The War on Drugs

[MU_Engineer]

It's amazing how undeductated people are on the subject. Marijuana is in the same class as Cocaine, heroin, and crystal meth. Alcohol should should be in that category, not marijuana.

You are wrong. Marijuana is a DEA Schedule I drug as is heroin. Cocaine and methamphetamine are Schedule II drugs. Those are big distinctions as nobody can prescribe or possess Schedule I drugs like marijuana or heroin for any reason without express and very limited permission from the federal government. A doctor can prescribe Schedule II drugs as they have medical uses as established by the DEA. Cocaine is a topical anesthetic used in ENT procedures (although it is rarely used) and methamphetamine (trade name: Desoxyn) is used as an ADHD drug and for weight loss. Granted, there are restrictions as to the number of refills and such, but they can be legally prescribed and possessed.

 

[MU_Engineer]

Strangestranger you sound like Bill Orielly oddly enough. His idea is to do the same with all the "drug addicts and murderers". Which is totally messed up, whether drugs are "bad or good" -if you only see in such black and white terms- is NOT what we are discussing about. Whether you think they are good or bad, it is not YOUR morality that should determine OUR choices.

It doesn't take a doctor to tell you that using those kinds of drugs has negative effects on you and that you shouldn't do it. There is little debate on that. The thing that is really being debated here is whether the government should ban those behaviors because they are harmful to people. Here are my views on that.

1. First off, the federal government has no authority to do anything with regulating drugs as the Constitution does not specifically allow them to do so. Regulation of drugs should be left to the states. The only reason that the federal government was allowed to do so in the first place was a very liberal interpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause in the Constitution.

2. I do not believe that states should specifically regulate drugs with the exception of antiviral, antibacterial, antihelminthic (anti-parasite), and antifungal agents. Those should be regulated as your misuse of those agents can directly hurt me as you could take them inappropriately and lead to the development of a multiple-resistant organism that infects me and kills me. All of the other drugs at best indirectly can cause damage to others by causing inappropriate behavior. We already have laws against the direct causes of harm to others, such as driving while under the influence and assault. If somebody is going to be deterred from doing something because it is illegal, they'd already be deterred from harming somebody as that is already illegal. You don't need to pile on extra laws as it wouldn't change anything. Those who will break laws won't care if they break one or fifteen laws, while those that respect the law won't break any.

And no society will not benefit, society is losing thousands of people a year from non violent arrests.

There are a lot more non-violent crimes than just drug-related crimes. There are a lot of crimes that are non-violent but still are pretty nasty. Bernie Madoff wasn't a violent offender, but you all still think he should go to jail, as do I. Also, quite a few of the druggies aren't really much of an asset to society anyway. I don't want them in jail because it costs a lot of money to keep people in jail and they're not much of a threat, not because we're missing the vast contribution to society that a crackhead provides.

I am a college student going in a major for CIS and i smoke weed. What would happen to my productivity if i got caught smoke a simply joint? I would lose my ability to get student loans and jobs. Why? Because weed (as the DEA commercials and talking dog ON those commericals say "It just isnt cool that you smoke weed") lmao i remember when they said smoking 1 joint was like smoking a whole pack of ciggarettes (school poster), now due to OVERWHELMING amount of evidence on pots behalf all they can say is "Well............. its not the cool thing...." What a farce.....

Your productivity would probably improve if you quit smoking weed as smoking weed is a recreational activity and doesn't do much to help increase very many peoples' productivity. You could spend the time you spend smoking weed and being stoned to do something that is actually productive, such as study. If I were you, I would admit that smoking weed is a recreational activity and use a different argument in your debate.

StrangeStranger 40 million americans have admitted to smoking weed and there is clearly CLEARLY a majority that supports decriminalization/legalization across the board.

There are over 300 million people in the U.S. 40 million is not "clearly CLEARLY a majority." 40 million is a big number and I bet that >40 million support legalization of marijuana since there are non-users that support legalization for various reasons unrelated to the fact they'd want to be able to use it. But apparently it's not anywhere near a majority. If it was, then we'd most likely see the issue brought up by more than just occasionally by a few politicians.

I am sick and tired of being afraid of the town guards(police) harassing me for weed when in fact thay have bigger things to worry about like murder, rape, and other violent criminals. But no they use the war on drugs today the same way they used it in the 60's to suppress a counter culture rise up.(hippies)

Drug possession is a very easy crime to enforce and you rarely step on peoples' toes in doing so. Ditto with speeding and parking tickets. Trying to prevent violent crimes is a lot harder and you often get into "profiling issues" and the whole, "no, OUR nice little city doesn't have a gang problem!!" types of stuff.

And clearly the "BAN ALL DRUGS BECAUSE MY MORALITY IS RIGHT AND YOURS IS WRONG!!!!!!" -which has been the case with weed for 70 years- hasn't had any negative effects........ever............

*Because the black market DOESNT make money off of it being illegal.

*Ronald Raegan and Bush Senior didnt smuggle in F****** vast amounts of drugs and shrug it off when they got caught.

*It doesnt cost the government billions of dollars! Thats ludicrous!

*Having it illegal instead of increasing public awareness properly(like idiots id say) definitely does not pique interest in weed...... no not all.....

All im saying is that our draconian laws on something as harmless as weed needs to stop. Thw WOD is killing our freedom, our country, and our ability to trust in local law enforcement. Its not cool.

There are a bunch of stupid social-legislation laws made by liberals that are "BAN **** BECAUSE MY MORALITY IF RIGHT AND YOURS IS WRONG!!!!" How many kids have gotten in trouble for praying on their own at school? What about crimes against certain races being called "hate crimes" even though there's no evidence that it was racially-motivated? What about the whole anti-First Amendment "fairness doctrine" crap that we had to put up with for decades and now the liberals want to bring back? What about the entire political correctness crap that does not allow any discussion on certain topics, such as why certain groups actually have certain problems and kills any chance of effecting any actual improvement? Or the whole hippie mindset and legislation that has killed our work ethic, decimated any sense of personal responsibility, marginalized individualism, caused the breakdown of the family, and installed a nanny-state government as our overlord?

 

[Albyint]

"Your productivity would probably improve if you quit smoking weed as smoking weed is a recreational activity and doesn't do much to help increase very many peoples' productivity. You could spend the time you spend smoking weed and being stoned to do something that is actually productive, such as study. If I were you, I would admit that smoking weed is a recreational activity and use a different argument in your debate."

Wow dude because i dont go to college and get good grades? No i doubt it, weed is a personal choice and i am absolutely fine being stoned. And I know it doesn't hurt MY productivity because i am one of the few responsible users out there.

"It doesn't take a doctor to tell you that using those kinds of drugs has negative effects on you and that you shouldn't do it. There is little debate on that. The thing that is really being debated here is whether the government should ban those behaviors because they are harmful to people. Here are my views on that. "

Dude common sense would say that smoking anything at all has "negative" consequences. But everyday life has negative consequences that are far worse than a joint. Hell, the food we eat has chemicals that are bad for you and your doctor will tell you all day you should not eat them but guess what? We do anyway.

"Drug possession is a very easy crime to enforce and you rarely step on peoples' toes in doing so. Ditto with speeding and parking tickets. Trying to prevent violent crimes is a lot harder and you often get into "profiling issues" and the whole, "no, OUR nice little city doesn't have a gang problem!!" types of stuff. "

Dude are you F***** kidding me? Doesnt step on peoples toes? So i could lose my college loans for a joint when it 'doesnt step on anyone's toes'. You sir are wrong. What about when i got pulled over and i missed my graduation practice because he took an hour to search my car? Yea he TOTALLY didnt step on my toes did he? You know why he searched me? Because i had a sublime shirt on that profiled me.

"Also, quite a few of the druggies aren't really much of an asset to society anyway. I don't want them in jail because it costs a lot of money to keep people in jail and they're not much of a threat, not because we're missing the vast contribution to society that a crackhead provides. "

Hey dont diss on crackheads....they contribute.. kinda.....okay agreed XD but thats my point, why put the users in jail when they arent the ones causing all the ruckus?

But dont get me wrong if someone is intoxicated on anything including weed, while doing anything other than being at home enjoying yourself -movies games, i like writing - etc etc, then they should spend an overnighter in jail and face a DUI charge like for alcohol which is far worse than weed could ever be.

Now there are several articles that suggest people who have smoked weed are far less to get in an accident than alcohol, but i dont care, driving intoxicated is a dumb choice regardless.

Okay 40 Million isnt a majority but neither were African american's when they demanded their rights from the government. But your average person does not care about weed one way or the other, but if they are informed they will tell you they hate there tax money being wasted in such a terrible fashion.

 

[MU_Engineer]

Wow dude because i dont go to college and get good grades? No i doubt it, weed is a personal choice and i am absolutely fine being stoned. And I know it doesn't hurt MY productivity because i am one of the few responsible users out there.

Dude common sense would say that smoking anything at all has "negative" consequences. But everyday life has negative consequences that are far worse than a joint. Hell, the food we eat has chemicals that are bad for you and your doctor will tell you all day you should not eat them but guess what? We do anyway.

You missed my point. Your arguments that marijuana is good for people aren't going to go very far in persuading people that marijuana should be legalized- in fact, you're probably just going to shoot yourself in the foot by using them. It doesn't do anything good to people with the exception of a small number of people with certain medical conditions that can be symptomatically treated with THC. I would strongly suggest going at it from a different angle, such as the fact that the prohibition is ineffective, the government shouldn't tell us what is good or bad for us, etc. etc.

Dude are you F***** kidding me? Doesnt step on peoples toes? So i could lose my college loans for a joint when it 'doesnt step on anyone's toes'. You sir are wrong. What about when i got pulled over and i missed my graduation practice because he took an hour to search my car? Yea he TOTALLY didnt step on my toes did he? You know why he searched me? Because i had a sublime shirt on that profiled me.

I'll bet you live in an area with a pretty homogeneous population if you don't realize I am talking about accusations of racial profiling when I say "stepping on peoples' toes." I live in an area with a large minority population and any police action that even appears to target the areas where they are more prevalent is darn near automatically classified as "profiling." It doesn't matter if there are a disproportionate number of calls reporting crime in that area and the police are merely responding- it's still profiling in the eyes of a certain very vocal contingent.. The city council is liberal as hell and even the mere suggestion that there is any profiling going on sends them into a tizzy and they pull the cops out of those areas. The cops thus take on much "softer" targets like speeding, underage alcohol possession, and DWI/drug checkpoints. It's very hard to be accused of profiling in those situations. You have already established the speeder is breaking the law with your radar gun. Underage alcohol possession is patrolled around campus and it's mostly white kids and Asians; Jesse Jackson isn't going to give a crap if you arrest them. DWI and drug checkpoints are not profiling as you stop EVERY car on a major road.

It does suck that you got pulled over and searched just for wearing a Sublime shirt. But like I was saying above, unless you are a member of a certain group of people, you can be profiled to no end and nobody cares.

Hey dont diss on crackheads....they contribute.. kinda.....okay agreed XD but thats my point, why put the users in jail when they arent the ones causing all the ruckus?

I thought I said that they didn't need to be put in jail as they weren't much of a threat.

But dont get me wrong if someone is intoxicated on anything including weed, while doing anything other than being at home enjoying yourself -movies games, i like writing - etc etc, then they should spend an overnighter in jail and face a DUI charge like for alcohol which is far worse than weed could ever be.

Now there are several articles that suggest people who have smoked weed are far less to get in an accident than alcohol, but i dont care, driving intoxicated is a dumb choice regardless.

...and it is already illegal. Driving under the influence of any impairing substance, be it alcohol, sleeping pills, marijuana, or other drugs, is already illegal.

Okay 40 Million isnt a majority but neither were African american's when they demanded their rights from the government.

There were a LOT of non-black people that saw the current laws were unjust and demanded that the laws be changed. Civil rights legislation was passed just the same as other legislation, so there had to be at least somewhere around half of the general population that supported it, and only a few percent of that population was black.

But your average person does not care about weed one way or the other, but if they are informed they will tell you they hate there tax money being wasted in such a terrible fashion.

The average person actually does not care very much about their tax money being wasted because they pay little or no income taxes (which is where almost all of the money used to run prisons comes from, if it isn't borrowed.) 40% of American households do not pay any income taxes at all. The next 35% of households pay a little over 10% of the total tax burden. It's really only the top quarter of income earners that pay much for taxes as those people pay nearly 90% of the entire country's tax burden. This is immediately apparent if you follow politics very much as the political landscape would be VASTLY different if people did actually care about the wasting of tax money. The Libertarians would be the very dominant political party and their main competition would be the "libertarian-lite" people in the Republican Party like Ron Paul rather than spending-happy "compassionate conservatives" like G.W. Bush. The Democrats in their current form would be a fringe party (like the Libertarians are now) as the vast majority of their platform is wasteful spending (bailouts, Cash For Clunkers, welfare, "green jobs," SCHIP, socialized medicine, etc., etc., ad nauseum.)

 

[Albyint]

"I'll bet you live in an area with a pretty homogeneous population if you don't realize I am talking about accusations of racial profiling when I say "stepping on peoples' toes." I live in an area with a large minority population and any police action that even appears to target the areas where they are more prevalent is darn near automatically classified as "profiling."

I live in a metropolitan suburb that has a large mixed population. Not homogenous in the least. i understood what you meant by profiling. Though i am white I still take offense to being stereotyped and profiled.

"I thought I said that they didn't need to be put in jail as they weren't much of a threat."

Dude i was agreeing with you

"The average person actually does not care very much about their tax money being wasted because they pay little or no income taxes (which is where almost all of the money used to run prisons comes from, if it isn't borrowed.) 40% of American households do not pay any income taxes at all. The next 35% of households pay a little over 10% of the total tax burden. It's really only the top quarter of income earners that pay much for taxes as those people pay nearly 90% of the entire country's tax burden. This is immediately apparent if you follow politics very much as the political landscape would be VASTLY different if people did actually care about the wasting of tax money. The Libertarians would be the very dominant political party and their main competition would be the "libertarian-lite" people in the Republican Party like Ron Paul rather than spending-happy "compassionate conservatives" like G.W. Bush. The Democrats in their current form would be a fringe party (like the Libertarians are now) as the vast majority of their platform is wasteful spending (bailouts, Cash For Clunkers, welfare, "green jobs," SCHIP, socialized medicine, etc., etc., ad nauseum.)"


Dude and prisons are privately owned. Now they get money from the government based on how full they are, which may be what you are talking about. And income tax, EVERY BIT OF IT, goes towards paying on the interest of our national debt. Other things like you mentioned come from the corporate income tax, which if you follow the annual budgets matches exactly how much we spend on everything else that isnt related to our terrible terrible debt.

And personally i would love o see the rise of a third party overtake the BS our country has been getting into. ever since nixon we have had a string of tyrannical, evil, assholes in power. I would love to see ron paul come in and shake things up. He would without question get rid of the war on drugs and the IRS. Perhaps even on the same day :-D

I would debate more with you but i gotta go get something to eat. (keep up the responses your keeping me on ma toes )

 

[FREERAVEN]

So ! Here it is ! You are allowed to have an opinion, it does not make it right however its pointless to argue with a man that has not walked in the shoes of both an addict of any substance, and the shoes of a clean man. This strangestranger is simply pushing your buttons and has no "experience" only "opinions" so they do not matter. Ignorence is bliss after all !

Let me say i have been deep in the tunnels of addiction, and i have clawed my way out and sprinted my way back in many times. I am older now! vision is clear and can see both the mind and thought process of an addict and of a straight person.

Marijuana seems to be the REAL topic i dont see people calling for outright legalization of meth or herion ect. however more humane and effective ways of dealing with these drugs needs to be created. Its a health problem not a crime problem, get your path set from the start or you will never reach your destination!
The crime is a side effect of the illegality of any substance profitiblity is created by the lucritive status of an outlawed substance.

So as for Marijuana! Its a love affair.. Very similar to that of someone who enjoys various wines. there are so many different strains of marijuana with different flavours, textures, smell, tastes, and of course highs. one could spend his whole life growing and seeking out all of the different combinations and never have had tasted al that the drug has to offer. this is just the recreational use of the substance and the world of medicine is finding different properties all the time.

So eliminate the standard arguments, Smoking kills.. YES but The THC ( tetra hydra cannabinol, the key to its intoxicating properties burns at a lower level than the rest of the plant actually causes the smoke. One can use a vaporizer that can be found at any shop that knows what its doing, and this allows you to cook the weed to the point at wich you only inhale the vapour of the THC.. problem solved!

The THC is mildly intoxicating yes but so is beer wine coffee and ciggarettes and you dont see people being jailed for simple use of that. THC is actually a vascular dilator with many uses, it can ease pain without the side effects of many other drugs and can be used to stimulate appetite in people undergoing kemo therapy.
Many other uses are saving peoples live now that some level of testing is being allowed after years of government interference!

The Drug can cause mild schizophrenia, dillusions, and paranoia. I will argue that depression and anger are often a symptom of withdrawl and not a symptom of using. So yes in a percentage of people this drug can cause negative effects but have you seen super size me? So can MCdonalds as an overly exagerated example.
its up to each person to regulate the things they put in there body not the government and not strangerstrangers. Its not illegal to do things to your body that are unhealthy its illlegal to hurt others with your actions that may or may not have been brought on by this lifestyle.

The plant is not causing the crime the crime is a self fulfilling phrophecy!

So as not to rant for too long i will simply state the obvious.

If you were stupid before you smoked your gonna be stupid after. it does not make you any smarter it does not make you lose sight of right and wrong. It does make you dependant on a substance and that can cause problems wether its cigarettes or marijuana or booze or coffee. Stop punishing peole for experimenting with FREEDOM! LEGALIZE FREEDOM NOW!

and dont say decriminalization that word is a lie! say legal thats the truth! beer is not decriminalized its beer. they will only build rules around the decrim name that lead to even worse prohibition then we see now!

 

[Bruceification73]

I'm one of the few non-users that think it should be legal. It doesn't appeal to me, but neither do cigarettes, and for those of you quoting long term health problems, that is where you need to start. Its rediculous to say cigarettes, alcohol, fast food, coffee, guns, ect are all legal and fine, but cause more damage than all illegal drugs combined. If we are going to live in a free society we should have the right to make bad decisions as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others...at that point they should become illegal. EVERY study on the subject shows criminalization does not deter use. If they appeal to you, you will do it whether its criminal or not. And you can be a big fat hypocrite like Rush Limbaugh and others, but the sad truth is there is no logic to our current laws. Just check out the countries that have decriminalized drugs...they thrive and have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Not to mention the actual number of people who have drug 'problems" (junkies) seems to stay stable or actually decrease.

when has coffee ever killed anyone? It has twice the anti-oxidants of green tea, and tastes way better. Also, guns save more people than they kill. Don't be a dum85h17, know your facts.

On the other hand, although I strongly oppose using illegal drugs, or any drugs, when one considers what happened when we banned alcohol, it simply makes no sense to ban drugs. Instead, we should do more to discourage their use and destroy the opiate plantations all around the world.

Anyway, just my two cents. (but seriously, when has coffee killed anyone?)

 

[Bruceification73]

undeductated

You must smoke pot.

 

[audiovoodoo]

The problem with cannabis is the long term effects it has on a person, from extreme paranoia to depression and Schizophrenia, these are all documented side effects...now granted not all people suffer from these effects, but some do, and it is a case of protecting those that do not those that will smoke their whole lives and never have a problem.

There is no easy solution to the drug epedemic that is gripping the world, they will always be there, i only hope that my children will not feel the need to go down that path by the love and education I give them. That goes the same for Alcohol in my house!!!

And the long term affects of Alcohol are?? Lets get this straight. The main reason for the war on drugs has more to do with the prowess of the lobbyists than anything else. The Portman group in the UK continues to promote alcohol and protect the interests of commercial bodies. Why? Because they know if other substances were available it would hit their bottom line.

If you take the UK calcification system for drugs and applied it to Alcohol it would be listed as a class A drug, the most dangerous drug their is on their scale. Unlike Coke, Speed, Acid, Weed taking somebody who is Alcohol dependent and stopping their supply can induce death. It is habit forming, it is addictive and yet I'm able to buy it most anywhere and for a very modest price.

In the UK Ecstasy was all over the news when the parents of Leah Betts cried to the news reporters about how their poor daughter was killed by it. WRONG She died of taking an excessive amount of water. More recently we have had the scandal of Methadrone where the press have reported a number of deaths. In every case it had been taken in conjunction with large amounts of Alcohol. Most people fail to look past the headlines. Again this is the same with Cocaine, metabolism with alcohol produces unique compounds which are far more dangerous than the drug in pure form.

If you look at Holland who take a far more grown up attitude to drugs (and in particular Cannabis) and compare it to the UK you will find that they have a far lower rate of usage amongst their youth. It's not seen as an act of rebellion in the same way it is here. Also people talk about it, the stigma is removed and people can be open and honest about what they do without fear of persecution. Despite Ecstasy being illegal there are testing facilities within certain night clubs where you can get your stash tested for purity. Regardless of what they find you get it given back and are free to make your own educated and informed decision.

If you want credibility in the war on drugs then inherently you are left with the question of what to do with Alcohol. If they banned it tomorrow then I would give the war some credibility, as it is I see the whole war as being motivated by commercial bodies.

And for a final shot at the war on drugs. Can anybody explain to me why the Peak availability of Heroin on the world market comes after the US decided to invade the country where 90% of the worlds supply is grown??


It's all politics and not science.

 

[audiovoodoo]

Rock on man!!

And you just go to show that you don't need drugs to be messed up!

 

[strangestranger]

Just scottish, tis all.

 

[audiovoodoo]

... and sober. It's the sober bit that truly worries me.

 

[strangestranger]

What could be worse than a sober scotsman you ask, one with brains I say. Thankfully I am lacking in those.

 

[Reynod]

This topic has been closed by Reynod