Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Doctors group backs marijuana for medical uses
#21
Palladin Wrote:I think it is valid to ask yourself what has been the end result of our war on drugs? Has 1 human avoided drugs that otherwise would not have?

The answer to that is YES. Freely available drugs will increase usage. Theodore Dalrympl recounted a story in one of his books about a construction company providing free booze (for morale purposes) to get people to go to Africa on a construction project (years ago). The result was drunks who would not work much. People do avoid speeding because they don't like the expense or hassle of tickets, and I am sure the same applies to drugs. Thus, laws work.

Quote:I can't figure out why we're so fixated on government prohibition of drugs. It works the exact same way.

Do you have children, Palladin? Most of us here do not worry about the adults, but kids are a different matter, and it does NOT work the same way with kids. Maybe you control your kids better than most, but peer pressure in high school is evidently very high.

Philosophically, I can agree with most of your arguments. The problem is, that the pragmatics don't seem to work out as you might imagine. There seem to be too many unintended consequences. In a pure libertarian world, we would just let Darwin's social law take its effect on those stupid enough to become ruined by drugs, but that world does not exist today. I don't think it would be easy to go back to the morality prior to the 19th century, say.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#22
jt Wrote:
Palladin Wrote:I think it is valid to ask yourself what has been the end result of our war on drugs? Has 1 human avoided drugs that otherwise would not have?

The answer to that is YES. Freely available drugs will increase usage. Theodore Dalrympl recounted a story in one of his books about a construction company providing free booze (for morale purposes) to get people to go to Africa on a construction project (years ago).

That seems to be a little bit apples and oranges to me. The booze was free, the drugs though available would not be free.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#23
JT,

Yes,I do have 2 kids. I would desire drugs be treated just like alcohol.

I see no objective reason that drugs and laws are different than alcohol and laws,do you?

Was our prohibition experiment a postive or did it turn the Sicilian mob from small potatoes into a gargantuan monster? Isn't THAT why we stopped prohibition? And the fact that most Americans wanted to drink?

Today,we're turning black gangs into wealthy monsters and it is drawing kids to the gangs,that's where the wealth is to be gotten today in the black community. I prefer WalGreen's gets the profits and young black males are attracted back to education to get their ticket,not crack .

It may be that giving humans this stuff causes addicts(or liquor),but drugs aren't being subsidized by the government or private companies,IMO.

Put simply,the results of prohibition are you give massive cash to criminal gangs. Including those who have terrorized the good people of Colombia now for 40 years. I like WalGreen's better.
Reply
#24
I actually don't support legalization of marijuana, because the tobacco companies would market it towards teenagers and pre-teens, and we'd end up with a nation of addicts.
Reply
#25
Anon,

Yea,today's criminal pot dealer has better ethics,that makes good sense.
Reply
#26
I wouldn't say they're more ethical. They're just severely limited in how many people they can sell it to - whereas multinational corporations are freakishly powerful and efficient. How'd you like to see a billboard of Joe Camel smoking a blunt ? S6
Reply
#27
Anonymous24 Wrote:I wouldn't say they're more ethical. They're just severely limited in how many people they can sell it to - whereas multinational corporations are freakishly powerful and efficient. How'd you like to see a billboard of Joe Camel smoking a blunt ? S6

You have no clue how prevalent pot is.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#28
So long as it was an adult smoking the blunt,I'd find it far less dangerous to society than either cigarettes OR beer and furthermore,I do not view governments as arbiters of morality.

Governments are to protect citizens from predators,internal and external,I'll take my morality from the Bible,I don't need idiots like Bush or Clinton teaching my children right from wrong.

Most peer reviewed texts show marijuana in moderate use is far less detrimental to human health than cigarette smoking or liquor is in moderate use. It's just part of the hysteria in America that we fail to use logic,it made things worse with beer abd it is with "illegal" drugs as well.
Reply
#29
Quote:You have no clue how prevalent pot is.

I know how prevalent it is; I did it in high school and most of my friends became potheads. But it wasn't nearly as prevalent as smoking or drinking, both legal, were.
Reply
#30
When I was in HS back during the black plague,more kids by far burnt doobies than smoked cigarettes. Smoking cigarettes is now illegal for under 18,I bet kids have given it up because of that law.(Being facetious here).

Incidentally,drinking was NOT legal for your HS mates,let's be accurate and let's also note the law didn't deter 1 kid from drinking either. No one is deterred by laws,never have been.

Even laws against murder don't deter it,they just lock folks up that are convicted,anyone "disgusting" enough to murder someone doesn't give a big frick about a law obviously they are willing to murder someone.
Reply
#31
Quote:When I was in HS back during the black plague,more kids by far burnt doobies than smoked cigarettes. Smoking cigarettes is now illegal for under 18,I bet kids have given it up because of that law.(Being facetious here).

Heh, when I was in Jr. High, 13-14 year old kids would mass on the corner right across from the high school smoking cigarettes. Cops would even have to break them up sometimes! But nobody ever got in trouble for smoking.

Pot is common, but its not as common as scpg thinks. But it would be much more common if the tobacco companies could advertise it.
Reply
#32
Anonymous24 Wrote:
Quote:When I was in HS back during the black plague,more kids by far burnt doobies than smoked cigarettes. Smoking cigarettes is now illegal for under 18,I bet kids have given it up because of that law.(Being facetious here).

Heh, when I was in Jr. High, 13-14 year old kids would mass on the corner right across from the high school smoking cigarettes. Cops would even have to break them up sometimes! But nobody ever got in trouble for smoking.

Pot is common, but its not as common as scpg thinks. But it would be much more common if the tobacco companies could advertise it.

I completely agree Palladin. Kids now get friends or relatives (even parents) to go the the mini mart (etc) to get them beer. If pot were legal, they would do the same thing, and pot smoking would be much more prevalent, since there would be many more ways to get it, and it is "cool" or "adult behavior".
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#33
LOL! You guys are clueless.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#34
Quote:LOL! You guys are clueless.

No, we're actually not. What makes you the expert?
Reply
#35
Anonymous24 Wrote:
Quote:LOL! You guys are clueless.

No, we're actually not. What makes you the expert?

LOL! I take the 5th.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#36
JT,

I just don't see the evidence that prohibition is wise policy. It failed with liquor,why is it best with synthetic drugs or natural ones? Both cause cash to flow to criminals don't they?

I have friends who would re-institute prohibition with liquor,do you agree with that angle?

Myself,I don't equate legality with morality,but lots of folks see the government as a moral arbiter,I'm not among those.
Reply
#37
The way I understand it, mob rule has a certain legitimacy in what is culturally acceptable behavior. The slouching to Gomorrah thing.
Reply
#38
Because she is, Anon, pure and simple.

If anything, I agree with Jt's assessment on this. Logical thinking isn't human nature. Besides, you legalize one illegal vice, people will get bored with it and look towards the next illegal vice. Human nature.

Perhaps we shouldn't be using gov't as a moral arbiter as Palladin says, but if we didn't where would our laws come from and what is their point?

We (the people) use it to ensure our own societies deceny, freedom and survival.

And on top of that, legalizing it, and taxing it (what a brainwave), only gives the gov't more revenue and an interest in promoting drug use now. And it's not like it'll really benefit anything but a larger bureacracy and more regulations.
Reply
#39
Quote:Because she is, Anon, pure and simple

That's not really good enough. Just because her circle smokes pot, doesn't mean she knows everything there is to know, or even close, to the problem. I did my fair share of it when I was in high school, and I know how prevalent it can be.

but here's the thing - in my high school, some of the kids started smoking it young, but most didn't try it until senior year or beyond. Most college kids do it, but if it was legalized, most kids would start 12, 13, 14. Most teens don't try it until they're much older. There is data to support this.

Its one thing to try pot when you're almost a full-grown adult, and can handle it. Its another to start smoking it heavily during those formative early adolescent years. Most who start at 15 or younger move onto heavier drugs. At my high school, the only people doing pot at 15(excluding myself, who did it at that age) were the ones who didn't do well in school and were not going to college...

If it was legalized, the tobacco companies would advertise it heavily to 12-year olds, like they do cigarrettes. Nobody cares about the effects that could have on our society?
Reply
#40
Anonymous24 Wrote:Most teens don't try it until they're much older. There is data to support this.

I don't see you supporting your argument with that data. Nor do I see most kids who start in Junior High moving on to harder drugs. I have kids this age dear. Kids who are open with me about what is going on and who is doing what.

I think most adult pot smoking is hidden. It would not shock me to find out 50% of the populous smokes.

I don't think legalization would increase use. It would still be illegal for kids just as cigarettes are and you have seen for yourself how effective that is.

Then there is the whole politics of it. I don't think the government should be telling me I can't smoke pot. I actually can't because of my asthma.

legalize drugs, legalize prostitution while you are at it. Get the government's hand out of baseball too.

Truthfully there are more important things the government should be worried about. The general public seems blind to what is really going on.

http://teendrugabuse.us/marijuana.html

Quote:Marijuana use among Teens

Marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug used by teens today. Approximately 60 percent of the kids who use drugs use only marijuana. Of the 14.6 million marijuana users in 2002, approximately 4.8 million used it on 20 or more days in any given month (Kids and Marijuana).

The marijuana that is available to teens today is much stronger than the marijuana that was available in the 1960’s. Sometimes it is also laced with other, more potent drugs. Marijuana is physically addictive. Each year, 100,000 teens are treated for marijuana dependence. Teens who smoke marijuana heavily experience much the same symptoms of withdrawal as users of nicotine.

The University of Michigan’s Monitoring the Future study, which assesses drug and alcohol use among American youth, reported substantial increases among eighth, tenth, and twelfth graders from 1992 to 1997. These statistics show a disturbing national trend in the increase of marijuana use by teenagers (Facts about Marijuana Use).

Between 1991 and 2001, the percentage of eighth graders who used marijuana doubled from one in ten to one in five. Kids are using marijuana at an earlier age. Research indicates that the earlier teens start using marijuana, the more likely they are to become dependent on this or other drugs later in life. Of teens admitted for treatment for marijuana dependence, 56 percent had first used the drug by fourteen years of age, and 26 percent had begun by twelve years of age (Kids and Marijuana).

According to the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA), marijuana was the most frequently used drug of choice by teens. The NHSDA also reported that teens using marijuana on twelve or more days during the past year, 58 percent of them had one problem that they related to their marijuana use, 41 percent had two problems, and 28 percent had at least three problems that they related to their marijuana use. From age 12 to age 13, the proportion of teens who say they could buy marijuana if they wanted to more than triples, from 14 to 50 percent. Also the percentage of teens who say that they know a student at their school who sells drugs almost triples, from eight percent to 22 percent (Psych Central).

Drugs and Crime Facts

Quote:General population

According to data from the 2005 National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) --
  • 112 million Americans age 12 or older (46% of the population) reported illicit drug use at least once in their lifetime
  • 14% reported use of a drug within the past year
  • 8% reported use of a drug within the past month.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)