Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello shaz:

You bring up two excellent points. I think I can handle them with ONE argument... There's NO disagreement about kids and drugs and the damage addiction causes. You're right too, accessibility IS the problem...

However, the drug laws haven't reduced availability. Kids know where to get it.. It's EASY. At the VERY least, popping down to the local pharmacy, as you put it, will at LEAST require the production of an ID saying the user is 21. Will kids cheat??? Of course, they will.. But, at least there's a LAYER between your kids and dangerous drugs, where there isn't one now...

Lemme also tell you about WHY kids think that dangerous drugs aren't really that dangerous... Clearly, they SEE that the government is LYING about the dangers of marijuana, so they're probably LYING about the dangers of heroine too.... Isn't there a story about that?? Something about a wolf???

Let me also mention that along with legalization we should provide treatment ON DEMAND for drug addiction... Today, even IF an addict wanted to get off drugs, there's no place for him to go.

Finally, if drugs are legalized, the manufacture can be regulated where there won't be any ugly stuff in the drugs people take.... And I suppose I should mention that clean needles would be available, and that's got to cut down on aids and hepatitis..

Sorry. I guess I used more than one argument...

excon

---

Excellent . Extremely well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

I've got one more argument, then I'll shut up..

Some say there's LOTS of people, who are chomping at the bit, but WAITING on the sidelines for drugs to become legal....

Do YOU know anybody like that? I don't. Everybody I know who WANTS to use drugs, is using drugs.

That's not to say that there won't be a few people who will try drugs for the first time... However, IF we provide treatment on demand, I believe there will be MORE people getting OFF drugs than are getting ON. Yes, addiction IS as bad as we think it is.

excon

---

Don't be shutin' up. You're doing great.

Exy, while I do agree with the points you are making, what about the street users? Legalizing drugs isn't going to stop people from using dangerously and buying off the street. Especially kids. Just like illegal cigarettes, not sure if you guys are having a "problem" with that in the U.S but there have been more arrests in the past few months for illegal cigarettes. People still buy them on the street because they are cheaper. The government is saying these ciggy's are dangerous, but everyone here knows one ciggy can't be more dangerous than another, and it's only because the government is losing so much money of smokes that this harsh ban and penalty came into effect. People buy the smokes 200 for $20, and fine of $20 per smoke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aurora_Bell

Legalizing drugs isn't going to stop people from using dangerously and buying off the street.

---

Hello again, Bella:

Take the profit out of it, and street dealers will disappear.

excon

Exy,

But just like illegal cigarettes, there will be profit to be made, just like boot legging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Bella:

Take the profit out of it, and street dealers will disappear.

excon

---

Nah, there will still be street dealers to deal to the tikes who are considered underage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Lemme also tell you about WHY kids think that dangerous drugs aren't really that dangerous... Clearly, they SEE that the government is LYING about the dangers of marijuana, so they're probably LYING about the dangers of heroine too.... Isn't there a story about that?? Something about a wolf???

---

Exy, how many teens do you personally know who are on drugs? Let me tell you from experience that the teens don't care about the government, the ones on drugs don't even really KNOW about the government.

They are taking drugs to replace something missing in their lives, they are taking drugs to gain acceptance into a culture that promises them "love" and "acceptance." It has NOTHING to do with the government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

It has NOTHING to do with the government.

---

Hello again, J:

Oh, not so, my friend...

Kids know pot is illegal. They know the government is behind that. They know pot SHOULDN'T be illegal because it does NOTHING bad. They SURMISE, that since heroine is also illegal, maybe there's nothing wrong it either.

It has EVERYTHING to do with the government...

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, J:

Oh, not so, my friend...

Kids know pot is illegal. They know the government is behind that. They know pot SHOULDN'T be illegal because it does NOTHING bad. They SURMISE, that since heroine is also illegal, maybe there's nothing wrong it either.

It has EVERYTHING to do with the government...

excon

---

WRONG! Sorry, that's the democrat in you talking. I'm not talking about either democrat or republican, but from the TEEN point of view. Remember, I not only have teens at home, but deal with drug addicted teens on a nightly basis.

It's sad really. Teens use drugs because there is something missing at home. It's a peer pressure sort of thing. If they use drugs, they are accepted by a certain percentage of their peers. They gain love and respect, if you want to call it that, by these "friends" of theirs. Love and respect are something that they feel is missing at home, from their parents and other family figures.

Look at gangs for example. Kids join gangs to gain love and acceptance, they call it a "family" because they are missing something at home.

Let me ask you how many teens you know, personally, who are on drugs. I gave drug tests to 10 women last night and had to have an indepth "interview" on why they used drugs. Not ONE of them told me it had to do with the government. They all told me that it was because "he would love me if I smoke the crack with him." or "I needed a way to escape from the demands of my parents." etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

They gain love and respect, if you want to call it that, by these "friends" of theirs. Love and respect are something that they feel is missing at home, from their parents and other family figures.

---

Hello again, J:

So, let's lock them up. Maybe they'll find respect and family figures in the slam..

excon

Ex, have you ever been spit upon, bit, kicked and attacked in the ER by someone on PCP? I have.

Have you ever had to intubate a baby weighing less than 3 pounds addicted to crack who later died? I have.

While I see your point, I believe that only CERTAIN drugs should be legalized. Mary Jane and possibly Shrooms. But to say that ALL drugs should be legalized is a very slippery slope.

You are looking at it from the legal standpoint, which you know legalities very well. I am looking at it from the medical standpoint, which I know very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

You are looking at it from the legal standpoint, which you know legalities very well. I am looking at it from the medical standpoint, which I know very well.

---

Hello again, J:

We DON'T disagree. Drug abuse is a HEALTH problem - NOT a legal one. In MY view, legalization will REDUCE the incidents you refer to - NOT increase them. To believe that it would INCREASE them, you'd have to believe that the drug war is WORKING, in that it keeps dangerous drugs OUT of the hands of children...

I don't believe that, and I don't believe you do either... I think you SUPPORT the drugwar because you don't know of ANY other solution - and legalization DOESN'T sound like a solution... Upon first glance it doesn't sound like it to me either, but, it IS.

excon

PS> Yes, when I came home from Vietnam, I experienced spittle in the face...

We need to ADDRESS drug problems. I think everyone can agree with that. Drug addicts are dangerous not only to themselves but to those around them. This is where I think education would be good, but honest education. Not telling kids that their baby will die or they will miss a tea party with grandma because they smoked pot. That's pretty darn easy to see through... it was for me.

My issue is the countless cases of over-zealous SWAT teams or police raids that ended up the death of innocent people, and fire-fights between cartel gangs in central America that have killed countless innocents as collateral damage. The death of completely innocent people as a result of this misguided war on drugs means a lot more to me than any teen who's addicted to crack. It's not that I don't feel sorry for those addicted teens, but it's not as heartbreaking as innocent deaths. Sorry.

And I'm very aware that many children lose their parents to drug addictions. My niece lost my brother to meth. We all lost my brother to meth. (He isn't dead, but his soul is pretty much gone). This war on drugs is clearly doing precisely jack when we see addicts left and right.

So maybe I argue not for the LEGALITY of drugs, just the end of this "war". Educate the masses on the reality of things. THAT is how you fight battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

But to say that ALL drugs should be legalized is a very slippery slope.

---

Hello again, J:

We're CLOSER to each other than you might think... You suggested earlier, that because I'm a Democrat, that I probably have this druggie, left wing, hippy idea that everybody should just do their own thing...

Nothing could be farther from the truth.. Yes, I smoke pot, but I DON'T want children to have access to it. In fact, I'm about as ANTI-DRUG as you get. So, I don't want you to think of legalization as SURRENDER, because it's absolutely NOT..

I'm fine if you want to call it drug war phase #2. But, THIS phase shouldn't be fought with cops, courts and prison. It should be fought with whatever your profession brings to the table, and the TRUTH. But, the OBJECTIVE is the same, and that's to REDUCE drug abuse.

Let's talk about the TRUTH for a minute. Do you know that when we FINALLY started telling the TRUTH about cigarettes, we reduced its use by HALF? Yes, it took over 25 years, but it WORKED... There are now about 150 MILLION Americans who DON'T smoke, who WOULD have without the truth. Do you know how many cases of cancer were prevented by telling the truth? How about heart attacks? Do you know that we DID that, WITHOUT putting a single person in jail??

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

Kids join gangs to gain love and acceptance, they call it a "family" because they are missing something at home.

---

So what can be done about that?

Obviously there will always be a black marcket not just for drugs but for smokes,alcohol and stolen electrical equipment.

We all know the health risks of smoking and drinking those figures hold a bigger death toll per year then anyy other drug even considering percentage of useres. So I don't think that you should be a crminal for choosing a different substance to use then alcohol.

Alcohol is sold but not everyone is addicted to it, you can use or abuse drugs.

If you become an adict then it is a health issue, and the money they use on the 'waR ON DRUGS' SHOULD BE SPENT on health care for addicts.

In the UK there is brilliant surport, although drugs are iligal you won't go to jail just for possestion, you just get a warning. You can seek counceling for free, and get perscription drugs for free to help you over come your adiction.

Legalise not criminlise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, J:

We're CLOSER to each other than you might think... You suggested earlier, that because I'm a Democrat, that I probably have this druggie, left wing, hippy idea that everybody should just do their own thing...

Nothing could be farther from the truth.. Yes, I smoke pot, but I DON'T want children to have access to it. In fact, I'm about as ANTI-DRUG as you get. So, I don't want you to think of legalization as SURRENDER, because it's absolutely NOT..

I'm fine if you wanna call it drug war phase #2. But, THIS phase shouldn't be fought with cops, courts and prison. It should be fought with whatever your profession brings to the table, and the TRUTH. But, the OBJECTIVE is the same, and that's to REDUCE drug abuse.

Let's talk about the TRUTH for a minute. Do you know that when we FINALLY started telling the TRUTH about cigarettes, we reduced its use by HALF?? Yes, it took over 25 years, but it WORKED... There are now about 150 MILLION Americans who DON'T smoke, who WOULD have without the truth. Do you know how many cases of cancer were prevented by telling the truth? How about heart attacks? Do you know that we DID that, WITHOUT putting a single person in jail???

excon

---

So which is it really where you stand on this subject??


Legalization ?

Legalization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Or

Decriminalization ?

Decriminalization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello again, dad:

I don't think I stuttered... LEGALIZATION!

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, dad:

I don't think I stuttered... LEGALIZATION!

excon

---

Just making sure because it sounded like you were making a case for decriminalization. Whereby there are still some controls in place (like age of consent and age to purchase) but penalties removed for the consenting adult that wishs to embibe.

Im more for decriminalization and a portion of the profits being returned to rehab then outright legalization.

J-9 makes a valid point. The fact is that there are some drugs that are too dangerous to legalize .

We can be against the widespread legalization of dangerous drugs AND at the same time be against the incarceration of addicts .

You say you are adament against it being legal for minors .Glad to see there are some lines in the sand we won't cross .But the truth is that minors get their hands on controlled substances including cigarettes and tobacco ;pot ,narcotics anyway. So what would you do?. Treat the kid and make the seller the criminal.

Bueno.. that is my position defined for all illegal drug use.

Hello again, dad:

I don't know from Wikkipedia... If Jim Beam is "decriminalized", then I want my Maui Wowie to be "decriminalized".

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, dad:

I don't know from Wikkipedia... If Jim Beam is "decriminalized", then I want my Maui Wowie to be "decriminalized".

excon

---

Yes my friend. That is what it means. Its regulated without the penalties. Although you still aren't allowed to make your own. Drugs could have a simaler variation so if you want to be a commercial grower your still going to need that permit. Or get better cammo to cover it up :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geesuzz

Obviously there will always be a black marcket not just for drugs but for smokes,alchol and stolen electrical equipment. . . Alchol is sold but not everyone is addicted to it, you can use or abuse drugs.

If you become an adict then it is a health issue, and the money they use on the 'waR ON DRUGS' SHOULD BE SPENT on health care for addicts.

---

Wisdom spoken here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by southamerica

So maybe I argue not for the LEGALITY of drugs, just the end of this "war". Educate the masses on the reality of things. THAT is how you fight battles.

---

The only way to end it all, is to legalize it all. True, education does work. It will stop some of the youth from using, at least for a while, but, it's not a permanent solution, and it also has no bearing on the cartel related deaths you mentioned. The only way to stop that mess is to take the market share away and open the drug trade to the public, i.e. legalize it. This is marketing 101.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by califdadof3

Just making sure because it sounded like you were making a case for decriminalization. Whereby there are still some controls in place (like age of consent and age to purchase) but penalties removed for the consenting adult that wishs to embibe.

Im more for decriminalization and a portion of the profits being returned to rehab then outright legalization.

---

I'm with you there Dad.

The only effect that making something illegal has is to make it more expensive. Which puts the money in the hands of the mafia, gangs, and assorted other criminals.
Lots and lots of money which gives them power to expand.

It costs billions to keep the people locked up when their only crime was getting high. And as has been stated ,that money could be used to do some good in treatment , education, and health care.

This , as Ex said, is a health issue and lack of real education about drugs that should be taught in school.
But it is the fact that it is also a moral issue to so many that keeps it where it is now, fueling the growth of gangs , crime, and violence instead of combating it.

If it is legalized , it would take the majority of the money out of criminal hands where it could be put to better use helping those with problems and not locking them up with the hard core to get educated in bigger and better ways to increase the problem that is already out of control.

It has never been a war on drugs. It is, and has been, a war on Americans .

Alcohol and tobacco cost more in health care and ruin more lives than all the other drugs combined . Why are they not illegal ?
Oh that's right , it was tried and failed miserably and got completely out of control until it was legalized again.

If we don't learn from the past we will be repeating the same mistakes.We need to stop judging the morality and address the reality of what it is doing to our population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slapshot_oi

The only way to end it all, is to legalize it all. True, education does work. It will stop some of the youth from using, at least for a while, but, it's not a permanent solution, and it also has no bearing on the cartel related deaths you mentioned. The only way to stop that mess is to take the market share away and open the drug trade to the public, i.e. legalize it. This is marketing 101.

---

You're right. I just fight the fight that I know well :). I am not equipped to argue for legalization the way I am equipped to argue for education.

Martin and Ex have done it splendidly well.

By the way, Martin... amazing post!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by southamerica

I am not equipped to argue for legalization the way I am equipped to argue for education.

---

Your equiptment looks fine to me :)

Don't worry about it. Present it as you feel it should be since this is an opinion post. Be yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by califdadof3

Your equiptment looks fine to me :)

Dont worry about it. Present it as you feel it should be since this is an opinion post. Be yourself.

---

I concur with the wise man with good eyesight from California.

I find this such a thorny problem to get my head around.

Here in the UK cannabis was downgraded from a class B to a class C drug some years ago, meaning that possession would be unlikely to result in prosecution unless the amount suggested the holder was a supplier. The good news, use of cannabis, especially amongst the age group 16-24 fell. The bad news, admissions to psychiatric hospitals for cannabis induced pyschosis rose alarmingly. It seems those who were already taking cannabis took this as a green light to take stronger and stronger skunk and many of them came a cropper. Also, whilst cannabis use fell, cocaine use rose.

In addition we also had a relaxation of alcohol laws. Where previously the availability of alcohol was limited - pubs had specifically permitted licensing hours - alcohol became freely available pretty much any time. This was felt to be a way of putting a stop to binge-drinking as it was felt that if people could get their drink whenever they wanted they would be more relaxed about it and not feel the need to drink themselves senseless before closing time. Apparently many studies were done on drinking cultures worlwide to come to this solution. The result - an explosion in binge drinking, alcohol related violence, and alcohol related medical admissions.

The political head-scratching continues. Do we relax things further or tighten them back up? I'm not surprised the politicians can't decide. I couldn't call it.

It seems a certain percentage of this popluation have a desire to get mindless regardless of what you do about it. I don't understand the appeal so I haven't a clue how to tackle it.

I'm staying right here on the fence until I see a clear reason to jump either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QLP

It seems a certain percentage of this popluation have a desire to get mindless regardless of what you do about it. I don't understand the appeal so I haven't a clue how to tackle it.

---

Hello QLP:

I agree with you.. But, what is there TO do? Keep them home and off the highway.. But, to PREVENT the majority from enjoying their diversions, because the minority can't handle it, is BONKERS.

excon

I have no idea. If someone wants to get quietly out of their skull that's their business. The trouble is they often don't do so quietly without affecting other people.

Provide nice safe padded rooms with free drugs supplies?

Serously I have no solutions. I might be getting splinters in my nether regions from staying on the fence but the only point I can really make is that I can see why there is much division of opinion.

Here is a cluster of drug war and marijuana info related sites that are current and informative.

DRCNet Online Library of Drug Policy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QLP

I find this such a thorny problem to get my head around.

Here in the UK cannabis was downgraded from a class B to a class C drug some years ago, meaning that possesion would be unlikely to result in prosecution unless the amount suggested the holder was a supplier. The good news, use of cannabis, especially amongst the age group 16-24 fell. The bad news, admissions to psychiatric hospitals for cannabis induced pyschosis rose alarmingly. It seems those who were already taking cannabis took this as a green light to take stronger and stronger skunk and many of them came a cropper. Also, whilst cannabis use fell, cocaine use rose.

In addition we also had a relaxation of alcohol laws. Where previously the availability of alcohol was limited - pubs had specifically permitted licensing hours, alcohol became freely available pretty much any time. This was felt to be a way of putting a stop to binge-drinking as it was felt that if people could get their drink whenever they wanted they would be more relaxed about it and not feel the need to drink themselves senseless before closing time. Apparently many studies were done on drinking cultures worlwide to come to this solution. The result - an explosion in binge drinking, alcohol related violence, and alcohol related medical admissions.

The political head-scratching continues. Do we relax things further or tighten them back up? I'm not surprised the politicians can't decide. I couldn't call it.

It seems a certain percentage of this popluation have a desire to get mindless regardless of what you do about it. I don't understand the appeal so I haven't a clue how to tackle it.

I'm staying right here on the fence until I see a clear reason to jump either way.

---

Great points and post.

Here , I hope is a nudge off that fence.

Cannabis induced psychosis is a term I have only very rarely encountered. And if four or five people got it that would be a considerable rise in my book.
I suspect the pot made other conditions they may have been suffering from more obvious , or added to it. (My opinion , I am no doctor)
But if it were the cause... I'd for sure have it.
The major affect it had on me was to keep me from losing my mind. I am convinced of this and have "studied" it's affect for about 45 years and am more than confidant and secure in my conclusion regardless of what anyone else says. I know what I have experienced.

You brought out another fact that has been consistent where drugs were legalized or decriminalized .
Use fell across all age groups , and crime rates decreased. Violent crime , robbery, theft, mugging dropped as it was no longer necessary to support the high prices illegal drugs demand.

It has worked wherever it has been implemented . Hopefully America will join the modern world one day with legal controlled drugs and healthcare for all who need it.
Hopefully.

QLP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ;

It seems a certain percentage of this popluation have a desire to get mindless regardless of what you do about it. I don't understand the appeal so I haven't a clue how to tackle it.

---

On the button. Regardless of the substance or legal status there is a hard-core, severely addicted, treatment resistant group. About <3% of user population. I have found that true throughout history. Ex: type II (skid-row) alcoholism.

martinizing2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ;

I suspect the pot made other conditions they may have been suffering from more obvious , or added to it.

---

Doctor or not, you have struck on the current medical consensus in relation to marijuana and psychosis, schizophrenia.

Of course, with any psychoactive substance there will be some that have adverse reaction which holds true for all drugs, legal, illegal, prescription.

Agreed the NHS in the UK surports drug users. There is a good system that if you admit to your doctor you have drug problems they can refer you to counciling and offer suport to come off adictive substances. In the UK you can be perscibed subutex (buprenorphine) for coming off heroin. It is much better then the methodone option which is much harder to come off and has a higher toxic level then heroin, it's also just as adictive. Either of these options you can take for free from the NHS if you don't work, or are on any other benefit.

In The US subutex is very expencive to everyone, methodone plan isn't free either which makes it obvious why people can't come off it. Not as much surport

CAnabis is legal in some staes if you get a perscription. The other states should follow suit... I hope.

But I think the US should have free health care for everyone.

Especially more surport for drug users.

There have been many studies done on the effects of taking drugs. One of the most resent was 'DR nutt's report'

He was hired by the UK Government to do a studies on drugs illegal or not.

He looked at 3 things

1. The damage to the body/ user (toxicity levels) and death toll, chances of death from long term use or the chance to kill you instantly.
2. How addictive the drug is.
3. Damage to society - crime etc.

Basically his findings were thought contrivers , but he had stuck to the research they wanted. They did not like what he found so he was SACKED/ FIRED lost his job.

Why ask for an expert opinion if you are just to dismiss his findings.

His findings are very interesting and you should research his work 'DR Nutt'

Make all drugs legal, 'the war on drugs' is massively disastrous. Make drug users non criminals.

Here's a wild leap with spidey senses all a-tingle.

I think Geesuzz and Dronit are the same person - read through the posts of both. Something very strange is going on.

Troll? Disturbed person? Something else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Here's a wild leap with spidey senses all a-tingle.

I think Geesuzz and Dronit are the same person - read through the posts of both. Something very strange is going on.

Troll? Disturbed person? Something else?

---

Spidey senses are a little out of whack this time. They come from two different countries. ;)