Soft Drugs: What gives?

[Love_Actually]

I think it should be legalized, if it can help treat some diseases, we should do it. However, I'm totally against them mixing it with a ton of other chemical products, it should remain as pure and natural possible.

[yomom1919]

Like alcohol, once soft drugs are legalized, violent crimes and criminal organizations that exist as a result of the illegality of these drugs will be nullified.

 

 

 

Actully I don't agree, there will always be a "black market" type of thing going on in the drug world, people selling for cheaper, to younger people, etc. Legalizing them would not help at all imo.

 

Yes it would,there could not be a "black market" if it were to be legalised...

 

 

 

I believe he said "soft drugs". Last time I checked, coke, heroin, acid, meth etc. were not too 'soft'. He's talking about pot. There are still millions of coke addicts in the U.S., along with the aforementioned drugs. The black market will still very well exist. Its loosing its biggest drug, yes, but its also its cheapest drug.

[BlueTear]

I said that in my original post, THC levels are unregualted and dangerously high. Also dealers are not careful about keeping the drugs they deal in decanted, so other hard drugs can potentially be mixed in.

THC is the active substance in marijuana. Marijuana has never killed anyone. So just how dangerous is dangerously high levels of THC? And dealers accidentally mixing the [cabbage] with harder drugs is just another piece of evidence that the whole getting "less drug dealers" is not a major factor.

Um' date=' ok? The demand is high from the number of people using marijuana, and the supply is not exactly unequal. Don't understand what you are saying here.[/quote']The idea that it would be cheap because it's legal isn't quite based on fact IMHO. Though strictly speaking, that mostly an aside to the main point I was making in that section; If it ain't addictive, people don't steal to afford it.

We already have a pathetic attempt at control and regualtion of marijuana: "It's illegal." Which is causing a lot more problems than if it were legal and under government control. One more substance to regulate is a small price to pay for lowering crime rate' date=' freeing up jail space, and oh, making massive profit from the legal sales.[/quote']Oh c'mon... Lowering crime rates surronding the use of pot is, as I've said, a contradictory concept. Lowering crime rates because the crime isn't illegal anymore; Meh. That really a route we want to go? And for profit; Surely a government turning a profit is not something we want to be considered before other aspects; Social, health etcetc.

 

 

 

People are addicted to heroin for completely different reasons than alcohol. Alcohol addiction is bodily dependence, heroin addiction is for the highs. People choose to use heroin because of the highs, alcohol addiction results from unconsciously drinking more and more. They are in different leagues.

Exactly? Alcohol is a cheaper, less hazardous intoxicant. Yet people still choose to use heroin.

 

 

 

Right, so we should use one of the most dangerous drugs out there for purposes that are already served by other substances :roll: Why use heroin when it has no unique uses and will damage patients.

See, I didn't pick heroin and morphine out of the blue, I picked them because they have the same physiological effect; Heroin just acts faster, and requires less mass to acheieve the same effect. But the actual effect is the same; A smaller dose of heroin can be used to cause the same painkilling relief as morphine. Properly dosed, it won't damage patients any more than morphine will.

 

 

 

Medical use does not make it fitting for recreational use (And that being said; Not using it medically is pure idiocy considering the various uses).

 

 

 

That is because I have little to no experience with either of them. In fact I have never heard of a drop in intelligence caused by marijuana and would like to see some proof of it.

I orginally read about in a book I found in a library on a break a few years ago. It was on one of those "PICK ME!" shelves so I picked it up and skimmed parts of it. The thing worth noting about the book is that the primary argument it was making about marijuana is that the current drug classification is wrong; It is nowhere near as dangerous as the other drugs in the category (and while I agree with that assessment, I'm not quite willing to stretch that into making it legal - though as I said, medical use is one thing). It noted that while there is a drop in learning etc. these effects were reversible, you just had to stop. But these effects outlasted the high's by quite a while, and frequent use would still cause an impairment - albeit not permanent.

 

 

 

Since I don't remember the name of the book, you'll have to settle for section from this .gov site I caught off a quick google;

study of 129 college students found that, among those who smoked the drug at least 27 of the 30 days prior to being surveyed, critical skills related to attention, memory, and learning were significantly impaired, even after the students had not taken the drug for at least 24 hours(19). These "heavy" marijuana abusers had more trouble sustaining and shifting their attention and in registering, organizing, and using information than did the study participants who had abused marijuana no more than 3 of the previous 30 days. As a result, someone who smokes marijuana every day may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level all of the time.

 

 

 

More recently, the same researchers showed that the ability of a group of long-term heavy marijuana abusers to recall words from a list remained impaired for a week after quitting, but returned to normal within 4 weeks(24). Thus, some cognitive abilities may be restored in individuals who quit smoking marijuana, even after long-term heavy use.

 

 

 

 

 

And after looking around, I'm really quite confuzzled about the whole non-addictive thing. I was fairly certain it was less dangerous/addictive than alcohol, but near enough as I can tell, that's not quite the same thing as being actually non-addictive in the physiological sense.

[guss]

In my book the only soft one is... a flintstone, George carlins too

[tomdavies90]

i stopped reading at

 

 

 

LSD, psilocybin and cannabis (among others) are far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes

 

 

 

just because they are less harmful doesnt mean they arent harmful. thats like saying i'll have less of a chance of dieing a i poke an unexploded bomb with a stick then if i poke 2...

 

 

 

DRUGS are still DRUGS soft or not

 

Urm but that's the point, they are less harmful, yet tobacco and alcohol are legal whilst drugs aren't. Simple as that. Saying that if they were legalised the only one I would even consider would be Cannabis, but I'd take as small an amount as possible, and use it only when severley dull. Playing videogames whilst stoned must be pretty fun too, imagining all the stuff going in is real.

[martinisback]

i stopped reading at

 

 

 

LSD, psilocybin and cannabis (among others) are far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes

 

 

 

just because they are less harmful doesnt mean they arent harmful. thats like saying i'll have less of a chance of dieing a i poke an unexploded bomb with a stick then if i poke 2...

 

 

 

DRUGS are still DRUGS soft or not

 

Urm but that's the point, they are less harmful, yet tobacco and alcohol are legal whilst drugs aren't. Simple as that. Saying that if they were legalised the only one I would even consider would be Cannabis, but I'd take as small an amount as possible, and use it only when severley dull. Playing videogames whilst stoned must be pretty fun too, imagining all the stuff going in is real.

 

 

 

Well Tobacoo is legalized for one reason, and thats cause the Government is making a TON of money. Thats no way going to be illegalized, unless a government thinks HEALTH over MONEY. Also, drinking causes more harm to us is because some Drink to much, and then when you drive it makes it more dangerous. I still need proof that some drugs are less harmful then Alchol...

[Snooooopy]

To the Author of this Topic.... Thanks

 

I was about to start a topic like this a couple of days ago but I got busy at work...

 

 

 

As a daily pot smoker of course it should be legalized, I've been smoking for roughly 8 years now started when i was 14 im 22 now, I work for a coorporation of apt communities im a site manager, hence i need to deal with alot of peoples checks, accounting,and I cannot mess up or it creates a whole lot of problems that I gotta fix later, needless to say my memory is good, im good at math, my brain works just fine, i may have alot more blonde moments when i smoke but sober im alright lol. Its only in the states where its illigal alot of other countries are being more open to the subject, thats why im taking a cruise to amasterdam for 2 weeks \ but im not smoking their cannabis :^o

 

 

 

Ive tried shrooms its natural better than doing acid or ecstacy harder drugs u know..

[Nom]

THC is the active substance in marijuana. Marijuana has never killed anyone. So just how dangerous is dangerously high levels of THC? And dealers accidentally mixing the [cabbage] with harder drugs is just another piece of evidence that the whole getting "less drug dealers" is not a major factor.

 

 

 

Exactly, THC is the active substance. It causes the highs that users experience. And we can state with reasonable certainty that it is causing the drop in intelligence that you are talking about, so less of it would be a good thing and make marijuana less harmful on the whole. And I stand by my argument on the reduction of drug dealers. If marijuana, the most abused illegal drug, is no longer illegal and profitable for them to sell, then they just lost a good portion of their business. And as I said before, users will be less likely to go to them when they have a legal soft drug that they can use.

 

 

 

The idea that it would be cheap because it's legal isn't quite based on fact IMHO. Though strictly speaking, that mostly an aside to the main point I was making in that section; If it ain't addictive, people don't steal to afford it.

 

 

 

I've said before, the dealers raise the price to maximize their profit. It would be cheaper legalized. But if this point is no longer a big issue, we can probably drop it.

 

 

 

Oh c'mon... Lowering crime rates surronding the use of pot is, as I've said, a contradictory concept. Lowering crime rates because the crime isn't illegal anymore; Meh. That really a route we want to go? And for profit; Surely a government turning a profit is not something we want to be considered before other aspects; Social, health etcetc.

 

 

 

I think you missed the point on that one: Using marijuana is a crime. People are therefore being punished for it, crowding jail space and backing up the legal system. If it wasn't a crime, they would not be arrested for it. And it should not be a crime, because pot is the least harmful of the drugs out there, we have established that.

 

 

 

And as for the government turning a profit, think of all the societal problems right now. The revenue from legal sales of marijuana can be put to good use rectifying these problems. And as far as putting it before other aspects, it doesn't make a difference, really. Instead of kids being told that it's illegal to smoke pot (which only draws them to it more), they are told the same thing as about alcohol and cigarettes, both of which are more harmful to the users in both their physical and social health.

 

 

 

Exactly? Alcohol is a cheaper, less hazardous intoxicant. Yet people still choose to use heroin.

 

 

 

Less hazardous? No, I don't think so. Alcohol is quite possibly the worst. And they still do not belong grouped together. People choose to use heroin because it produces the desired effect and they know it. Most people don't choose to get drunk, they cannot control their body's craving for more once they've had too much. It's addictive in a different way than heroin. Heroin is more of a mental (though it does cause bodily dependence, of course) addiction, and people choose to start using because, as I said, they want what it can offer. No one looks at alcohol the same way as they do heroin.

 

 

 

See, I didn't pick heroin and morphine out of the blue, I picked them because they have the same physiological effect; Heroin just acts faster, and requires less mass to acheieve the same effect. But the actual effect is the same; A smaller dose of heroin can be used to cause the same painkilling relief as morphine. Properly dosed, it won't damage patients any more than morphine will.

 

 

 

We already have morphine abuse as a problem. Why switch it out with heroin? It would just make the abuse way worse and more dangerous because, as you say, heroin is more potent. This isn't really relevant to marijuana, becuase marijuana has uses that cannot be replicated with larger doses of anything. I suggest we drop this as well.

 

 

 

Medical use does not make it fitting for recreational use (And that being said; Not using it medically is pure idiocy considering the various uses).

 

 

 

Then it seems we agree on this point.

 

 

 

I orginally read about in a book I found in a library on a break a few years ago. It was on one of those "PICK ME!" shelves so I picked it up and skimmed parts of it. The thing worth noting about the book is that the primary argument it was making about marijuana is that the current drug classification is wrong; It is nowhere near as dangerous as the other drugs in the category (and while I agree with that assessment, I'm not quite willing to stretch that into making it legal - though as I said, medical use is one thing). It noted that while there is a drop in learning etc. these effects were reversible, you just had to stop. But these effects outlasted the high's by quite a while, and frequent use would still cause an impairment - albeit not permanent.

 

 

 

Since I don't remember the name of the book, you'll have to settle for section from this .gov site I caught off a quick google;

study of 129 college students found that, among those who smoked the drug at least 27 of the 30 days prior to being surveyed, critical skills related to attention, memory, and learning were significantly impaired, even after the students had not taken the drug for at least 24 hours(19). These "heavy" marijuana abusers had more trouble sustaining and shifting their attention and in registering, organizing, and using information than did the study participants who had abused marijuana no more than 3 of the previous 30 days. As a result, someone who smokes marijuana every day may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level all of the time.

 

 

 

More recently, the same researchers showed that the ability of a group of long-term heavy marijuana abusers to recall words from a list remained impaired for a week after quitting, but returned to normal within 4 weeks(24). Thus, some cognitive abilities may be restored in individuals who quit smoking marijuana, even after long-term heavy use.

 

 

 

See first point about THC. And, since it seems that only the really heavy users suffered, and it is possible to recover, I can't see this as being an greater a problem than alcoholics, since they can quit and suffer no lasting damage, unlike alcoholics.

 

 

 

 

 

And after looking around, I'm really quite confuzzled about the whole non-addictive thing. I was fairly certain it was less dangerous/addictive than alcohol, but near enough as I can tell, that's not quite the same thing as being actually non-addictive in the physiological sense.

 

 

 

You've received testimony from actual posters who claim that they can easily put it down. What more can you need?

 

 

 

 

 

On a side note, good debate. Glad to see we can actually have one without flames. (Ignoring some of the other people posting. . . :uhh: )

[Giant_Torti]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

 

As a daily pot smoker of course it should be legalized, I've been smoking for roughly 8 years now started when i was 14 im 22 now.

 

 

 

Oh I see ...... yup I'm totally convinced, on that basis then shall we start picking and choosing which laws apply to everyone. So when people start looting and forcibly acquiring property to sell on for there next fix, that'll be ok because people have been doing it for ages eh?

 

 

 

The illegal narcotics trade spreads user related crime, misery and suffering to more than the person consuming whatever substance they are imbibing on. A fact that seems lost 'pro-substance' debaters.

[PaperClipsYaaaar]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

That's why it needs to be legalized.

[martinisback]

To the Author of this Topic.... Thanks

 

I was about to start a topic like this a couple of days ago but I got busy at work...

 

 

 

As a daily pot smoker of course it should be legalized, I've been smoking for roughly 8 years now started when i was 14 im 22 now, I work for a coorporation of apt communities im a site manager, hence i need to deal with alot of peoples checks, accounting,and I cannot mess up or it creates a whole lot of problems that I gotta fix later, needless to say my memory is good, im good at math, my brain works just fine, i may have alot more blonde moments when i smoke but sober im alright lol. Its only in the states where its illigal alot of other countries are being more open to the subject, thats why im taking a cruise to amasterdam for 2 weeks \ but im not smoking their cannabis :^o

 

 

 

Ive tried shrooms its natural better than doing acid or ecstacy harder drugs u know..

 

 

 

Nice man! 8 years of pot smoking= present. Cointuine the good work! Aim for 30!

[Giant_Torti]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

That's why it needs to be legalized.

 

 

 

Wonderful, so we get someone of the opinion that Marijuana has never killed anyone, then a confirmation that, drugs in fact do cause death, despair and suffering in the communities where tentacles gain a grasp.

 

 

 

The school of thought that legalizing something of this nature would make the related problems in society go away must be naivety of the highest (definitely no pun intended) order.

 

 

 

Don't think I'm being all moralising etc on this, its just that I've seen so much crap on this subject, at first hand in most instances as to the eventual consequences of usage of narcotics and I don't think anyone's life is worth trading in for a chemically induced state of mind.

 

 

 

Realistically I don't think that theres ever going to be a day when mankind releases itself from the shackles of destroying itself with all manner of intoxicating substances, but one can hope.

 

 

 

Before anyone comes back with "Don't knock it until you've tried it".

 

Been there done that, moved on.

[PaperClipsYaaaar]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

That's why it needs to be legalized.

 

 

 

Wonderful, so we get someone of the opinion that Marijuana has never killed anyone, then a confirmation that, drugs in fact do cause death, despair and suffering in the communities where tentacles gain a grasp.

 

 

 

The school of thought that legalizing something of this nature would make the related problems in society go away must be naivety of the highest (definitely no pun intended) order.

 

 

 

Don't think I'm being all moralising etc on this, its just that I've seen so much crap on this subject, at first hand in most instances as to the eventual consequences of usage of narcotics and I don't think anyone's life is worth trading in for a chemically induced state of mind.

 

 

 

Realistically I don't think that theres ever going to be a day when mankind releases itself from the shackles of destroying itself with all manner of intoxicating substances, but one can hope.

 

 

 

Before anyone comes back with "Don't knock it until you've tried it".

 

Been there done that, moved on.

 

When was the last time you saw a gang war caused by beer or wine?

 

 

 

This is not about your morals. This is about history. The legalization of soft substances has been proven to work.

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_of_alcohol

[guss]

i stopped reading at

 

 

 

LSD, psilocybin and cannabis (among others) are far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes

 

 

 

just because they are less harmful doesnt mean they arent harmful. thats like saying i'll have less of a chance of dieing a i poke an unexploded bomb with a stick then if i poke 2...

 

 

 

DRUGS are still DRUGS soft or not

 

Urm but that's the point, they are less harmful, yet tobacco and alcohol are legal whilst drugs aren't. Simple as that. Saying that if they were legalised the only one I would even consider would be Cannabis, but I'd take as small an amount as possible, and use it only when severley dull. Playing videogames whilst stoned must be pretty fun too, imagining all the stuff going in is real.

 

 

 

Well Tobacoo is legalized for one reason, and thats cause the Government is making a TON of money. Thats no way going to be illegalized, unless a government thinks HEALTH over MONEY. Also, drinking causes more harm to us is because some Drink to much, and then when you drive it makes it more dangerous. I still need proof that some drugs are less harmful then Alchol...

 

 

 

 

 

Relly the government legalized it because of Religous seremonys, Alchol at least. wht i relly found funny, he he, there is no Nutrition facts on a cigarettes (tobaco) packet because you dont eat them, any one want to demonstrate how you are only eating cigarettes in cort, you will be my hero(happy about smoking in movies hase rating higher) and i wish this didnt have to be a long quote.

 

 

 

-----------------------------

 

Neeed person to eat cigarettes in cort! for runescape prank!

[martinisback]

i stopped reading at

 

 

 

LSD, psilocybin and cannabis (among others) are far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes

 

 

 

just because they are less harmful doesnt mean they arent harmful. thats like saying i'll have less of a chance of dieing a i poke an unexploded bomb with a stick then if i poke 2...

 

 

 

DRUGS are still DRUGS soft or not

 

Urm but that's the point, they are less harmful, yet tobacco and alcohol are legal whilst drugs aren't. Simple as that. Saying that if they were legalised the only one I would even consider would be Cannabis, but I'd take as small an amount as possible, and use it only when severley dull. Playing videogames whilst stoned must be pretty fun too, imagining all the stuff going in is real.

 

 

 

Well Tobacoo is legalized for one reason, and thats cause the Government is making a TON of money. Thats no way going to be illegalized, unless a government thinks HEALTH over MONEY. Also, drinking causes more harm to us is because some Drink to much, and then when you drive it makes it more dangerous. I still need proof that some drugs are less harmful then Alchol...

 

 

 

 

 

Relly the government legalized it because of Religous seremonys, Alchol at least. wht i relly found funny, he he, there is no Nutrition facts on a cigarettes (tobaco) packet because you dont eat them, any one want to demonstrate how you are only eating cigarettes in cort, you will be my hero(happy about smoking in movies hase rating higher) and i wish this didnt have to be a long quote.

 

 

 

-----------------------------

 

Neeed person to eat cigarettes in cort! for runescape prank!

 

 

 

Um, i didnt understand anything you said accept for the legalizing alchol about religious cermonies, and thats not really the case..

[IGoddessI]

People use heroin because of the highs

 

 

 

You should be careful when you make generalisations :D. Generally heroin is taken for its' euphoric effect. However, heroin can be used for mood modifiers, especially by women users with mental health/personality disorders to level out their social personalities (Room 1996). Heroin is also often used for short-term anxiety relief, used inappropriately to maintain weight loss and to temporarily escape psychological memories such as sexual abuse. There are other reasons and it depends on each user.

 

 

 

Here are a few quotes I've personally taken from counselling heroin users (Names have been changed).

 

 

 

"I've gotta show that he doesn't have complete control over me, don't I?" - Lisa (21).

 

 

 

Lisa felt an increase in power and control in some aspects in her life such as her relationship and her employment.

 

 

 

Dawn (27) remembered feeling repulsed by the whole heroin scene. She felt "confident and really good". She managed to stay clean to finish a 2 year post graduate course. She still found her heroin use very pleasurable but felt it could cause her problems in her career.

 

 

 

Dawn managed to limit her use to the end of the week when she was not working and not beyond her financial means.

 

 

 

And to the ignorant who think alcohol is safe:

 

 

 

Alcohol is the third leading cause of death in Australia and second leading cause of death in Australia for women, accounting for 900 deaths in 1998 compared to 185 illicit drug related deaths (NH&MRC 2001).

 

 

 

70% of Australian children under the age of 13 report having consumed alcohol and this increases to 90% by the young age of 15 (AIHW 2002a). Compared to 40-50% of Australians aged 16-24 years who have reported trying cannabis at least once (PDPC 2002), the 10% of older adolescents and young adults who have tried amphetamines (Moon et al. 1999), the 7% of older adolescents and young adults who have tried MDMA (who mind you most users were relatively well educated and mostly employed) (AIHW 2002a), the 7% of young people who have tried chroming compared to the 2% who do it on a regular basis (Moon et al. 1999) and 1% of young Australians who have at least tried opiates (AIHW 2002a).

[Nom]

People use heroin because of the highs

 

 

 

You should be careful when you make generalisations :D. Generally they are taken for their euphoric effect. However, heroin can be used for mood modifiers, especially by women users with mental health/personality disorders to level out their social personalities (Room 1996). Heroin is also often used for short-term anxiety relief, used inappropriately to maintain weight loss and to temporarily escape psychological memories such as sexual abuse. There are other reasons and it depends on each user.

 

 

 

Here are a few quotes I've personally taken from counselling heroin users (Names have been changed).

 

 

 

"I've gotta show that he doesn't have complete control over me, don't I?" - Lisa (21).

 

 

 

Lisa felt an increase in power and control in some aspects in her life such as her relationship and her employment.

 

 

 

Dawn (27) remembered feeling repulsed by the whole heroin scene. She felt "confident and really good". She managed to stay clean to finish a 2 year post graduate course. She still found her heroin use very pleasurable but felt it could cause her problems in her career.

 

 

 

Dawn managed to limit her use to the end of the week when she was not working and not beyond her financial means.

 

 

 

And to the ignorant who think alcohol is safe:

 

 

 

Alcohol is the third leading cause of death in Australia and second leading cause of death in Australia for women, accounting for 900 deaths in 1998 compared to 185 illicit drug related deaths (NH&MRC 2001).

 

 

 

70% of Australian children under the age of 13 report having consumed alcohol and this increases to 90% by the young age of 15 (AIHW 2002a). Compared to 40-50% of Australians aged 16-24 years who have reported trying cannabis at least once (PDPC 2002), the 10% of older adolescents and young adults who have tried amphetamines (Moon et al. 1999), the 7% of older adolescents and young adults who have tried MDMA (who mind you most users were relatively well educated and mostly employed) (AIHW 2002a), the 7% of young people who have tried chroming compared to the 2% who do it on a regular basis (Moon et al. 1999) and 1% of young Australians who have at least tried opiates (AIHW 2002a).

 

 

 

Meh, when taken out of context I guess you could do that, but it only furthers my argument in our little debate. People use heroin for completely different reasons than alcohol. But thanks for the tidbits :

 

 

 

Oh, and the alcohol stuff, I worship you on my knees for providing solid statistics :thumbsup:

[IGoddessI]

No problem, it took me 40 mins to find it all, have books and papers scattered all over the bed :oops: I'm passionate about the subject so it's all good :thumbsup:

[Mithril_Max]

The only way id be ok with pot being legalized is if they treat it to the same laws of smoking and drinking, where you could only smoke outside or in smoking areas... also you would not be able to be high in public for obvious reasons... then id be ok

[Giant_Torti]

When was the last time you saw a gang war caused by beer or wine?

 

 

 

On the news.

 

 

 

Rioting and generally anti-social behaviour.

 

 

 

If you mean in real life, hmm that would be a fracas I witnessed New Years Eve a few years ago.

 

 

 

So are you trying the tired and well worn out approach of "This stuff is legal, but a certain sector causes problems, so therefore my choice of narcotic should be legal"? Fatally flawed argument.

 

 

 

This is not about your morals

 

 

 

I didn't it say this discussion was about my morals, I said I was not moralising, which is a slightly different context of the word.

 

 

 

To moralise.

 

1. Interpret the moral meaning of

 

"moralise a story"

 

- moralize

 

 

 

2. Speak as if delivering a sermon; express moral judgements

 

- sermonize, sermonise [brit], preachify, moralize

 

 

 

3. Improve the morals of

 

- moralize

 

 

 

This is about history.

 

 

 

I beg to differ, this is about all our futures.

 

 

 

The legalization of soft substances has been proven to work.

 

 

 

Again flawed argument, alcohol addiction and its damaging effects on the person and society in general have been well documented. What your merely doing is looking to replace one substance with another. Hardly a good move I think.

[Led-Zeppelin]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

 

That is killing people indirectly. Not the drug itself, I think you would find the problem behind the gang fights is greed and ego, not marajuana. :roll:

 

 

 

We're saying no one has ever OD'd on the stuff.

[IGoddessI]

I read something today and thought of this thread, enjoy.

 

 

 

In 1974, Szasz, writing about drug policy, asked:

 

 

 

Why is it that:

 

A man who sells alcohol is a retail merchant

 

A man who sells drugs is a pusher?

 

An alcoholic with DT's ends up in a hospital

 

A drug user who hallucinates ends up in a jail?

 

 

 

(Szasz 1974, p. 131, 1st edn)

[Giant_Torti]

Marijuana has never killed anyone.

 

 

 

Never heard of drug related homicides then? Gangs have fought, maimed and killed for 'control' of the streets where this stuff gets peddled.

 

 

 

That is killing people indirectly. Not the drug itself, I think you would find the problem behind the gang fights is greed and ego, not marajuana. :roll:

 

 

 

We're saying no one has ever OD'd on the stuff.

 

 

 

I know what the poster was driving at, I'm saying theres more to this than someone 'firing up the challis'.

 

 

 

Just because you feel no one has died in its consumption doesn't make everything 'hunky-dory'.

 

 

 

An avoidable death ....

 

 

 

Still think drugs are fun and safe ?

 

 

 

Still not convinced?

 

 

 

At the end of the day there's going to be people that are so ingrained in there ways, (addicted?) choosing to do whatever. Fine, really I have no problem with that, go turn your brains to mush doing whatever substance(s).

 

 

 

But if your going to choose that kind of lifestyle, get used to associating with people for whom law-breaking is a career, doing time or paying fines isn't a deterrent. Like I've said in a previous post, substance ab(use) isn't glamorous whether it be a rampaging group of pissed up youths causing trouble for a neighbourhood or some junkie stealing whatever to get their next hit.

 

 

 

The facts remain that substance abuse/use, violent crime, death and mental health issues are inextricably linked. The suggestion that the legalisation of cannabis, etc would somehow remove these issues is short-sighted at best and recklessly dangerous at worse.

 

 

 

I'm just wondering if anyone can move past the 'bad alcohol - legalise pot' argument....

[IGoddessI]

Good points, however drug use will always continue, legalised or not.

 

 

 

Australia has recognised that and introduced the "harm minimisation" approach to drug users.

[Giant_Torti]

Good points, however drug use will always continue, legalised or not.

 

 

 

 

If your replying to my last post, thanks.

 

 

 

Yes I'd agree drug use will always continue, but I don't think theres anything wrong with giving anyone and everyone 'fair warning' of even 'harmless dabbling' (assuming there is such a thing) of any (btw I'm including alchohol here) 'substance'.

 

 

 

Even if one person reads all this, thinks for themselves and decides "Hmm Nope this isn't for me", then its been a worthwhile exercise and a productive debate.