RE: Legalizing Drugs.

RE: Legalizing Drugs. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

CruelNUnsual -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 12:54:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kidwithknife quote: ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual Amsterdam decriminalized and portions of the city are uninhabitable. On the other hand, a smaller percentage of young people have tried drugs there then in either the US or the UK. i highly doubt that, and there is evidence in Portugal that decriminilization has led to increases in mj and ecstasy use.

Vendaval -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 12:55:44 PM)
Mr. Rodgers, There is a wealth of research in the scientific literature on this very subject. You can find many of the studies on The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Website, part of the National Institutes of Health. Enter the term "genetic predisposition" in the site's search engine, http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/ Below is a sample of what you will find. "Biomarkers for alcohol use and abuse, a summary" Karen Peterson, Ph.D. "Clinicians can use several biochemical measurements to objectively assess patients’ current or past alcohol use. However, none of these currently available biomarkers—including measures of various liver enzymes and blood volume—are ideal. Several more experimental markers hold promise for measuring acute alcohol consumption and relapse. These include certain alcohol byproducts, such as acetaldehyde, ethyl glucuronide (EtG), and fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEE), as well as two measures of sialic acid, a carbohydrate that appears to be altered in alcoholics. Some progress has been made in finding markers that predict people’s genetic predisposition to alcoholism, such as genetic differences in several neurotransmitters, including beta-endorphin and gamma-aminobutryic acid (GABA)." http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh28-1/30-37.pdf quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Of course, smoking vrs mainlining for example. You also have to factor in genetic predispositions to additction. That includes one side of my family. quote: ORIGINAL: vincent63 youre right vendaval, but dont delivery system also affects addictiveness There exists no genetic predisposition to addiction. There can be an inherited addiction which is through birth and is a physiological but not genetic born addiction. Most addicition is environmentally passed along, so father an alcoholic, son and an alcoholic etc. I am pretty sure that if one side of the family is hooked it is not genetic or both sides of the family would similarly be affected as both sides would have acquired...the gene.

kidwithknife -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 2:27:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual i highly doubt that, and there is evidence in Portugal that decriminilization has led to increases in mj and ecstasy use. It's a statistical fact as far as Amsterdam is concerned. See http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/annual-report/2008 What's the evidence for Portugal?

CruelNUnsual -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 2:56:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kidwithknife quote: ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual i highly doubt that, and there is evidence in Portugal that decriminilization has led to increases in mj and ecstasy use. It's a statistical fact as far as Amsterdam is concerned. See http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/annual-report/2008 What's the evidence for Portugal? http://www.idpc.info/php-bin/documents/BFDPP_BP_14_EffectsOfDecriminalisation_EN.pdf.pdf

kidwithknife -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 3:44:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual http://www.idpc.info/php-bin/documents/BFDPP_BP_14_EffectsOfDecriminalisation_EN.pdf.pdf Thanks for that. Some observations from a preliminary reading. Firstly, while ecstasy and cannabis use have gone up (although that's further complicated by the fact the cannabis use mirrors a similiar rise that's taken place across much of Europe), heroin use has fallen. And the number of deaths from drug use has heavily fallen, as has the amount of drug related disease cases. It also seems that more drug addicts are getting treatment. On the negative side, it does look like more crimes with a strong drugs element are happening. To draw some tentative conclusions from the Portugal experience. It does definitely seem that drug decriminalisation does not necessarily lead to a fall in drug use. On the other hand, if we look at the US it would seem that having strict drug laws does not reduce drug use either. That would suggest to me that this issue is probably more heavily effected by other social factors then the legal status of drugs. It does seem that decriminalisation does lead to the reduction in public health problems caused by drugs, particuarly when combined with investment into harm reduction programs. Portugal would bear that out. So really it comes down to whether you want to prioritise reducing drug use per se, or if you take an approach of reducing the harm caused by drug use. (One thing I think we can categorically say based on experience is that eradicating the use of illegal drugs entirely is not feasible). But one thing I hope that most people can agree on, whatever their views on decriminalisation, is the need for an increase in programs to treat addicts. As an aside, I think the debate we're having here is actually how the drugs debate should be conducted. Far too much, the debate seems to be couched in political soundbites, as opposed to based on hard facts and scientific evidence. And that applies equally to both sides of the debate.

CruelNUnsual -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 3:51:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kidwithknife As an aside, I think the debate we're having here is actually how the drugs debate should be conducted. Far too much, the debate seems to be couched in political soundbites, as opposed to based on hard facts and scientific evidence. And that applies equally to both sides of the debate. Why should drugs be different from any other debate? Bumper sticker debate is memorable and easily accesible to the lazy (non) thinkers that comprise the majority of the electorate.

rulemylife -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 6:33:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian Should we be looking at consumption or human consequence? Considering alcohol alone, the current-day numbers are staggering. I do believe you're right; we need to explore different solutions, and those solutions lie deep in our culture, to where the hunger is. What I think we are missing in the discussion on this whole thread is not everyone who uses a substance becomes addicted to it. There are people who drink who are not alcoholics, there are people who smoke who are not potheads. Making something illegal does not do anything to change someone's personal habits. Those who will use something in moderation will continue to do that while those who are prone to abuse will likely continue to do that as well. The only thing our "war on drugs" is doing is draining money that could be put to better use.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 7:27:56 PM)
~FR~ Legalizing drugs will not make them more accessable. Instead of driving to the corner store and talking with a guy that hangs out on that corner, they can walk in and buy it from a store. Anyone that does not know a place right now, that they can likely drive and buy crack, is probably living a long way away from a major city. As to the comment about people getting high and killing people in an accident, it still happens now with them being illegal. People will still drive while under the influence of something, and there are seperate laws to cover that. The pro's far outweigh the con's of drug legalization.

Owner59 -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 9:15:22 PM)
What`s the difference between pot heads and drunks? Drunks run stop signs and pot heads are waiting for them to green......[:D]

TheHeretic -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 9:17:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Drunks run stop signs and pot heads are waiting for them to green......[:D] Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery.[8\|]

Vendaval -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 10:18:26 PM)
Pot heads think the stop lights are a type of lava lamp for public art.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 10:27:00 PM)
What is the difference between a meth head and a pot head? One robs your house of valuables and the other robs it of munchies. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 What`s the difference between pot heads and drunks? Drunks run stop signs and pot heads are waiting for them to green......[:D]

TheHeretic -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/29/2009 10:29:49 PM)
What's the difference between a thief and a speedfreak? The speedfreak will hang around to help you look for what he stole.

MarcEsadrian -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 7:46:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Automobile/Industrial fatalities: Driving and operating machinery under the influence of legal substances is regulated. Why would you assume there would be any difference if more substances were legal? Oh I'm quite certain it would have to be regulated—and heavily—but that's not really the crux of the previous point. Despite regulation of any sort, it stands to reason that legalizing the commercial sale and open distribution of narcotics for recreation would increase mortality rates and damage to property statistics, not lower them. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Rehabilitative costs of addiction: Far and away offset by the influx of new tax revenue, not to mention the savings in our justice system. Sin taxes to support health care, in essence? Sounds like more government intervention to me, especially if one uses tobacco and alcohol as a guide; the government is all over that. Further, how will we be assured the tax revenue drawn from the sales of these now licit drugs will go directly to rehabilitative costs? Big G, as we all know, handles our money so well. Further, will the taxes the government levies against these products inevitably create its own black market and smuggling problem? Legitimate traders in this would-be utopia will be undercut by illegal traders. Therefore, will the criminal activity around drugs stop or simply change? quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Birth defects: Unless you are referring to cases of infants born to addicts... For the sake of clarity, yes, that's precisely what I'm talking about. And going back to cost where it relates to health, there are some interesting figures presented here on drug abuse related illness, including birth complications, etc. http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/economic_costs98.pdf Further, data about health risks and links to birth defects (Government sources and peer-reviewed journals): http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/349/10/975#R21 http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_Notes/NNVol10N5/Cocainefacts.html http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNVol18N1/New.html http://www.drugabuse.gov/ResearchReports/Marijuana/Marijuana3.html#acute http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/345/5/351 quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic As for crimes committed by people under the influence, perhaps you should get some information a bit more current than Reefer Madness. You could always look here, and that's just to start: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/drugs/research-findings.htm http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/drugs.htm There are admittedly a great many number of socioeconomic factors behind criminal statistics, but to suggest narcotics have no additive effect on negative human behavior—or vulnerability to negative human behavior—is optimistic. I've seen my share of stupid violence based simply on alcohol use alone in my fair city. I don't see any substantive evidence to suggest legalizing all drugs under the sun will improve the problem, raise our living standards or make us more competitive in the world. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Do have any idea how the size and power of Big G has grown trying to make this utter failure of a policy work? Do you honestly believe Big G will get any smaller having to regulate and tax the market to rehabilitate, administer and create laws for it's victims? I just don't have much faith in this proposed brave new world, but I admire your libertarian spirit. Legalizing drugs would be an enormously risky social experiment, particularly where it relates to our youth, who will inevitably receive mixed messages about the safeness of drug use. After looking at the data, my ultimate question is if this is really a good idea. I remain highly unconvinced, in the least.

heartcream -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 9:43:58 AM)
Yeah that is a sad joke. Q: What is the difference between an alcoholic and a drug addict? A: An alcoholic will steal your stuff and a drug addict will steal your stuff and help you look for it. I erringly dated a crack head back in the day. Quite naive I was. He stole all sorts of wonderful things from me and then would say things like, "Baby you sure you cant find your walkman (so back in the day) I am sure I saw it on the bed." The pain of it, not even funny. Funny, but so not funny.

CruelNUnsual -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 9:52:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heartcream Yeah that is a sad joke. Q: What is the difference between an alcoholic and a drug addict? A: An alcoholic will steal your stuff and a drug addict will steal your stuff and help you look for it. I erringly dated a crack head back in the day. Quite naive I was. He stole all sorts of wonderful things from me and then would say things like, "Baby you sure you cant find your walkman (so back in the day) I am sure I saw it on the bed." The pain of it, not even funny. Funny, but so not funny. Which ultimately gets back to the fact that you cant regulate a tweaker. If you legalize drugs then just let those who will kill themselves.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 2:45:37 PM)
So Marc, let us turn this around. What are the positives of keeping drugs illegal?

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 2:54:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 What`s the difference between pot heads and drunks? Drunks run stop signs and pot heads are waiting for them to green......[:D] hahahahaha

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 2:57:23 PM)
fr i think making alcohol illegal and legalizing pot would make the world a safer place.....and although im kinda giggling as i type that, im also very serious...id rather be on the road with a bunch of pot smokers than one drunk any day (or night)

twoisnotenough -> RE: Legalizing Drugs. (3/30/2009 3:15:36 PM)
The positives of keeping drugs illegal are simple. It keeps the "war on drugs" alive. IE saves face for a lot of govenment types. it keeps crime rampent which keeps the police in jobs. which keeps the people that run the jails in jobs. LOL.. its a government created govenment enforced job security. if they made them legal.. god forbid.. we would have a massive upswing at the morgues while the idiots killed them selves on too much legal drug use followed by pretty much normality. same thing that happened after prohibition. Prohibition basically created the mafia and organizesd crime in the 20s and early 30s. The only difference now is who is making the money by keeping it illegal.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875