Drug Control

[Jab-Jab]

This thread was made to clean up the rights thread. All drug disscussion from that thread goes in here.

My position on drug control. I don't think the government has any bussienss telling a person what they can consume/ put into their own body.

Drugs are dangerous, and Never said they weren't, but each drug reacts differently with the body's chemistry and needs to be evaluated separately. Now, this dose not mean I am encouraging drug use. Far from it, drug use is very dangerous and I support schools educating about the harmful effects of drugs. The main reason I don't support the illegality of drugs, is that it gives the government the power to tell us what we can eat and put into our own body and collects tax dollars to fund this.

I think the government would be better off spreading general awareness and putting more resources into murder, theft, and rape departments rather then a specific department just for drugs.

Now, I say don't do heroin because its highly addictive and dulls reaction time. I also say don't do Ecstasy or acid because it burns out neurotransmitters. For other drugs I'm not so much read up on. We would have to discuss them.

Here is where you can state why you think drugs are bad.

 

[Lewis]

What type of drugs are you talking about ? LSD, speed, reefer or what ?

 

[Jab-Jab]

What type of drugs are you talking about ? LSD, speed, reefer or what ?

In the rites thread we were disscussing all illegal drugs. I do want to make it clear that I'm not advocating the usage of drugs, and I do understand the harmful effects.

 

[Pebbles]

I begin a scientist seek to quantify the risk a drug poses to a person, I do it along two axis, Their must be a critical threshold that's decided by others, bare in mind ALL recreational drugs are judged on these axis.

X: Physical Harm
Y: Addictiveness

of course however the limitations of this axis really needs to be divided into immediate and long term harm. A number can be quantified and risk to the user can be established.

It dose astonish all reason that tobacco and alcohol is legal while weed and steroids are not.

But basically as is obvious drug policy is en-placed not by science or reason or even for concern of the citizenship but socially conservative distressed moral guardians ¬.¬ who just want to patronize people with lies. When scientists publicize these facts they are silenced and removed.

Three more government drugs advisors resign over sacking of Professor David Nutt | Mail Online

 

[jasoncran]

well here in america alcohol was banned at one time. the carnage and cop death makes that chart look like nothing. ever heard of al capone? and the kennedies and the bush's all famous by the illegal sale of alcohol during the prohibition.

so it was better to allow that. i have no love for alcohol, and pot(cannabis) that will be up there with harm given more reasearch. its being linked already to psychosis.

ok so jab you are saying that by making drugs illegal it leads to food bans. uh mj was made illegal in the 30s and also other drugs in the 60s

its the hippies in power and the peta types that want to do that. this has nothing to do with the drug war.

i dont like tobacco, in all its forms but as jab-jab said if no one else is harmed as those users can work, can get the fix without harming others.save the second hand smoke but that is resolved already in most states.

pebbles if i may if we did this to the extreme that jab is stating about. we wouldnt be in any liberty.

what about american football
boxing
mma
wrestling
how many permanent injuries are there a yr from this?


when its all said and done the govt will be in such control that people in its society will be such drones or dependent on it they will be instutionalised. i have been there and that is why i dont miss active duty military as that is how controlling they are.

i'm sure peebles wouldnt like to be told hey no beer, no cokes, no dating that guy cause he outranks you, etc or suntans etc.

that is needed in the military but not so much in the civilian life

i do still believe in the stronger addictive drugs need to be control by current means. theres not enough studies to say that mj is all that safe like some say. anedoctal stories aside as i have been on both sides of the issue. wife used and also seen afghan soldiers use it and make poor judgment and could have gotten man killed when they were to numbed up to respond.

 

[Pard]

The drug chart is all fine and dandy but it misses some obvious things. In regard to tobacco and alcohol you need to remember that it isn't describing a person who uses either substance in moderation. It is describing an all out binge on the stuff. Alcohol has no negative (and in fact has positive) effects when taken in moderation. Tobacco is a slightly different story (depending upon how it is taken in) but I imagine that dot is in reference to cigarette smokers. Smoking cigarettes is terribly harmful but the majority of the ways one can intake tobacco (cigar pipe snuff chew) are not that harmful at all.

The key is moderation. Do you know many people who use coke or meth or weed in moderation? I don't. Not even weed. I have watched friends start up on weed and they went crazy over it within weeks. Often times weed isn't "awarded" the amount of addictiveness it really has. Much of weed usage isn't chemical but psychological. People BELIEVE they need more of weed even though their body doesn't need it at a chemical level.

Drug usage is often described as a "victim-less" crime. That is anywhere from the truth. A user is a victim in some regard. The user's family suffers greatly. The family can experience anything from total bankruptcy to losing a family member (either literally or metaphorically). Another harm caused by drug usage is theft. In high drug areas theft is higher as well. It's no coincident. People who use drugs burn all their money on drugs and eventually have to resort to stealing in order to acquire enough money to buy more drugs. It doesn't help that chronic drug users cannot hold down a job because of their dependency and mental deficits.

 

[xounstaer]

great thread which i will follow and reply to or discuss certainly more thenonce..

i love the way your opinions are so right but not judgementive. i like how the good side is shown, and on the other side the bad side.

let me first say i've used heroine about five times throughout.. the last time was about a month ago and therefor about four years. so i was clean of hard drugs for four years before i fall back.

besides hard drugs, the most obvious; cannabis/weed/thc. i still use though i've tried to quit a few times the past two years all before i fall back in hard drugs. and i will try to quit weed again. but atm its most important i dont do hard.

so i've shared a bit about my experience, so far.

my first psychologist told me smoking' coke/crack is worse then heroine really.
i saw coke is in that list below heroine, but i suppose it's the powder referred to that goes through the nose..



right now; i blacked out a bit, since i thought; what am i supposed to say?
i am glad at least it's not a taboo(as in not allowed to talk of).

but i really cant give all wise sayings, and do not feel like sharing besides all i did.

what do youguys think of praying under influence?
or practising religion/belief under influence?

it's these two questions that started to get me end up being banned i think.(ok i didnt listen not to post, on ibelieve.com)

but what is your opinions about them 2 questions? (in the far past...for example; egypt drug usuga was used before trial by the judges for better justice...)

for the rest i fully agree hard drugs is bad and that weed may be underestimated..

 

[Potluck]

I got my introduction of drugs, mainly reefer, while doing alcohol. Tobacco was the same way... Got drunk, tried a smoke and that was it. The reefer was easy to kick compared to tobacco though.
The alcohol? Well, believe it or not but the night I was saved I lost the desire... it wasn't something I had to conscientiously give up. The other two were on me though.
I can tell you a drunk will beg, borrow and steal for his fix of alcohol. I will honestly say though that reefer wasn't quite so intense for want of the stuff.
I had dabbled in the more addictive drugs like coke, horse and acid but for some reason those never really tripped my trigger. What I absolutely had to stay away from was Valium. That one was me weak area big time. 714,s were much too intense for me.
Anyway, it was alcohol that opened the door to all other drugs and vises. A person that doesn't frequent the bars is much less apt to be exposed to it all. And I'm talking about keggers too.

But making drugs legal for the sake of "It's my body I'll do as I please with it" is a rather selfish attitude I think. We aren't hermits. We are social whether it be family, friends, spouse or siblings. It's the innocent that concerns me with that idea of making all thing legal.

Isn't the destruction of the innocent wrought by alcohol enough already???

 

[Potluck]

Death by Alcohol

How can alcohol be blamed for 100,000 deaths each year?
<table bgcolor="#c0c0c0" border="1" cellpadding="20" width="90%"><tbody><tr><td>5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.

(Sources: NIDA Report, the Scientific American and Addiction Research Foundation of Ontario.) Also see Alcohol Consumption and Mortality, Alcohol poisoning deaths, CDC report, 100,000 deaths. That's more than a statistic. That is 100,000 individuals with faces. 100,000 individuals with lives not fully lived. 100,000 individuals grieved by mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and children. Every year.
</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[jasoncran]

trust me if i thought it would work, i would be for another alcohol ban. i do have mixed feeling as some can drink it with moderation but seriously as potluck said how many drunks, and one doesnt have to get drunk all the time to be an alcoholic, are on the road and dont get hurt but push their luck?

far more abuse this stuff then those that dont. if its going to change then it must be a cultural change as media and sports promote beer consumption. ever notice when a charachter on tv or in the movies celebrates or is sad he or she consumes some type of alcohol

 

[Potluck]

So, we can also talk about the adverse effects on innocent peoples' lives, family upheaval, adultery, degradation, embarrassment, insult toward a family member, bad arguments etc just to name a few things that aren't on the books as illegal to commit.

I really don't think I want to add anything else that can have adverse influences on the lives of innocent people. Aren't we to protect the innocent rather than those who don't care about anyone else but themselves? Because that's how it is, caring only for self, to have fun, to look cool, to catch a buzz, to escape, to get blitzed and brag about it the day after. Whatever the reason someone wants to get drunk or do drugs in the first place.

And please, spare the "Well, they will do it anyway" argument before anyone thinks of posting such an idea. We're supposed to be civilized, we're supposed to teach and uphold the same. We're not animals that cave to every urge and desire. Nor do we do things simply because animals do it. We're not animals either.

I think the government would be better off spreading general awareness and putting more resources into murder, theft, and rape departments rather then a specific department just for drugs.

Ok, let's start with alcohol. All I see is "Don't drive drunk" and "Drink responsibly."


I'm with you Jason. Agreed.

 

[Jake]

trust me if i thought it would work, i would be for another alcohol ban. i do have mixed feeling as some can drink it with moderation but seriously as potluck said how many drunks, and one doesnt have to get drunk all the time to be an alcoholic, are on the road and dont get hurt but push their luck?

far more abuse this stuff then those that dont. if its going to change then it must be a cultural change as media and sports promote beer consumption. ever notice when a charachter on tv or in the movies celebrates or is sad he or she consumes some type of alcohol

It's the same with cigarettes, too, all the old movies show the cool people and the good looking chics smoking, now it's pretty taboo, they should do the same with alcohol, whenever there is a party, even for kids, it ends up being more of an adult party with the drinking. Then, of course, they leave and drive home.

 

[jasoncran]

:bigfrown and the cycle repeats with pot! the hollywood nuts never learned from tobacco and also alcohol.

sooner or later sadly they will turn on pot and that will be taboo as well.

 

[Pard]

I never understood that! In California you can't even smoke a tobacco in your own house without fearing that a neighbor will call the cops on you because they somehow could smell the smoke through your walls and windows across the yard through their walls and windows and into their nose. Yet in California people smoke marijuana openly on the streets in front of the cops.

Second hand smoke from weed is just as bad as from tobacco (not that I am even suggesting such a thing as "second-hand" smoke actually exists in tobacco products). It has been proven that you can get a contact high from marijuana smoke. That right there is illegal in all 50 states! it is illegal to intoxicate another person in anyway. And you may say that the marijuana smoking didn't intend it to happen but it is a action that any logic person could deduce and thus falls under a "voluntarily induced involuntary action". That means it's still like drugging me!

 

[Lewis]

Wait a minute, let me get this straight, you can't smoke cigarettes in your own house in California ? I don't smoke anymore, but that is the government gone to far.

 

[Potluck]

Wait a minute, let me get this straight, you can't smoke cigarettes in your own house in California ? I don't smoke anymore, but that is the government gone to far.

Belmont Journal - Smoking Ban Hits Home. Truly. - NYTimes.com

BELMONT, Calif. — During her 50 years of smoking, Edith Frederickson says, she has lit up in restaurants and bars, airplanes and trains, and indoors and out, all as part of a two-pack-a-day habit that she regrets not a bit. But as of two weeks ago, Ms. Frederickson can no longer smoke in the one place she loves the most: her home.

Ms. Frederickson lives in an apartment in Belmont, Calif., a quiet Silicon Valley city that is now home to perhaps the nation’s strictest antismoking law, effectively outlawing lighting up in all apartment buildings.

More at the link

 

[jasoncran]

is it a law in cali or just the apt owners if the later then i agree on the ban.why? the yellow tar cant be removed from the walls.the walls must be painted and no to mention the windows. i dont let my relatives smoke in the house. they must go outside unless its raining.most of them do that anyway out of respect.

 

[Lewis]

Thanks Potluck, and Jason I don't let nobody smoke in my house too.

 

[Jake]

is it a law in cali or just the apt owners if the later then i agree on the ban.why? the yellow tar cant be removed from the walls.the walls must be painted and no to mention the windows. i dont let my relatives smoke in the house. they must go outside unless its raining.most of them do that anyway out of respect.

Some apartments say no smoking, but think that might be standard to in other places, I heard they have that in Washington State, but haven't verified it. It's just like renting a home, too, sometimes homeowners don't allow smoking - also, pets or no pets.

 

[jasoncran]

Some apartments say no smoking, but think that might be standard to in other places, I heard they have that in Washington State, but haven't verified it. It's just like renting a home, too, sometimes homeowners don't allow smoking - also, pets or no pets.

its same here in florida. in commiefornia that is a law however whereas here it up to the "people"not the state.