Why do people want to legalize harmful drugs??

reply to post by Doomzilla


If marijuana becomes legal, then the next bad drug (eg. heroin) might be the next trend with kids who are curious. And we already know about that gateway drug. This will not end when its legalizes, just displaced.

reply to post by DuneKnight


Marijuana is Not a gateway drug . Alcohol and cigarettes are _ They are the only legal drugs after all so it makes sense that you would try those 1st .

reply to post by DuneKnight


Have you ever smoked Marijuana?

If yes-
Did you then climb the ladder all the way to Heroin?

If no-
How do you know anything about it that people who have used it don't?


/thread. You're either a troll or a Federal Reserve sized bank of ignorance.

If you want to call alcohol a "gateway" drug it is fair then to put that into perspective. Alcohol is the flashing neon-lighted, six barkers, two jugglers, and a clown handing out free balloons for the kiddies grand entrance into recreational drug use.

Alcohol is wholly sanctified, energized, and sanitized for your protection. It recommended for every occasion, is the center-piece to a party, is a toast, a celebration, and is a main event in and of itself. It is acceptable for almost every event, sold at almost every event public private, atheltic, scholastic, artistic, and family.

Alcohol is not just a gateway, for many it is That Path.

Alcohol has trampled through and widened that entrance and has brought the Joys of Recreational Drug Use into every home and every life, directly or not, and made it the proper thing to do. You are EXPECTED to consume alcohol. It is just about considered your patriotic duty. All recreational drug roads lead to alcohol, no detours permitted.

Governments have been trying to make a gateway of marijuana for decades but that gateway no longer exists, there is the super-highway of alcohol consumption to efficiently shuttle the acceptance and rejoicing of recreational drug-use into you lives, home, and families. I believe we have all seen the danger along that route.

Pot was perhaps the first off-ramp.

Why do people want to legalize harmful drugs??

Beats me. Ask the folks from the Prohibition era.

Prohibition of any substance creates crime.

If the government were to ban strawberrys today, tomorrow there would be illegal grow ops in peoples homes growing strawberrys.

Those people growing would then be branded criminals(prohibition creating crime).
Those people buying would then be branded criminals(prohibition creating crime).

If anything, drug ABUSE(of any kind) is a public health issue, not a criminal one. That is the problem, people against it can not see the difference between moderate use and ABUSE.

When you go to a bar and have a couple drinks, is that abuse? NO.
When you go to a bar and stumble out drunk, is that abuse? YES.

Now the funny thing about cannabis is this, you can not ingest a fatal dosage of THC through smoking. There has never been a single death on record from cannabis.

There are negative side effects to ABUSING ANY DRUG.

YOU CAN DIE FROM DRINKING TOO MUCH WATER.

ZOMG MAKE WATER ILLEGAL.

Prohibition fails to stop illegal drug use while simultaneously making otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals.

Victimless crime is victimless, unless you get caught, in which case you're the victim of overreaching unconstitutional laws.

Originally posted by DuneKnight
All the arguments I read were not convincing not the slightest. If anything we should make more substances illegal not the other way round. Government is not trying to control you, if it wanted to it wouldve legalized it and regulated it and abused its access. Basically, it would take it away from you if you do something it doesn't like. Right now, the government knows more than you the average citizen can ever know and they know the dangers. So why defy that?

Wake up, harmful drugs are already legal. Don't you see those drug commercials?

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by DuneKnight

 

Marijuana is Not a gateway drug . Alcohol and cigarettes are _ They are the only legal drugs after all so it makes sense that you would try those 1st .

I agree. Stupidity and ignorance is the gateway, not the substance itself.

reply to post by DuneKnight


oh that has to be the lamest argument put forth thus far concerning the harmful effects
of so called illegal drugs.
Do you not see the irony that big pharm put out more dangerous addictive drugs for
illnesses that do not even exist in the 1st place like all the anti depressants to name
one type.

Take heroin. the big bad wolf of the drug world. it has been proven that this drug in its
pure form has no real ill effects on the body. yes you heard that correct you can live a
long productive life on heroin with no ill effects.
The big problem for most drug users are what the cutting agents are. these are the contaminates
used to bulk out the drug for maximum profit.

another drug would be cannabis, the medical implications are good and trials are taking place
as we speak. this may be a better alternative to some chemical cocktail dreamed up in some lab
by again big pharma. this is a plant for gods sake!

another vallium, or benzodiazipam, made from the root of the Valerian plant. may be addictive
in the long run but it does just what patients demand of it. it calms them down.

now see the problem is big pharma know that 20 tablets of 10MG cost £1.12pence
as opposed to the anti depressant that the Dr's are pushing like cipramil and this is a real nasty
believe me i have tried them. well they cost for 28 20 mg tablets around £8.00 so the profit margins
are massive so there is no incentive to give out vallium as there is no profit in them.

let me guess you are what "we" term a straight head? never touched a non proscribes drug?
well i belive we should be allowed to put whatever we choose into our body's.

whilst i do not agree with the crime that goes hand in hand with the illegal drug trade do you
not think the crime rate would drop if ALL drugs were regulated and made as safe and pure as
possible so user's did not come to harm? or you just think drug user's are the scum of the earth?

Take my favourite 2 drugs i love to hate ALCOHOL & CIGARETTES these two drugs alone cause
more trouble than ALL the illegal drugs put together but guess what your government loves them
FOR THE TAX. when did you see a pot smoker smash some poor sods head in like what i have
seen so often with alcohol? you wont. they just want to be left alone and chill. not like the alcoholic thugs.

If your not or have never been in the drug scene YOU will never understand it.
don't hate the player hate the game.

I haven't read the whole thread because I know if I did my attitude in this reply would be a lot more pissy than it should be. I only had to read the first couple posts to know the whole thread is mostly ignorant rantings. Sorry if everybody in the thread figured this issue out by the end of the thread and I didn't see it.

The title of this thread is evidence enough of the mis/dis-information surrounding psychoactive substances.
Harmful drugs? What drugs, what route of administration, how are they harmful and to what degree? Drugs like alcohol and acetaminophen (tylenol/APAP) destroy livers. Saying that you are talking about illegal, recreational drugs and not about legal, medicinal drugs is making a totally arbitrary distinction - there is no difference between the two sets of chemicals. They all interact with your physiology and many, many cross the BBB or affect neurotransmitter systems throughout the body. Sugar is an addictive opioid - they give babies a spoonful of sugar water right after they are born when they prick their toe or finger for a blood sample, so that the babies don't feel the pain and start crying. That gram or so of sugar is enough to nearly instantly dull the pain of the prick.

I have made a few posts on ATS about drugs and safety and harmfulness, but really there is so much information out there that I don't feel compelled to add personal writing here. Everybody chooses to believe propaganda about psychoactive substances, they have this part of their mind where DRUGS go and anything that gets stuck inside this little part of consciousness is feared and rejected blindly. The fact of the matter is few drugs cause direct physical damage with responsible use. When you take a psychoactive drug, you temporarily alter your psychology (not permanently) and so changes in your perception which may or may not be lasting may occur. But smoking weed has never hurt anything but the smoker's lungs when they smoke a lot. Cannabis is incredibly non-toxic and actually neuro-protective and even promotes neurogenesis (new brain cell growth). In fact, most drugs are quite safe.

Please do yourself a favor and visit www.erowid.org or www.bluelight.ru for intelligent discussion of psychoactive substances. Don't believe ANYTHING your government tells you about drugs - they make way too much money off of the #ed up system they created around drug trade to tell anybody the truth. The truth is, however, all around you. Drugs are just direct-to-brain technology. We engineer a substance and apply it to some real-life situation. Taking a drug doesn't destroy the sanctity of your consciousness unless you make that choice. Combine the current system of abstinence/JUST SAY NO with the insanely huge amount of disinformation/baseless propaganda about drugs spread daily, and it is clear that an ignorant and addicted society will inevitably be born. We have been living in this ignorant addict society for about 60 or 70 years now.

edit: Tao Te Ching quote (the Tao Te Ching is an old chinese book about how to rule a kingdom with wisdom and humility, how to be a great leader):
-----------------------------------------
#58
Where the ruler is mum, mum,
The people are simple and happy.
Where the ruler is sharp, sharp,
The people are wily and discontented.

Bad fortune is what good fortune leans on,
Good fortune is what bad fortune hides in.
Who knows the ultimate end of this process?
Is there no norm of right?
Yet what is normal soon becomes abnormal,
And what is auspicious soon turns ominous.
Long indeed have the people been in a quandry.

Therefore, the Sage squares without cutting,
carves without disfiguring,
straightens without straining,
enlightens without dazzling.
-----------------------------------------


The first paragraph applies to this situation in that the more laws a country has, the more tightass rules and the more hardass the ruler is, the more wild the people will be. The more laws will be broken, and not just because there are more laws - fewer laws allow the people to realize harmony in themselves. The soft-lawed nation governs itself whereas the hard-lawed nation must be chained and restricted by a powerful government. There's a lot more in that quote, but I'm just gonna leave it at this.

I think the OP is talking about fluoride.

It has never been approved by the FDA.

In all seriousness. Let's go way upstream and find the source of the discussion. 2006 global spend

Heroin is illegal unless you talk about percoset, morphine, codeine, vicodin, oxycodone, etc;

FDA Approved Cocaine

Marinol

It is not about health. It is about money.

For anybody to classify cannabis as "dangerous" is the sheer epitome of ignorance. Cannabis is one of the least harmful substances known to man. And the gateway drug concept does not make sense, because since it is the most widely used drug, found in every single city in every state, used by millions across the world, of course if you ask a meth addict if he tried cannabis before using meth he will say yes. Why not ask a serial killer if he tried watching television before murdering people? Ask a drunk driver who crashed into oncoming traffic if he tried playing video games first, ask a rapist if he tried masturbating before raping, ask an alcoholic if he drank milk before trying liquor.

You have to buy cannabis through drug dealers, and lots of these dealers sell more than just cannabis, and these other drugs rake in more money than cannabis. One day the dealer might offer you a drug that gives you a much stronger high than cannabis without warning you of the addiction or the dangers of it, and before you know it you'll be a crack addict. If cannabis was decriminalized we would not have this problem, because you wouldn't be offered crystal meth at a cannabis dispensary. So really drugs being illegal actually makes them more dangerous.

Also I think my signature speaks for itself, but the harmful drugs (alcohol and tobacco) are already legal. Half a million people are killed every year by those two. These "harmful drugs" you refer to, all of them combined only kill 15,000 people in a year. That is only 3% of the amount of people that are killed by alcohol and tobacco! So in reality we would be better off making alcohol and tobacco illegal, and legalizing or decriminalizing crack, heroin, ecstasy, '___', '___', mushrooms, and whatever other illegal drugs there are, however crazy that may sound.

Right so you punish me because im having a civil conversation ?
You warn me because im responding to the question of the THREAD ?
Why not just delete the thread ?
Trying to send a message i guess .
I see im not the only one .
WHY allow threads like this if your going to punish me for discussiing the topic ??

Originally posted by IAMIAM
Perhaps this idea of certain substances being "dangerous" is based on ignorance based on government studies which were performed to meet the agenda of criminalization.

This being the most likely case, I advise all opposed to check out independent studies which contradict the government mantra. Such studies can be found here:

NORML

If you are for the decriminalization of said substances, check out my thread here:

The Teapot Party

With Love,

Your Brother

I cant check the thread its been Deleted friend

Originally posted by TupacShakur
For anybody to classify cannabis as "dangerous" is the sheer epitome of ignorance. Cannabis is one of the least harmful substances known to man. And the gateway drug concept does not make sense, because since it is the most widely used drug, found in every single city in every state, used by millions across the world, of course if you ask a meth addict if he tried cannabis before using meth he will say yes. Why not ask a serial killer if he tried watching television before murdering people? Ask a drunk driver who crashed into oncoming traffic if he tried playing video games first, ask a rapist if he tried masturbating before raping, ask an alcoholic if he drank milk before trying liquor.

You have to buy cannabis through drug dealers, and lots of these dealers sell more than just cannabis, and these other drugs rake in more money than cannabis. One day the dealer might offer you a drug that gives you a much stronger high than cannabis without warning you of the addiction or the dangers of it, and before you know it you'll be a crack addict. If cannabis was decriminalized we would not have this problem, because you wouldn't be offered crystal meth at a cannabis dispensary. So really drugs being illegal actually makes them more dangerous.

Also I think my signature speaks for itself, but the harmful drugs (alcohol and tobacco) are already legal. Half a million people are killed every year by those two. These "harmful drugs" you refer to, all of them combined only kill 15,000 people in a year. That is only 3% of the amount of people that are killed by alcohol and tobacco! So in reality we would be better off making alcohol and tobacco illegal, and legalizing or decriminalizing crack, heroin, ecstasy, '___', '___', mushrooms, and whatever other illegal drugs there are, however crazy that may sound.

edit on 13-2-2011 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-2-2011 by TupacShakur because: Bad Math

Exactly, the "War on Drugs" creates all the problems associated with drugs.

Violence, ignorance, addiction and money to criminals.

Drug use is natural, drug abuse is the problem and the "War on Drugs" only amplifies it.

Since the this war started drug prices have decreased, purity has increased, and use has stayed the same.

The "War on Drugs" has done nothing but give violent people huge profits and imprison innocent people.

I agree. I think the drug of self rightousnesss should be banned.

The answer is making LESS things illegal.

Not more.

First of all, "the government" is a body of elected officials and it must represent the people, not the other way around. To say that a body of elected officials somehow knows more than the people whom elected them is a great big misnomer. Last time I checked, most of the drug laws were written by the legislators more than 50 years ago and many of those have purely religious motivations for outlawing various drugs, they didn't even have internet or computers back then and certainly there wasn't nearly as much research data on the subject matter as there is now.

One motivation for outlawing them is that they might be dangerous, however just because something might be dangerous is not a good enough reason to outlaw them, unless that is what the public wishes. Another question is dangerous to whom? Many people in the public don't mind if somebody else chooses to endanger him or herself, so long as it isn't dangerous to other non-participating people, a way of thinking that is different than the past.

If people want to endanger themselves, then they have the right to do so as long as it's a legal activity. Also, "dangerous" is quite a subjective word. Sex and alcohol, horseback riding, camping, hunting, etc etc etc, are dangerous, but you wouldn't want to try to make them illegal, right? I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who once said "Those who sacrifice freedom for safety deserve neither." which I think also applies to one's state of mind. The freedom to an altered state of mind ought to be up there with the first amendment right to freedom of speech and religion, imo.

Also, one could make the argument that illegal drugs aren't harmful if used properly, with the proper dosages and such, just like how legal drugs aren't harmful if used properly.

After reading 6 pages of nearly ubiquitous condemnation of the OP's position, I have to ask, "have the 'people" influenced your opinion yet, OP?" Especially since it is their behavior, or rather, choices, or actually, freedom of choice, that you advocate suppressing?

We clearly, as a community, disagree overwhelmingly with your position here. We refute it with studies, we argue the limits of reasonable governmental authority, and we assert our natural rights.

Your answer to this? Apparently you have your mind made up, and don't feel the need to answer.

I would hope that you can take what your fellow ats members say, again overwhelmingly, a little more seriously. If this were a serious thread, I believe it would have fizzled a few pages back, where studies were cited that proved drug use rates decrease (especially among the young) in countries that legalize drugs. You would have found an answer to the query in your OP title.

And admitted you were misinformed, and wrong.