It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Why are drugs illegal? You asked Google – here’s the answer
page: 2share:
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Thecakeisalie
Yea, I've heard of that horror substance. Just looking at what it does to people is disgusting... Yuck... And that started as an alternative to heroin.
It's hard to believe that methadone is the better alternative.
edit on 28-10-2015 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Krazysh0t
As far as I see it, nobody should have the night to tell a grown person what they can or can not put into their own body. Regulate the substances sure enough, great tax revenue and try to keep it out of the hands of minors but to make it criminal is just a waste of time, money and man power.
As far as I see it, nobody should have the night to tell a grown person what they can or can not put into their own body. Regulate the substances sure enough, great tax revenue and try to keep it out of the hands of minors but to make it criminal is just a waste of time, money and man power.
a reply to: Ghost147
In a prior reply it was mentioned that bad behavior and outward actions are a different matter, the limit on alcohol while operating a motor vehicle is a safety concern. I understand that, that makes sense. Never seen a stoner kill a car full of kids trying to get a twinkie though... so I think one thing that stops general decriminalization is the time it would take to figure out how to regulate every thing people decide looks like a good time. Pot, sure that one is easy, but what about meth or MDMA, or MDA, '___', or ketamine??? How does one regulate those for safety??? In my younger days I did some remarkably interesting substances (hey thats what college for right?) I was lucky that nobody myself included ever got hurt, because we did some dumb things once in a while, I remember a time a friend freaked out and jumped through the bay window of his sisters apartment. Anyway I digress, or not, either way that is likely why many substances are criminal. It is just easier that way.
In a prior reply it was mentioned that bad behavior and outward actions are a different matter, the limit on alcohol while operating a motor vehicle is a safety concern. I understand that, that makes sense. Never seen a stoner kill a car full of kids trying to get a twinkie though... so I think one thing that stops general decriminalization is the time it would take to figure out how to regulate every thing people decide looks like a good time. Pot, sure that one is easy, but what about meth or MDMA, or MDA, '___', or ketamine??? How does one regulate those for safety??? In my younger days I did some remarkably interesting substances (hey thats what college for right?) I was lucky that nobody myself included ever got hurt, because we did some dumb things once in a while, I remember a time a friend freaked out and jumped through the bay window of his sisters apartment. Anyway I digress, or not, either way that is likely why many substances are criminal. It is just easier that way.
edit on 28-10-2015 by sycomix because: Type
O
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Not me. People with ordinary ailments have no idea they are being prescribed powerful addicting synthetics like oxycodone or Vicadin. They don;t tell people they are begin prescribed opiates or synthetic. Then when addicted and the prescription runs out, they have the street alternative to fall back on, heroin.
They wouldn't probably start on addictive legal pills if they knew they would have to kick their habit, too.
Trying to stay on topic, I get the law needs to justify its existence, evermore. It all kind of crumbles when you consider anyone can get drunk for a few bucks and wipe out a bus load of nuns.
The medical, legal and financial ruin caused by alcohol abuse is way more important, but thats not addressable because prohibition doesn't work.
From a financial perspective on the part of alcohol companies the less drugs the better. From the financial perspective of the pharma companies the less illegal drugs the better, from the Industrial Prison Complex , the more prisoners the better.
Well the pharmaceutical industry is heavily invested with lobbying power in the government and makes tons of money off of opiates (which I actually don't have a problem with, I'd rather a legal company made money on drugs than an illegal organization like the mafia).
Not me. People with ordinary ailments have no idea they are being prescribed powerful addicting synthetics like oxycodone or Vicadin. They don;t tell people they are begin prescribed opiates or synthetic. Then when addicted and the prescription runs out, they have the street alternative to fall back on, heroin.
They wouldn't probably start on addictive legal pills if they knew they would have to kick their habit, too.
Trying to stay on topic, I get the law needs to justify its existence, evermore. It all kind of crumbles when you consider anyone can get drunk for a few bucks and wipe out a bus load of nuns.
The medical, legal and financial ruin caused by alcohol abuse is way more important, but thats not addressable because prohibition doesn't work.
From a financial perspective on the part of alcohol companies the less drugs the better. From the financial perspective of the pharma companies the less illegal drugs the better, from the Industrial Prison Complex , the more prisoners the better.
Whilst they remain illegal, someone somewhere is making a nice bit of wedge through the illegal selling of said narcotics. After all, demand is on the
increase it appears.
No doubt the Secret Services such as the CIA and MI6 do alright from the selling of these products, whilst all the while we will be told it is financing terrorism. Which of course it is, but not as we are led to believe.
No doubt the Secret Services such as the CIA and MI6 do alright from the selling of these products, whilst all the while we will be told it is financing terrorism. Which of course it is, but not as we are led to believe.
edit on 28/10/15 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)
I decided to google it and found some other good articles along with the ops.
www.upworthy.com... ason-why-drugs-like-marijuana-and-coke-are-illegal-its-not-what-i-expected
also it is always fun to see yahoo answers
answers.yahoo.com...[editb y]edit on 28-10-2015 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)
When hundreds of thousands of Chinese started showing up in my country, working hard on the railroads and the mines and then kicking back in the evening just like they had in the old country with a few puffs on that opium pipe, that's when you saw the first drug prohibition laws in California and Nevada, driven by racist fears of Chinese transforming white women into opium-addicted sex slaves.
www.upworthy.com... ason-why-drugs-like-marijuana-and-coke-are-illegal-its-not-what-i-expected
also it is always fun to see yahoo answers
answers.yahoo.com...[editb y]edit on 28-10-2015 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Krazysh0t
As a proud member of LEAP I applaud You for keeping up the good fight. I can also add that I was working in 'Narcotics' during the Rave Era and the City in which I worked in Ca. was also well known for the various RAP artists ("Fizz" in The Hood). I remember sitting outside many of Raves and the only real 'issue' as far as the cops were concerned were the Business Permits, sure there were the occasional 'Tool' but they had their own security so it wasn't any issue.
I mention the Rap/Fizz (mdma) because even the folks from The Hood would come to the Raves and get along fine. One rapper, SugaWolf made a living rapping 'bout Fizz.. It was the "Ri¢hies" from the 'Burbs who would come over and let loose and of course these were kids of 'voters/white/affluent' they would skate any legal issues.
As far as heroin is concerned, that too is a 'racket'. One of the last cases I did was follow some heroin back to the source, Afghanistan. In 2001, before 'The War' Afghanistan supplied 7% of the world's opium, now it is close to 90% since 'The War' Who woulda thunk growing opium would be easier in a 'war zone'? Have You seen an upswing in opiate based pain meds and/or heroin in Your area? That is to keep 'bodies' pumping crap out of the privatized prison system. That is why 95% are incarcerated on 'plea bargains' and why the Police ALWAYS raid low income housing. It is a 'target rich environment' aka 'easy fishing' If there isn't low income housing where You live then each traffic stop is a "fishing expedition" and the Deputy/Cop wants to search Your car because Your tail light is out.. Tell Her/Him "No" and that You are a 'bottle cap' and not worth the dig. Plus, KNOW that the SCOTUS has decided that a detention cannot take longer than it is to write a ticket/ "Let's wait for the K-9" --- You can't find an elephant in a shoe box!!!
"There is a strain for every pain" I remember I didn't get hired at Richmond PD because the drunk polygrapher said I was a 'middle man in a drug deal' because I gave a bag of cannabis (medicine) to a full blown AIDS pt. on the way to fishing only because I was in the front seat of the truck on the way. The guy was 'in the bag' (vodka) at 0930 hrs. but it was Me with the 'issues'.. hahahaha
It would be less expensive if they just gave it away, ALL of it. But this makes too much 'sense' and not enough cents.
namaste
As a proud member of LEAP I applaud You for keeping up the good fight. I can also add that I was working in 'Narcotics' during the Rave Era and the City in which I worked in Ca. was also well known for the various RAP artists ("Fizz" in The Hood). I remember sitting outside many of Raves and the only real 'issue' as far as the cops were concerned were the Business Permits, sure there were the occasional 'Tool' but they had their own security so it wasn't any issue.
I mention the Rap/Fizz (mdma) because even the folks from The Hood would come to the Raves and get along fine. One rapper, SugaWolf made a living rapping 'bout Fizz.. It was the "Ri¢hies" from the 'Burbs who would come over and let loose and of course these were kids of 'voters/white/affluent' they would skate any legal issues.
As far as heroin is concerned, that too is a 'racket'. One of the last cases I did was follow some heroin back to the source, Afghanistan. In 2001, before 'The War' Afghanistan supplied 7% of the world's opium, now it is close to 90% since 'The War' Who woulda thunk growing opium would be easier in a 'war zone'? Have You seen an upswing in opiate based pain meds and/or heroin in Your area? That is to keep 'bodies' pumping crap out of the privatized prison system. That is why 95% are incarcerated on 'plea bargains' and why the Police ALWAYS raid low income housing. It is a 'target rich environment' aka 'easy fishing' If there isn't low income housing where You live then each traffic stop is a "fishing expedition" and the Deputy/Cop wants to search Your car because Your tail light is out.. Tell Her/Him "No" and that You are a 'bottle cap' and not worth the dig. Plus, KNOW that the SCOTUS has decided that a detention cannot take longer than it is to write a ticket/ "Let's wait for the K-9" --- You can't find an elephant in a shoe box!!!
"There is a strain for every pain" I remember I didn't get hired at Richmond PD because the drunk polygrapher said I was a 'middle man in a drug deal' because I gave a bag of cannabis (medicine) to a full blown AIDS pt. on the way to fishing only because I was in the front seat of the truck on the way. The guy was 'in the bag' (vodka) at 0930 hrs. but it was Me with the 'issues'.. hahahaha
It would be less expensive if they just gave it away, ALL of it. But this makes too much 'sense' and not enough cents.
namaste
originally posted by: sycomix
a reply to: Ghost147
In a prior reply it was mentioned that bad behavior and outward actions are a different matter, the limit on alcohol while operating a motor vehicle is a safety concern. I understand that, that makes sense. Never seen a stoner kill a car full of kids trying to get a twinkie though... so I think one thing that stops general decriminalization is the time it would take to figure out how to regulate every thing people decide looks like a good time. Pot, sure that one is easy, but what about meth or MDMA, or MDA, '___', or ketamine??? How does one regulate those for safety??? In my younger days I did some remarkably interesting substances (hey thats what college for right?) I was lucky that nobody myself included ever got hurt, because we did some dumb things once in a while, I remember a time a friend freaked out and jumped through the bay window of his sisters apartment. Anyway I digress, or not, either way that is likely why many substances are criminal. It is just easier that way.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't suggesting that every drug should be treated equally dangerous, nor should they have the same regulations. But, regulations are a good thing in general, for those that simply cannot control themselves naturally, or who are prone to poor choices.
For instance, Weed is known to be an incredibly safe plant. However, it is also known to intentionally damage cognitive abilities if used on a regular bases before a general age. So regulating Weed to prevent youth from using it on a regular basis isn't a bad thing. We have a legal age limit for alcohol for similar reasons.
The regulation would apply to the actual health/behavioral concerns of each legal drug. Legal doesn't necessarily mean free-use for everyone, after all.
a reply to: JimNasium
And yet you ALL support tobacco prohibition, stigmatization , isolation and financial rape of smokers, all based on the same kind of evidence used against marijuana
You all are hypocrites or merely posers jumping on a band wagon.
Tired of Control Freaks
And yet you ALL support tobacco prohibition, stigmatization , isolation and financial rape of smokers, all based on the same kind of evidence used against marijuana
You all are hypocrites or merely posers jumping on a band wagon.
Tired of Control Freaks
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Checked "Find a Grave" to see if Harry Anslinger was buried in a legal state in the U.S. (nope, in Hollidaysburg Presbyterian Cemetery in Pennsylvania, although someday...), but saw that somewhere along the way someone put up an interesting picture above the photo of his tombstone:
www.findagrave.com...
Edit: Looked again, and on that site you can leave a Memorial message. On Anslinger's page that section reads:
Checked "Find a Grave" to see if Harry Anslinger was buried in a legal state in the U.S. (nope, in Hollidaysburg Presbyterian Cemetery in Pennsylvania, although someday...), but saw that somewhere along the way someone put up an interesting picture above the photo of his tombstone:
www.findagrave.com...
Edit: Looked again, and on that site you can leave a Memorial message. On Anslinger's page that section reads:
The Virtual Flowers feature has been turned off for this memorial because it was being continually misused.
edit on 28-10-2015 by Aleister because: (no reason
given)
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Krazysh0t
The ban on MDMA has in the UK resulted in more deaths.
Yeah obviously. Genuine MDMA has become rare, people are now using much more dangerous alternatives. Yet they don't even know it, since its illegal and there is obviously no quality control.
Young people regularly overdose & often die, because they see police with a drug detector dog harassing people at raves and night clubs... they end up panicking about being arrested, then swallow all the drugs they have on them in one go, then end up having a fatal overdose, as a result of the pills not being genuine MDMA.
It seriously happens all the time. Young people end up dying, simply because it's illegal.
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks
I'm typing this to You w/a lip full of Copenhagen™ but as far as 'choking on sticks' "smoke 'em if You got 'em' or better yet "Butt Out"...
Have a better day!
P.S. If tobacco does indeed 'kill' then when I use My snuff, I'm only 'killing Myself' while You poison the air.. How does that work for Your supposition?
I'm typing this to You w/a lip full of Copenhagen™ but as far as 'choking on sticks' "smoke 'em if You got 'em' or better yet "Butt Out"...
Have a better day!
P.S. If tobacco does indeed 'kill' then when I use My snuff, I'm only 'killing Myself' while You poison the air.. How does that work for Your supposition?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok
Yea. It's just like a big game of wack-a-mole, but every time they hit a mole, the next one to pop up is nastier than the previous one.
Yup.
Each analogue thats pops up seems to have rather more random and nastier effects.
MDMA was rather benign as far as pharmaceuticals went, so long as you used it responsibly and didnt mix it with other drugs.
The legal replacements however have resulted in some nasty incidents the cathione ones like methadrone being some of the worst, plus being adictive.
edit on 28-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: Ghost147
a reply to: sycomix
I agree with you, somewhat. Everything should be legalized, so long as they are still regulated. It's not exactly a bad thing that we have an alcohol limit for people who want to drive, for example.
Yea, I'm not against this either. Heck, I wouldn't mind some drugs like heroin still not being legal to sell. It would be fine if it just remained decriminalized so we don't jail the users, but jailing dealers still would keep usage rates from skyrocketing.
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: JimNasium
And yet you ALL support tobacco prohibition, stigmatization , isolation and financial rape of smokers, all based on the same kind of evidence used against marijuana
You all are hypocrites or merely posers jumping on a band wagon.
Tired of Control Freaks
Regulations aren't the same things as bans. We've gone over this many times before in your plethora of "tobacco shouldn't be restricted in one bit" threads.