The war on Americans who use drugs...

They are? Since when?
Click to expand...

:confused: wait, what forum am I posting on again?

Oh yeah, and according to the bible even Jesus liked to catch a little buzz now and then, his drug of choice was wine.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, but alcohol is the "responsible" drug, the socially acceptable one. What I find most confusing about the anti-drug arguments is the idea that legalization and regulation will lead to massive, widespread abuse and cause the downfall of society (just like Florida's self defense laws have made the streets in Tampa run red with the blood of innocents, right? ;)) while completely ignoring the simple fact that drugs these days are very easy to get. Being against the law stops no one from getting drugs if they decide to use them. While I certainly wouldn't do it, I know that I can drive 45 minutes into downtown Chicago after 10pm and within half an hour buy just about any illegal drug I could ever want to sample. The same goes for every major city in the United States as well as most suburban areas and many rural areas (though out in the country most potheads just grow their own).

But no, drugs aren't protected in the Constitution and thus we don't deserve them. But we all have the right to buy machines that can end a life with a single trigger pull. If a man isn't responsible enough to drink and smoke without hurting someone else then what makes him responsible enough to carry a weapon designed to kill?
 
There are friendly letters between Jefferson and Washington talking about smoking hashish (which was the prevalent method of the day to prepare cannabis for consumption) and it is fairly well known that they both grew the stuff.
Click to expand...

They both grew what they would call hemp, but it is the same plant. I've seen reports that one or the other of them directed a caretaker to separate males from females, and one possible reason for doing that is to enhance potency for smoking, but there are several other reasons a commercial hemp farm would separate out certain plants.

I've never seen anything about these letters between Jefferson and Washington talking about hashish. I'm not even sure how friendly the two men were. Washington was viewed as an ally of Hamilton, and Jefferson was kind of on the other end...

Anyway, you got a source?

ASCII Bunny upgrade:
(\__/)
(='.'=) -'---=()===,\==(
(")_(") ......... /_/....\\ ...
 
They both grew what they would call hemp, but it is the same plant.
Click to expand...

Yet another problem with the criminalization of a relatively harmless plant. Even if all other drugs remain illegal it still makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to keep marijuana illegal considering the immense benefits from the plant. Without even considering the recreational or medicinal uses it's still a very versatile species. Hemp can be used to make just about any product made from cotton with stronger and lighter fabric all the while being far more resistant to harsh weather than cotton. Cannabis is just as easy to grow as soy and the seeds can be made into the exact same products that soy is used for (without a single intoxicating effect, by the way) as well as serve as a potentially huge source of biodiesel which, if implemented nationwide in all commercial trucking, would make a significant impact on our foreign oil dependancy.


But no, corporate controlled politicians decided that DuPont's profits and the bigotry of whites was a bit more important than freedom. Of course they can't admit they were wrong, the government is never wrong. :rolleyes:
 
wait, what forum am I posting on again?
Click to expand...

I assume that you mean that this forum promotes the nonregulation of firearms and thus your point is made that people are free to use dangerous projectiles but not free to engage in the use of drugs.

This is an incorrect assumption on your part.

For one thing, firearms are not unregulated. In all states, you must be at least 18 to own a firearm (or some type or another), For another, ammo sales are regulated. For another open carry is regulated. Transportation is regulated. Just about all aspects of firearm ownership is regulated.

Thus your premise that people are free to use dangerous projectiles in any way they wish is incorrect. Projectiles and projectile weapons are regulated.

The same holds true for automobiles. Cars are regulated in specific equiment they must have. They are regulated as to what speeds they may be operated. They must be registered, insured, and operated only by those who have been licensed by the State.

Thus, again, the premise that people are free to use dangerous projectiles (cars) in any way they want to is incorrect.

The biggest flaw in the argument is that it is inconsistent in logic. Stated simply, the argument is: "The gov't has no right to totally forbid the use of drugs on the grounds that some may misuse them. Those who misuse the drugs can be punished but those who do not should be free to do what they want. Just as alcohol is free to be used and those who abuse it can be punished."

This misses the point that alcohol is regulated and thus can't be "freely used". This argument also misses the point that drugs can be used as prescribed by a doctor or pharmacist under the existing regulations. Neither alcohol nor drugs are items that can be freely used without restriction and those who abuse either can be punished. The fact that the gov't defines "abuse" in the context of ANY illegal drug useage is merely the gov't drawing a line somewhere and saying "this" is against the law. Moving the line to allow recreational use of marijuana, crack, heroin and the like won't change the fact that drugs can be and still would be regulated. Thus there still wouldn't be any "free use" and arguments using that reference point fail due to logical inconsistency.

The whole arugment is aimed at moving the line and allowing recreational use of drugs. At this point no one has shown that doing so will benefit anyone and cannot refute the fact that easing restrictions on drug use will harm society and the individuals therein.
 
I assume that you mean that this forum promotes the nonregulation of firearms and thus your point is made that people are free to use dangerous projectiles but not free to engage in the use of drugs.
Click to expand...
Not once have I claimed that drugs should be unregulated. In fact, the war on drugs practically guarantees that they remain unregulated. Only through legalization can they be regulated for safety, quality, and to avoid public health problems as well as stem abuse.

I never claimed that people are free to use dangerous projectiles however they wish but people are most certainly trusted more with dangerous projecticles than with drugs. Yet these dangerous projecticles are specifically designed to cause harm and/or death while the drugs are generally designed (or cultivated) for the purpose of enjoyment or medication. Yet the guns are the safer objects?

At this point no one has shown that doing so will benefit anyone and cannot refute the fact that easing restrictions on drug use will harm society and the individuals therein.
Click to expand...

I've listed example after example of exactly how legalization of at least one illegal drug would most certainly benefit people. Not only is it extremely beneficial as a medication (if you've ever been diagnosed with advanced cancer or any other excrutiatingly painful and/or debilitating disease then you'd agree) but hemp has a wide array of uses from biomass fuel to clothing.

Legalization would also benefit the legal system by clearing out prisons and courtrooms of people who have commited no crimes other than simple possession. Legalization would also benefit the state because, like the alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and cars that you mentioned were all regulated, marijuana could very easily be taxed. Legalization would also benefit people who benefit from the legalization of alcohol because it's simply an enjoyable thing to do for many people. Now maybe "the pursuit of happiness" means jack squat to you but to me that's a pretty damn important benefit.

I cannot refute your fact because it's simply not a fact. Easing restrictions on drug use, just like easing restrictions on guns, has never been the cause of problems for any society and the individuals therein. The mistakes of the individuals themselves is what causes problems. The fact that some people are simply incapable of handling certain chemicals responsibly does not in any way mean that I or even a majority of people are incapable of doing it.

With all due respect I believe that you're projecting your own guilt about alcoholism on others despite the fact that many of us can enjoy alcohol and other drugs without ever once harming another soul.
 
About the whole marijuana and hemp thing, It truely makes me sad about how anti-capitalist our nation has become.

If the full might of American agribusiness could be brought to bear, we would be able to produce the finest marijuana in the world. Famers would have a new cash crop to grow and perhaps they wouldnt need to suck so hard off the government's teat. Consumers from around the world would be willing to buy Marijuana that was made in the USA.

But no, thanks to government intrusion in the marketplace in what country is best marijuana supposidly made? ****ing Canada. :barf:

Hooray for prohibition. It makes criminals richer, it errodes away at liberty of our citizens, and it takes jobs away from Americans.
 
Moving the line to allow recreational use of marijuana, crack, heroin and the like won't change the fact that drugs can be and still would be regulated.
Click to expand...
You keep saying that, but no matter how many times you say it, I'm never going to see marijuana as "the like" of crack and heroin. It is much more "the like" of alcohol.
 
Publius,

I personally believe that harder, highly addictive drugs such as heroin, crack and methamphetamine should be regulated more along the lines of prescription medication. You go to the doctor and say "Hey doc, I'm an addict", the doctor does a few tests and asks a few questions to determine the appropriate prescription, gives you a couple of brochures on different programs that could help you quit , perhaps talks about different drugs that could help you quit (methadone, for instance) and writes a scipt. You take the prescription to either a pharmacy or a specialty shop and buy cheap, clean, safe[r] drugs in pre-measured doses that the doctor has determined would be safe.

This would be much better than the current situation in several ways;

-Drugs would be much cheaper as these drugs typically have a street price hundreds of times higher than cost of production due to the greedy criminals who now control them, this would reduce crime since an addict could afford to maintain his addiction on even a McDonalds wage and wouldn't have to steal your car radio for a dose.

-The black market would be virtually eliminated, running criminals out of business and further reducing crime.

-Addicts would be much more likely to seek help since they could now talk openly about their addiction without risk of arrest and incarceration.

-It would be much harder for pregnant women, non addicts and minors to aquire these drugs since there is no black market, a doctor would not prescribe it to them and other addicts would only have enough to maintain themselves so they probably would be unlikely to sell their precious fix.

-These drugs would be safer since they would be clean and in known, regulated doses determined by a doctor, most overdoses occur because drugs on the street vary greatly in strength and street drugs don't exactly come with a label.

-Oh, and these drugs would lose their glamor and appeal to young people since addicts would no longer be seen as outlaws and rebels but as sick people who need help.

Just my two cents.
 
VaultDweller,

I agree in theory. In fact, I'm going to sell all my stuff and MOVE to theory. Everything works there. ;)

We haven't gotten rid of the black markets in cigarettes and alcohol, nor in prescription meds, and we won't. We reduced the black market in alcohol dramatically by ending prohibition, and we could do the same with cannabis or any of the other drugs. I just see fewer risks and more rewards by doing it with cannabis than by doing it with the rest.

I see fewer risks because cannabis is substantially less dangerous than meth, crack, heroin, etc.

I see more rewards because about half of US drug arrests are for marijuana. We're devoting half of our energy against the least harmful, most widely used and accepted drug. For the past ten years, we've arrested about as many people for marijuana each year as we have arrested for property crimes. Those cops and courtrooms and jail cells could be doing something useful. And don't get me started on the effects on property rights, and on the Constitution, and our firearms rights, all from this senseless war on a weed.
 
There is another economic reason for de-criminalizing drugs.

Under the current system, when a drug purchase is made, it is generally made with money accumulated thru crime. About half of that money is then funneled out of the country where it benefits the foreign economy. So there is a double negative - the money is taken from someone and then it is not circulated within the local market place. Say that buy cost $100.

If the drug was legal it would likely cost $20, and that $20 could be earned honestly, and then recirculated within the local economy.
 
I Need A Joint Now!!!!!!!!

Gaaa, I pulled a muscle in my back yesterday.:( Did the same thing in High School, I had a joint every other day and I could deal with the minor pain that was left. Now I am popping asprin like M&M's and it still hurts.:(

/I hope I get better soon.
//This hurts like **** and I have to rant.:(
 
I personally think that drugs are illegal and should remain that way for a reason.

But thats just my opinion. As i do not use nor want to use illegal drugs, it is of no consequence to me whether they are illegal or not. I dont really care either way IMHO.

Heres the thing, instead of ranting about it in a firearms forum, which will do no good in the end. Maybe you should try to make some change. Contact your local congressman or senator, form a lobbying group, join a lobbying group, petition.

You have all these options and more to do, and believe me, if you get enough people and money swinging your way, you could have anything passed and ruled legal/illegal. The one thing that will not contribute to your cause is complaining on a firearms forum.

And the same goes for people that complain about how their firearms rights are being taken away and that something needs to be done. Why is it someone else's responsibility to get something done? Why don't you stand up and say "I will make a difference. I will draw the line in the sand. I will ensure my rights aren't stampeded over."?

There are many ways this can be done and a little initiative and dedication can go a long way.
 
I've written my senators and representatives in the past on various issues, including this one. I've donated to NORML and supported most, if not all, of their stances. Why complain about it on a firearms forum? Because this forum is for "Legal and Political" matter, which this most certainly falls under, and it's a good opportunity to maybe convince even one anti-drug person here that maybe, just maybe, caring about the second amendment requires caring about liberty as a whole, not just the right to buy a noisemaker.


Gaaa, I pulled a muscle in my back yesterday. Did the same thing in High School, I had a joint every other day and I could deal with the minor pain that was left. Now I am popping asprin like M&M's and it still hurts.
Click to expand...

And people still claim that marijuana can't be used for medicinal purposes. I guess some people lack the basic understanding of medicine to realize that "pain relief" is one of the most important aspects of the field.
 
Actually, the most important drug to legalize is heroin. Why? Because Afghan warlords are making bundles of money off the black market for opium. Drug prohibition is enriching our enemies.

I would rather take the money spent on fighting heroin, give most of it back to the US taxpayers, and spend the rest on rehab and methadone.

Then sit back and watch the Afghan warlords flee for their lives. Without drug money to pay their armies, most of those guys would probably be killed off fairly quickly by the people that they've been pushing around.
 
I think an argument could be made that if marijuana was taken out of the black market it would no longer be a "gateway drug". People who buy marijuana buy from people who also deal in harder drugs. If the marijuana user could obtain pot legally they may never know or associate with the dealers of other harder drugs.
 
Pyrozen
As i do not use nor want to use illegal drugs, it is of no consequence to me whether they are illegal or not. I dont really care either way IMHO.
Click to expand...

Wheter you care or not and whether you use illegal drugs or not these laws and policies still affect you.

1) There is the issue of liberty. In my opinion, what one puts into their own body and mind is entirely a personal choice that the government has no right to dictate. Would you like the right to change your mind? Because you currently do not have that right. What if you came down with glaucoma? Wouldn't you want the right to use an effective and cheap natural medicine?

By the way, I do not use illegal drugs. I smoked a little pot when I was younger but nowadays I'm happy with beer, coffee and cigarettes. What brought this issue fresh into my mind is my grandmother's ongoing fight with cancer. The chemotherapy made her terribly nausious, and marijuana does a great job of settling nausia, boosting appetite, and offering mild pain relief at a very low price per dose, the only side effect is a buzz that many people find enjoyable. Instead she has to take anti-nausia pills that do not restore her appetite well, make her so weak she can barely walk, cost 70$ a pill and have side effects that have been known to kill.

You do not have to personally exercise a right for it to be valuable. For example: I do not own a .50 BMG rifle. I have no real desire to own a .50 BMG rifle and if someone gave me one I would probably sell or trade it. That being said, I want the RIGHT to own a .50 BMG rifle and would be quite vocal if the government took that right away.

2) The WOD is a huge drain on taxpayer money. YOUR money. What purpose is your tax money serving in the WOD? Could it be used better elsewhere?

3) You may not personally use illegal drugs, but can you be sure that all of your friends and family are the same? What if your cousin Buster got thrown in jail for possession? Your best friend? Your son? You might change your tune then.

4) Crime affects everyone. That junkie who is hypothetically going to burglarize your house tuesday afternoon might not do so if his drug of choice was cheaper, as it certainly would be if it were legal. Stray bullets from a gangland shootout would not be a danger if those gangsters did not have a black market to fund and fuel their wars. How many police officers are killed yearly enforcing drug laws?

5) The WOD has set precedent for taking away many of our rights, from gun control to property seizure. Many of the rights we have lost in the last century have been taken on the pretext of fighting the WOD.

You may not like what your neighbor does in the privacy of his own home, but if you take away his rights you might find your favorite rights next in line for the chopping block.

As for what good it may do to post this here, I like hearing other people's opinion, even when I don't agree with it. Also, I might just cause one or two people to reexamine the lies and misinformation they have been fed their whole life concerning drugs and perhaps convince them to join a cause I think is of great importance.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have a very important meeting with a cup of coffee.
 
Gaaa, I pulled a muscle in my back yesterday. Did the same thing in High School, I had a joint every other day and I could deal with the minor pain that was left. Now I am popping asprin like M&M's and it still hurts.
Click to expand...

I tried using marijuana for pain relief once many years ago. I hurt my foot, and didn't have anything else in the house. A few tokes, and the throbbing got worse, and I couldn't stop thinking about every pulse of pain.

Seemed like a good idea at the time, but had the opposite effect from what I figured would happen. I'm always amazed when I read about someone using it for pain, since it only made my pain worse.
 
Different people have different reactions, and even different strains can affect how you'll feel. There have been times when even prescribed drugs have made me feel worse yet worked fine other times. Some folks get giddy, others just fall asleep. It reduces nausea for many, especially cancer patients gong through chemo, yet others say it makes them feel like throwing up.

Not everyone will see a medicinal benefit from THC but many do.
 
publius42

Seemed like a good idea at the time, but had the opposite effect from what I figured would happen. I'm always amazed when I read about someone using it for pain, since it only made my pain worse.

Yea, drugs effect different people differently. What works for one person may not for another. Lucky me my back is getting better and I don't have to take so many pills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top