The War on Drugs

[vortexring 0]

What is the point of this war? What does it achieve?
What is the point of prohibiting heroin, as an example? Benign in the hands of the doc, yet highly dangerous when cut by unregulated and illegal dealers. And then look at the crime involved around this blackmarket. This is a war being lost. Prohibition spreads drug use.

But being tough on drugs win votes doesn't it?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 3,176]

>Prohibition spreads drug use.

Well, I don't think that's true. Prohibition greatly reduced alcohol consumption; it didn't recover until a few years after prohibition was over. OTOH there were a lot of other bad effects of prohibition (crime etc) which are good examples of the negative effects of a ban.

[vortexring 0]

Consider new users. The easiest way for them to fund their habit is to sell the drugs and use the profit for themselves. The find new users to sell to. When someone in the class starts using, soon others join in. One user in the streets? Friends and neighbours soon join in. Black market drug use spreads geometrically - pushers push. In the late 60's the 'official' figures of herion users was reckoned to be less than a thousand, yet now, despite the war, it's around 500000. Pyramid selling at it's most effective.

Prohibition, similiar to the alcohol ban you mention, is quite simply stupid. The real danger isn't from the drugs, it's from the blackmarket.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

"The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this."
Albert Einstein "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[normiss 917]

So you believe the hype!

That's bullshit.
Maybe inner-city under-privileged users...but I don't think the typical user does this.

Bear in mind, my only experience was with weed. We simply bought what we wanted to smoke. Allowance, part time job money, lunch money is what we used in high school.
Never graduated onto anything harder than the "gateway drug" of pot either.


I don't believe most of the drug trade works that way.
The real or heavy dealers that had everything for sale, generally didn't use.

[billvon 3,176]

>The real danger isn't from the drugs, it's from the blackmarket.

Well, I'd say it's from both. Plenty of people die from smoking and drinking (legal) and from drug overdoses (illegal) every year. But I also agree that the black market is a very big problem with illegal drugs, and I'd like to see at least the less-addictive and less dangerous ones legalized as a start.

[vortexring 0]

Quote

So you believe the hype!

That's bullshit.

What hype? And what's bullshit?

Quote

Maybe inner-city under-privileged users...but I don't think the typical user does this.

Bear in mind, my only experience was with weed.

Some quite assertive replies from someone who doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.

Quote

We simply bought what we wanted to smoke. Allowance, part time job money, lunch money is what we used in high school.
Never graduated onto anything harder than the "gateway drug" of pot either.

Quote

I don't believe most of the drug trade works that way.

How would you know? Odd belief you have there.

Quote

The real or heavy dealers that had everything for sale, generally didn't use.

Did I mention the 'real' or 'heavy' dealers?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

>The real danger isn't from the drugs, it's from the blackmarket.

Well, I'd say it's from both. Plenty of people die from smoking and drinking (legal) and from drug overdoses (illegal) every year. But I also agree that the black market is a very big problem with illegal drugs, and I'd like to see at least the less-addictive and less dangerous ones legalized as a start.

Regarding heroin, it isn't from both. It's simply from the blackmarket. Why are people dying from overdoses? Is it through the fact the drugs aren't regulated so you never quite know whether the drug is 20% or 90%? Or you never quite know what it's been cut with?

Why less dangerous? Heroin becomes seriously dangerous in the blackmarket, not in the hospitals. It's easier to die from a paracetamol overdose than a heroin overdose.

Why less addictive? Would legalisation suddenly have heroin addicts springing up left right and centre? If people want to do heroin, they'll do it whether it's illegal or not.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

Is it through the fact the drugs aren't regulated so you never quite know whether the drug is 20% or 90%? Or you never quite know what it's been cut with?

Why less dangerous? Heroin becomes seriously dangerous in the blackmarket, not in the hospitals. It's easier to die from a paracetamol overdose than a heroin overdose.

You want to legalise heroin? I dont care about weed but but damn heroin? Have you seen a heroin addict and seen first hand how fucked up they are?

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[vortexring 0]

I've known many heroin addicts who've been using for greater than twenty years, who go about their daily business just like anyone else. Who are just like anyone else. Addiction can be problem though; my point is that the blackmarket only serves to exasperate that problem.

Have you seen how fucked up alcoholics are!?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Have you seen how fucked up alcoholics are!?

Fuck that! Have you seen skydivers?!

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[vortexring 0]

Sure, but being serious for a minute; imagine the hundreds of millions of pounds which would be released by stopping this pointless war?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[frequentfaller 0]

i have to agree with vr on this one. legalize the drugs. weed can be given to the tobacco companies to produce. hard drugs in govt controlled clinics 21 and over.

i think it will cause a drug use increase at 1st, but after the glamour(cocaine rich people drug) finally wears off, people will see that hard drugs are bullshit. make you feel horrible the next day.

there will always be people who get hooked on it, just like alcohol, but at least it will be a lot cheaper, so they wont have to resort to crime to fuel their habit.

Born ok 1st time.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

weed can be given to the tobacco companies to produce.

I'd prefer the tobacco companies not get the opportunity to adulterate cannabis as they have adulterated tobacco.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[downwardspiral 0]

I agree with you completely. However in this country its an unpopular notion and likely the main reason the Libertarian party will never gain enough power to make our system 3 party which I think we desperately need.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[vortexring 0]

It's only unpopular because people so readily believe the propaganda and bullshit they're fed over there. And here! It shouldn't have anything to do with being a liberal though.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 3,176]

>Why are people dying from overdoses?

Because people are stupid and it's a very, very addictive drug.

>Why less dangerous? Heroin becomes seriously dangerous in the
>blackmarket, not in the hospitals.

Using that argument, alcohol should be much less dangerous, since it's completely out in the open. Yet 44,000 people a year die from alcohol overdoses and alcohol-caused disease like liver failure and stroke.

>If people want to do heroin, they'll do it whether it's illegal or not.

Well, that's definitely not true. A lot of people do not do illegal drugs because they're illegal.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

It's only unpopular because people so readily believe the propaganda and bullshit they're fed over there. And here! It shouldn't have anything to do with being a liberal though.

I was referring to the Libertarian party because they're a large proponant of drug legalization. But again I agree. I just stopped fighting that fight years ago because too many people think continuing to fight an expensive and unwinable war is a better option. Thank Jesus.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[vortexring 0]

Quote

>Why are people dying from overdoses?

Because people are stupid and it's a very, very addictive drug.

They're dying of overdoses through stupidity? In a sense yes, using heroin is stupid. You don't know what it's been cut with, or exactly how pure it is. And making the drug illegal is the cause for this. That's also what's stupid.

Quote

>Why less dangerous? Heroin becomes seriously dangerous in the
>blackmarket, not in the hospitals.

Using that argument, alcohol should be much less dangerous, since it's completely out in the open. Yet 44,000 people a year die from alcohol overdoses and alcohol-caused disease like liver failure and stroke.

Nope. Alcohol is regulated. It isn't 'cut' with potentially harmful substances. The container has to legally read how strong the drink is.

Quote

>If people want to do heroin, they'll do it whether it's illegal or not.

Well, that's definitely not true. A lot of people do not do illegal drugs because they're illegal.

Really? Who are these people? I've never, ever met anyone in my life who didn't do drugs because they were illegal. You're speaking of a minority. I've met many who didn't do drugs because they were educated on the substances and were able to make informed decisions though. Like I said, if somebody wishes to take drugs, they'll take them, whether they're illegal or not.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 3,176]

>Nope. Alcohol is regulated. It isn't 'cut' with potentially harmful
>substances. The container has to legally read how strong the drink is.

Exactly. And even with all that, 44,000 people a year die as a direct cause of drinking too much of it. So the argument "making it legal will prevent deaths from overuse" doesn't work.

>Really? Who are these people?

A few:

Denise Neirinckx
Lindsay Haugland
Sue Behson
Ken Corless
Dave Kaplan

>Like I said, if somebody wishes to take drugs, they'll take them, whether
>they're illegal or not.

I've proven that incorrect. History does as well; during prohibition, far fewer people drank than before prohibition.

[vortexring 0]

I read this article about Ecstasy from the US DEA. It appears as an honest and informative description, unfortunately it's just not quite as informative as it should be:

'Ecstasy has rapidly become a favorite drug among young party goers in the U.S. and Europe, and it is now being used within the mainstream as well. According to the 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, Ecstasy use tripled among Americans between 1998 and 2001. Many people believe, incorrectly, that this synthetic drug is safer than cocaine and heroin. In fact, the drug is addictive (not quite - certainly not in the long term, certainly not physically) and can be deadly.(HOW!?) The drug often results in severe dehydration(How? It just dehydrates you!?) and heat stroke(How?) in the user, since it has the effect of “short-circuiting” the body’s temperature signals to the brain.(No it doesn't quite short circuit anything) Ecstasy can heat your body up to temperatures as high as 117 degrees.(Lies) Ecstasy can cause hypothermia, muscle breakdown, seizures, stroke, kidney and cardiovascular system failure, as well as permanent brain damage during repetitive use, and sometimes death.(How!? Just by eating a pill!? Nonsense.) The psychological effects of Ecstasy include confusion, depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, drug craving, and paranoia.'

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/demand/speakout/03so.htm

Now, there are dangers from taking this drug, such as not quite getting the chemical MDMA that you were expecting. Or the strength. People have suffered heat stroke from dancing like dickheads in a hot environment and not taking enough water, as people have died through drinking too much water whilst not dancing like dickheads for that matter. Why doesn't it mention that? Why does it just say it's addictive. Like heroin? Why can it be deadly? How often to people die using it?

Going by that description, if I take an ecstasy pill I might suddenly go down with heat stroke or hypothermia, just from simply taking the drug, or from my actions after taking the drug? Can I control how long I dance? In the UK a couple of people died through taking ecstasy; they danced so long and hard, without drinking enough water and died of heat stroke. The official Government advice was to make sure you drink enough water if you're going to take the drug. Some did; and drank too much water, and sadly died. Death through ignorance! What a shame. Or because it's best they don't do drugs, we'll not bother with drug education and advice, because they shouldn't be doing it anyway?

It's a misinformed article either through ignorance, (From the DEA?) or through the simple propaganda reasoning that all drugs are evil and dangerous and this war must be waged! Nuts.

What would someone curious about experimenting with ecstasy make of such an article? Would it frighten him or her off? It certainly would if that's all they read! But what if such a person was educated around the real issues regarding the drug? What would they make of the article then?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

>Nope. Alcohol is regulated. It isn't 'cut' with potentially harmful
>substances. The container has to legally read how strong the drink is.

Exactly. And even with all that, 44,000 people a year die as a direct cause of drinking too much of it. So the argument "making it legal will prevent deaths from overuse" doesn't work.

That isn't the argument Bill. Making it legal, will, amongst other things, allow people to know the strength of the drug they're taking, hence less overdoses.

Quote

>Really? Who are these people?

A few:

Denise Neirinckx
Lindsay Haugland
Sue Behson
Ken Corless
Dave Kaplan

>Like I said, if somebody wishes to take drugs, they'll take them, whether
>they're illegal or not.

I've proven that incorrect. History does as well; during prohibition, far fewer people drank than before prohibition.

You haven't proven anything. You've simply provided a few names. Besides, that prohibition you speak of was nothing more than ultimately stupid. People consumed alcohol legally before it came in. Do people take illegal drugs legally today? It's a different kettle of fish. Listen mate, this is reality: People will take drugs whether they're illegal or not.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 3,176]

>Making it legal, will, amongst other things, allow people to know the
>strength of the drug they're taking, hence less overdoses.

I agree. Making it legal will ALSO allow far more people to get their hands on the drug; that will tend to increase overdoses.

>You haven't proven anything.

Your statement, "if somebody wishes to take drugs, they'll take them, whether they're illegal or not," is demonstrably false. I know several people (I listed them) who did want to take drugs and did not because they were illegal, and they did not want to break the law.

You can think such people are idiots; that's fine. They do, however, exist.

>People will take drugs whether they're illegal or not.

Some people will. Some won't. Your argument that making drugs illegal does not slow their usage or restrict the people using them is incorrect; this was proven during prohibition. Some people do actually obey laws.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

You want to legalise heroin?

Sure.

Quote

I dont care about weed but but damn heroin? Have you seen a heroin addict and seen first hand how fucked up they are?

Yup. It'd be better for society as a whole to give them all the heroin they care to shoot or smoke in clean government facilities than dealing with the crime which pays for the habbit and diseases spread by those who've turned to prostitution without safe sex or paying piles of money to lock them up (California spending is now $40K per inmate).

Domestically legallizing vice would reduce the size of the parallel economy where the under-educated can earn a decent living at the expense of violence which results in collateral damage.

Internationally it would mean less money for nasty groups like the Taliban.

[masterrig 1]

I think, something that enters into this 'Drug War' thing is, the number of U.S citizens being kidnapped and killed by the drug cartels. The high number of innocent people being killed by the 'warring' drug cartels along our southwest border just to gain control of the 'trade routes' into this country. If, they can control these routes they stand to make millions and millions of dollars. As long as the demand in this country for illegal drugs remains high, innocent people are going to die. Does anyone care about that?


Chuck