk by eliminating the consequences of assumed health risks down the road.

I cannot count how many people I know who have smoked marijuana regularly for at least 10 years and never experimented with harder drugs. I literally have a list of 15 in my head without even trying.

You do not know what your talking about.

By taking that license, they agree to forfeit all US government health benefits, and have to pay a yearly fee to the government to renew your license.

You stand a higher risk of dieing from a car crash then dieng from any disease related to pot. Should we cut out all benefits to those who drive cars?

You simply cannot consume enough pot to kill you. Lung cancer is the most dangerous threat. Living in LA causes lung cancer. Should those that live in LA have their social security cut as well?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-12-21 01:59:52

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#2 2002-12-21 07:52:21

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#3 2002-12-21 11:37:32

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#4 2002-12-21 12:39:29

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#5 2002-12-21 12:58:45

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#6 2002-12-21 18:45:13

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#7 2002-12-22 02:22:48

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#8 2002-12-22 11:51:02

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#9 2002-12-22 12:08:56

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#10 2002-12-22 12:44:20

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#11 2002-12-22 12:47:40

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#12 2002-12-22 12:54:04

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#13 2002-12-22 13:09:45

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#14 2002-12-22 13:12:50

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#15 2002-12-22 13:57:56

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#16 2002-12-22 14:42:30

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#17 2002-12-22 14:54:58

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#18 2002-12-22 15:11:07

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#19 2002-12-22 15:43:23

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#20 2002-12-22 15:45:38

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#21 2002-12-22 16:01:58

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#22 2002-12-22 16:06:21

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#23 2002-12-22 16:13:40

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#24 2002-12-22 16:21:15

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#25 2002-12-22 22:16:47

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

Board footer