 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Legalise Drugs ?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: CarolC Date: 09 Jun 02 - 05:20 AM Hrothgar, even though Sativa and Vulgaris are two different plants, it's still illegal in the US to grow industrial grade hemp (Vulgaris), because some people in the government argue that you can get high from it. So although Marc's botanical information may have been less than accurate, the basis for his argument was sound. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Bobert Date: 08 Jun 02 - 12:25 PM Right on, WyoWoman. I agree with everything you said, especially "getting the gangsters out of it". JohnP said "follow the money" and this is an important point in that the War on Drugs is a big, big business that costs us at all kinds of levels. Incareration is big, big business. Attornies, bailbondsmen, judges, court clerks, probabation and parole folks. Billions of dollars. Police, DEA, paid informants. Billions of Dollars. On the other side, like WyoWoman pointed out, the gangsters are taking bllions of dollars on the taxfree blacvk market. And how about the junkie who is hustling, stealing, ripping and running. Whos stuff is he stealing? Yours! Insurance premiunms to cover losses from stolen stuff by junkies. Billions more. And how about all the guns that the street dealers have to have to protect their turfs. Billions. (and the NRA knows this, incidently...). And the untold losses of folks who because of their Jones spend all their time hustling rather than producing and paying taxes. ( It is possible for an addict to work if he's not spending his entire day hustling for the next fix.) Yaeh, more billions. Now that's just the monitary side of this mega business. And guess what, not one danged widget is produced from this mega monster of a business. Not one widget!!!! Then there is the human and social devestation that the "War" takes on mankind. Turning kids into gangsters. Breaking up families. Threatening communities. This is an evil godless anti-human crusade being led by folks who want to control everything and have been doing a pretty good job of doing just that for way too long. They are the ruling class who has drawn this whole thing up to create money for themselves at the expense yet again, their serfclass, which is comprised of the working class and the poor. This cannot change in the US until the citizenry stands up and lets it be known that business as usual ain't cutting it. The worst part about this, though, is that those in contral also contral the information and are adept at keeping the flock where they want them, voting for the Rebubocratic Party. We do need to move off of this square, not only on this tragic issue but also all the tragic issues that we let the ruling class handle because as long as there is a buck in it for them then they will chase it at the expense of huymanity. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Hrothgar Date: 08 Jun 02 - 07:49 AM Well, for a start, Marc should check on the difference between Cannibis sativa and Cannabis vulgaris. The old "rope is made from hemp" story (I nearly said "yarn") has gone around before. Other random thoughts: If illegal drugs are legalised, it will affect the domestic economics of quite a few coppers. Is that why so many police authorities are against legalisation? Should currently illegal addictive drugs be generally available for sale, or made available on prescription to registered addicts? Should all drugs be taxed? This can be interesting. Tobacco is a plant that is notoriously difficult to grow, but the amount of tax on it (around AUD250 per kilo in Australia) has made illegal growing economically possible. Should the taxed drugs include caffein? Wouldn't you like to do that, and then run for re-election anywhere in the world?
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 08 Jun 02 - 01:56 AM One year on, any more thoughts? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Marc Date: 19 Jun 01 - 04:59 PM Just a little more marijuana background. The prohibition of pot had very little to do with any evidence of harmfull effects what so ever. It a documented fact that the 2 major lobbiests for the passing of the "Marijuana Tax Law" were a chemical company and a paper company. The former had developed a process for manufacturing synthetic rope. The other, a by bleaching wood pulp, could make paper at far less expense. By playing on the average americans fear of black jazz musicians, eliminated their competition.(Rope and paper were once made of hemp in the U.S.). Most folks didn't realise hemp and pot were the same thing. Not only did these corporations stack the deck in their favor, they put thousands of honest farmers out of work at the begining of the depression. Modern paper manufacturing is one of the largest polluters of our water ways today, and as for plastics,well. To my knowledge nobody has yet to come up with any convincing evidence that marijane is very harmfull. I know there is the lung disease issue but most pot smokers don't smoke 30-40 joints a day, you can't fairly compare it to tobacco use. Also in this climate we live some of us get piss tested regularly so we can keep our job. Howcome if I smoked a joint 3 weeks ago I'm fired but my partner can drink every night, not to mention lunch. Sorry for rambling Marc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:35 PM Yep, coffee is indeed a drug, a powerful drug, and a pretty damaging one over a long period of time. That's why I quit drinking it...and BROTHER...it was not easy! It took numerous attempst over a period of several years. It's never easy to quit an addiction, which is precisely the way the pusher wants it. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Jun 01 - 01:08 PM So far as I know, the only people who are consistently anti-drug are the Mormons, who quite correctly count coffee as a psychoactive drug.
In a few years time all this is going to seem absolutely crazy. People will tell their kids about it, and they'll think that they are making it up. Questions about it will turn up in general knowledge quizzes, and people won't know the answers.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Jun 01 - 09:29 PM To address the original question... Legalise Drugs? Yes. For the user only. The user needs help, not prosecution. But NOT for the pusher, NOT for the one who manufactures and markets it. Where would the user find most harmful drugs, without the pusher? The only drug I know of that's so easy to make that any fool can do it very simply in his own home is marijuana, and if someone wants to grow his own marijuana or brew his own beer for his own consumption, it's nobody's business but his. If he creates a big organisation, puts the drug in a fancy package, and advertises it on the public media, and sells it to millions of vulnerable and often unsuspecting people, then it bloody well IS society's business. Drug users are not criminals, per se, although they are often people with a serious emotional problem...(which sometimes can lead to crime). On the other hand, people who knowingly market drugs in order to profit on someone else's weakness are essentially criminals, as far as I'm concerned. I include in that estimation many presently legal industries, like the tobacco companies, and in some cases the pharmaceutical companies, as well as pushers of illegal drugs. Casinos are also in the business of marketing an addiction...but of a different sort. Drug users often become unstable and then commit crimes or antisocial acts that affect others...in that case, prosecute them for the act, not the drug. How hard can that be to figure out? I knew hundreds of young adults in the early seventies who indulged casually in various illegal drugs, and most of them were utterly harmless people. It would have been ludicrous to prosecute any of them under the circumstances, since they were not hurting anyone, except possibly (in a few cases) themselves, and that was usually hurt on a fairly trivial basis. The people who MUST be controlled are the large organizations which profit from mass marketing of drugs. As long as they run loose in this world, you will never make any real progress by harassing the users. It's the pushers you've got to stop. If I or anyone else should take a drug (pick any one of hundreds, both legal and illegal)...and then commit no antisocial act whatsoever as a result...then it's nobody else's business. People have a right to govern their own lives, as long as they don't hurt others. As far as hurting themselves...well, if you love them, you can give them good advice, but at the end of the day they will decide what to do to themselves. Who among us has not indulged in something at some time that someone else was wise enough to avoid indulging in? You wanna stop all of that? Arrest EVERYBODY and lock 'em up in isolation tanks. They will finally die safely without having done anything you disapprove of or consider unconventional according to whatever is your notion of conventionality. The real reason you see the law always coming down on the Little Guy (the user)...instead of on the BIG GUY who mass markets the drugs is simply this: MONEY TALKS. The marketers have lots of money and lots of influence and friends in high places...and the users don't. It's easy to beat up on the powerless. "Steal a little and they throw you in jail, Steal a lot and they make you a king." - Bob Dylan Besides, this whole damned society is based on addiction! What do you think commercial advertising is all about? Addiction (emotional or physical) sells product! Ever hear of "shopping addiction"? It's far more common than illegal drug use. Prosecuting drug users is, again, a distraction, a side issue, a "motherhood" issue. It sounds good, but it arises from a state of denial which does not even begin to address the deep systemic problems that lie at the heart of this whole money-corrupted society. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 01 - 12:12 PM Here's one of the victims of the "war on drugs": Franci sits on the veranda and whimpers. The little girl is underweight. Her armpits are erupting in boils. Like most of her people, she has suffered from respiratory problems and stomach pains since the aircraft and the helicopter gunships came over at Christmas and again at New Year dropping toxic pesticides on their villages.
For the rest of the story in today's Observer (England), click here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Crazy Eddie Date: 17 Jun 01 - 09:47 AM Interesting article in the Grauniad today. If true, I think it is a very sensible approach. http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST Date: 15 Jun 01 - 04:27 PM Here's one way everyone can help, Ask children you know, especially pre-high schoolers, about anti-drug messages they get in school. The DEA and federal programs make money available to school districts for the purpose of delivering "Just Say No" sermons. These messages, like most propaganda, are created by well meaning, but very ignorant, people and are loaded with misspoken "truths" and oversimplfied warnings that would make junkies shake their heads. It's like when I was taught that Coca Cola would crystalize my liver(you too?). When I finally discovered otherwise, it made me skeptical of other "truths"; so I decided the way to truth was experimentation. Bottom line? Were I a pusher, would I want the schools to keep on keeping on? You Bet! Funny we used to say the same stuff about Viet Nam. Stuff like, "This war is working out so well for the other side, I wouldn't be surprised if LBJ is getting advice directly from Ho Chi himself. And yes, during prohibition, they said the same about the government and Capone; that one turned out to be true. Paxton taught me to ask my kids "What Did You Learn In School Today". And by golly, more than half of what my kids told me they learned about drugs was pure poppycock. If I were runnning the show, I'd employ actual recovered junkies and just let them tell their stories. Woah, unvarnished truth; that would never work! Might scare the shit out of 'em.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: WyoWoman Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:22 PM I think it will make a difference, Bagpuss. Not any one article, or any one speech or any one action. But the fact that so many people are questioning the rationality of our drug policies, and who benefits and what's really going on anyeay?, and all of it eventually will add up and we'll come up with something more rational in a few years. Of course, human beans being what humans be, we'll figure out some other way to get things all bolloxed, but at least for a while, we might reach equilibrium on this particular issue. ww |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 14 Jun 01 - 09:21 PM I just heard on the radio that from now if the police catch people with cannabis they will not be prosecuted,they will just get a good telling off,and have their dope confiscated,this scheme starts in Brixton today.maybe we can expect to see a few stoned cops in Brixton! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Bagpuss Date: 14 Jun 01 - 10:19 AM Gervase, I just read that. I had always been a little unsure about legalising so called hard drugs, but he makes a compelling case. But like his series on education, I doubt whether it will make any difference. Bagpuss |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Dharmabum Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:44 AM Interesting article Gervase,thanks for posting it. The funny thing about the war on drugs is that it's so unclear who the enemy acually is. There is a fine line between the organizations claiming to be fighting the drug war,and the organizations that are supplying the drugs. DB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: John P Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:23 AM Follow the money. Who is getting rich because drugs are illegal? It would be interesting to find out how much cartel money is flowing surreptitiously into the campaign coffers of the more rabid anti-legalization politicians. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Gervase Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:44 AM A timely piece in the Guardian today argues for the legalisation of heroin, pointing out that its harmful effects come from its criminalisation. It's a compelling argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: WyoWoman Date: 13 Jun 01 - 10:50 PM Legalize everything and then treat the people who have problems with addiction in the way they deserve to be treated -- as people with a medical situation that needs to be addressed and cared for. Get the damned gangsters out of it. Then figure out ways for people with the entreprenurial drive to make money in ways that don't kill people. Read "Man's Quest for Meaning" and maybe you'll come to the conclusion I've come to, that all this silly shit about drug and alcohol abuse comes about because we're smack-dab (no pun intended) in the middle of an enormous crisis of meaning, and people can't figure out better ways to spend the light they've been given. We don't know that we're as equally closely related to the angels as to the apes. And the commercialization of absolutely everything means that everything precious -- sex, consciousness, love, beauty -- can and will be exploited for profit if someone can see a way to do that. What we can do is refuse to play along, refuse to let our lives become about consuming. Work toward a sense of the holy and a sense of connection to the In Here and the Great Out There. And love the heck out of every other being we encounter, to the best of our abilities, and just see where that takes us ... Maybe we can be comforted by the knowledge that we couldn't screw things up a whole lot worse than we have already, so maybe this wheel is about to start ascending, too. ww |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Jeri Date: 13 Jun 01 - 10:19 PM Negatives to legalization of all drugs (and I mean currently illegal drugs and legal drugs obtained illegally): If you advocate legalisation, some may think you advocate, or at the very least condone the use of drugs. I suspect this is the #1 reason why people are against legalisation. It looks bad. People may say with drugs more available, more people will have drug problems. I think most folks who really want illegal drugs can get them now. I believe there's more of a chance people who wouldn't go near illegal drugs would try them if they were legalised and possibly become addicted. As for the positives: If people buy them legally, they'd be safer. Less "selling of souls" to get them. Less danger of having to deal with someone who cares little about the law. No trading of sex for drugs, and all the dangers of that. Less chance a drug is cut with a dangerous substance. Less variance in strength, so less of a chance of overdose. Things that aren't socially acceptable have an allure for some people. Remove the clandestine nature of drug use, and for some, you may remove a reason to use. More of a chance that someone who wants help with an addiction will seek it - no criminal record. There are undoubtedly more factors than these, but I know I can't think of more reasons not to legalise. It just seems to me the problems caused by illegality of drugs are far more dangerous than the drugs themselves. I lived in Korea for 2 non-consecutive years. In the drugstores/apothecaries, Koreans could buy anything they wanted over the counter. I'm sure someone somewhere had a drug problem, but I never heard of it. I'm not saying the legality prevented a widespread drug problem, but it was obvious it didn't contribute to one. I don't think controls on all drugs, legal or illegal, will be removed. I do think marijuana has a chance of being legalised when politicians stop focusing on image and consider facts...or when pigs fly - whichever comes first. Cynical Jeri, who thinks it's far too hot to be sitting by this computer! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Jun 01 - 09:34 PM Why smoke it? Smoking anything is a drag and in the case of grass, it's a waste. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: hesperis Date: 13 Jun 01 - 06:52 PM Well, I'm with Joan Baez on this one. "It's silly to smoke it, too." But marijuana definitely has good medical uses, such as epilepsy... so criminalizing it is more silly than smoking it. hesperiswhodoesn'tdoanydrugsatallexceptephedraforallergieswhichisfortunatelylegal |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Dharmabum Date: 13 Jun 01 - 05:08 PM Seems to me that "WE THE PEOPLE" outta be running the government instead of the government running the government. Course, I sure as hell don't wanna swim with those sharks! DB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: mousethief Date: 13 Jun 01 - 04:09 PM Well said, Dharmabum. My thoughts almost precisely. And I already know the FBI is watching me, so I'm not any more paranoid than I ever was. Plus, all those farmers we pay to grow tobacco could be paid to grow industrial hemp, and we could use that to make paper instead of tearing down trees. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Dharmabum Date: 13 Jun 01 - 03:09 PM What's an ounce of decent weed going for now? $400/$500. And superweed? Now let's legalize it & have it controlled by the government & have them tax the hell out of it. WOW,I'D LOVE TO HAVE STOCK IN THAT CASH COW!!!!!
Legalize it,NO,not if that means government control.
For the record,I don't smoke weed anymore. But I am not against anyone making a choice to do so.I have smoked my share & IMO it is much less harmful than many of the over the counter drugs & alcohol that are available to all of us.
Here's a thought,We decriminalize the growing & possesion of marajuana.Anyone who chooses to do so, may grow it in their own backyard or windowsill with a plant grow light. It'll make one heluva Chia pet folks!!!!!!
#1,If you can grow it ,you ain't gonna buy it.
Now, what shall we do with all of these leftover resourses? Could we use them to fight the real drugs,to help the real victims? It takes 1 overdose to kill a drug user, It takes 1 drunk to wipe out a whole family.Maybe we could save 1 or 2.
Truth is, no one has to lose their job if pot is decriminalized. There are still plenty of illegal substances that need to be dealt with. There will always be wealthy people behind it.And there will always be government officials willing to look the other way for the right price.
I wonder if we'll be under FBI surveilance now. DB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Jun 01 - 02:59 PM "It is a symptom of the times" - but prohibition of pot in the USA happened only a few years after prohibition of booze got reversed, so it's not a question of these times we are living in.
I'm not asking the reason for the difference - obviously enough, pot was used by poor people and black people and hispanics, and there wasn't a big wealthy industry tied up with it at the time, all very different from booze, and money talks; but the question is, how did they square all this with that constitution that is supposed to be so significant? (And Barry Finn: "There are no moonshiners anymore." Don't you believe it. Well there are in Ireland anyway.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: mousethief Date: 13 Jun 01 - 01:01 PM We're losing the "war on drugs." Perhaps time to try a new approach, like legalization and regulation. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Bert Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:56 PM The prohibition of certain drugs is purely a political issue. Politicians think that they can win elections by being strongly against drugs. Whether this or that particular drug is harmful is just a red herring that is used to cloud the issue and make the stance appear acceptable. Some currently illegal drugs are harmful and addictive. And so is caffeine and so is tobacco and so is alcohol. Any citizen who consumes caffeine or tobacco or alcohol should be outraged that the drug of choice of others is not similarly available. So if you drink tea or coffee or Coca Cola or any one of many other soft drinks, or eat chocolate, then you are simply a hypocrite if you don't agree with the legalization of other people's drug of choice. You are also a hypocrite if you VOTE for politicians who wish to continue this unconstitutional restriction of personal freeedom. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Grab Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:51 PM On the constitutional side, I'm also confused about the US rulings on this. IIRC, 1 state has voted to legalise medicinal use of pot and another is about to vote, but the federal government is insisting that federal laws override state laws, so you can still be busted for it. I bet that's going to be an interesting one for the constitutional lawyers to sort out - this'll keep the legal beagles in work for years! Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: BobP Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:25 PM As dangerous as drugs are and cognizant of countless Belushi's, The damage pales in comparison with the dangers of coming into direct contact with the business end of the American criminal justice system. Not the glossy one you see on Law & Order; the one where the soldiers of America's cartels go for R & R. Where the soldiers going in get replaced seamlessly by those going out who were sent up last year. I don't know the numbers, but if I had to bet on which has devastated more lives, It wouldn't be the drugs. Keep in mind, the premise is an either / or, but we don't even get that, what we get is both ends of the same dirty stick.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Gervase Date: 13 Jun 01 - 04:42 AM As a boozer and a dope-smoker, I agree that alcohol is far more dangerous than cannabis. In fact I was mightily relieved when my son moved from being a trainee lush - when he was constantly falling over, getting into fights and even being carted home by the rozzers - into a pot-head. OK, the fridge maybe needs a padlock now, but the anticosial and self-destructive side has gone. However - and there's always a but - dope isn't completely without its problems (and I speak as someone who's maybe smoked four days a week for a quarter of a century). Too much too often can sap motivation and turn you into a sad, boring git who can't be arsed to get up and go out to work or contribute sensibly to society. That said, booze is far more damaging. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST, Eve Date: 13 Jun 01 - 04:25 AM ALL DRUGS SHOULD BE LEGALIZED. Yes, you heard me right. More damage is done by alcohol than by all illegal drugs combined, and yet it is easily obtained by anyone over 21. Hell, even though it's illegal to drink and drive, anyone going to a bar or nightclub anywhere in the world knows that, as long as they have an ID to prove they're over the legal drinking age, they will be served. No questions asked as to whether or not they're driving, right? And yet if I want to listen to Pink Floyd and smoke a joint in the privacy of my own home, I'm breaking the law... this is irony of the worst kind imaginable! I know of only 2 people in the city where I live (60,000+), in the last 15 years, who have died of an overdose (one was a 20-something man who decided to ingest a lethal amount of Jimson weed [found alongside every highway and bi-way here in the good ol' USA] cause he heard it would get him "high", and another was a 14-year old girl from sniffing gold spray paint she purchased at our local Wal-Mart). And yet, nearly every week another alcoholic gets in his car and claims the lives of innocent people, every week a family dissentigrates because of a parent's alcoholism, every day another young person is jailed because of antiquated pot laws - and this is just in my hometown! I cannot remember where I saw this, but I read recently that, unless our drug laws are changed, by the year 2050 there will be more people incarcerated in US jails and prisons than there will be walking the streets. There are no moonshiners anymore. There are no dark alleys where people are trying to score a pack of Marlboros. Makes you think, doesn't it? Let's start with marijuana. Let's tax the hell out of it. And lets do something with that money to put an end to all this madness, like ensure that those who are addicted - to anything - get the help they need. Addicted to marijuana? Please!!! When smoked, it only makes one feel happy, calm and tranquil - not to mention gets rid of headaches, opens up the sinuses, and gives you the munchies. Overdose? Fuggedaboudit! You'd have to smoke your weight in the stuff, and the average user (like myself) probably smokes no more than a quarter ounce in a month. Would I prefer to buy it from my local convenience store as opposed to buying it from someone who also sells things I wouldn't want my worst enemy to use? Hmmmnn... let's see... What the f*@k do you think?! Looking over the postings so far, there are a lot of intelligent people who seem to agree with at least moderate legalization. Please, write to your congressman and senator and beg them to open their eyes to the fact that the war on drugs is a losing battle that will NEVER be won. And if any of you still believe that it CAN be won, watch the movie "Traffic" - then come back here and tell us how you propose we win this stupid war. Cause frankly, as a hardworking taxpayer, I'd rather pay to house an addict in a halfway house or recovery center than to pay to house that person in a prison. My 2 cents, EVE |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:20 AM Mark S-well said,I agree with everything you said,especialy the comments "nobody is mugging your grandma",thats what prompted me to start this thread(see the capital punishment thread for my original comments) I feel people should have the right to do what they want with their body,SO LONG AS IT DOSENT AFFECT OTHERS,also if it were legal and controlled it would be safer for the users,herion is cut with all sorts of rubbish,in england we have around a million teenagers a week taking ecsacy ,sadly some of them are been sold horse traquilisers with the obvious horrific consequences.Most of the street crime around here,(mugging burgalry prostitution etc) is commited to fund a drugs habbit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Barry Finn Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:03 AM Ok, shoot me but as far as I'm concerned the junkie is the victum as well as anyone whose in contact with them. WAR ON DRUGS, war is big business as is arms for drugs & who & where & why do we funnel volumes of money to what drug growing/manufacturing countries. The costs of educating the pre or present addict or providing a half way house to help the addicted is far less that the cost of locking one up for yrs on end (I tried to get my cousin help when he was begging for it but of all the half way houses in Boston there was room at only one Inn & that one cost $8,ooo per month, the tax payer now foots his stay at MCI Norfolk for the next 33-55 yrs). Where's the money going & who's concerned. Half way houses do work but they do not turn out the large success stories that wet are wants or cares, those on tobacco or booze have a worst shot of kicking their habits than if they were on heroin, humm, why aren't they outlawed instead of hard drugs?? I been clean close to 30 yrs too (same with my dad before he passed) & have no friends from the 60's that I know of that are still alive, seen many Od'd, seen the how the war in Nam gave addiction it's biggest shot in the arm while the drug trade got it's never ending high. Ask any relation of a junkie if there's a war raging & they'll tell you the only war they see is the personal war that tears their familys & hearts apart. I've hardly ever known a junkie who was not a bad person because of drugs unless they were bad from jump street first off, so if education were one of the keys we'd be tempted to do more than just say NO! Just to keep this a bit music related & to do a bit for thread creep here's a song I recently penned on the rude awaking of junkie who's doing time, while not not looking for a shoulder they're still bewilder at the speed & theturn of events that took place almost without they're seeing it even coming before getting hit in the face with the reality of it all.
These old wall have held me, I've been here since 83
Chorus: I can't go back & make a change
Every day when I awake, I can't believe I'm in this place
Chorus:
I swear I hear these old walls weep when I lay me down to sleep
Chorus:
So now there you go my friend, so good of you to come again
Chorus:
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Peg Date: 13 Jun 01 - 12:02 AM Chip: good for you. I am happy for you and your courage is impressive. I smoke pot. Not every day, not even every week, it varies, but fairly frequently. I am a productive member of society; very creative (and I believe this is enhanced by smoking pot, as many other creative people do), rather good at my various jobs, and judging by the comments of some kind Mudcatters lately, it has not harmed my singing voice one whit. It really makes very little sense to classify marijuana in the same category as other so-called "recreational" drugs like heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, crystal meth, horse tranque, Quaaludes, etc.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: MarkS Date: 12 Jun 01 - 11:40 PM Hi McGrath It is a symptom of the times that what once needed a constitutional amendment now can be done by fiat and nobody raises a voice about it. Our government now regulates the design of ladders and can order an employer to maintain a certain racial balance in the workforce, etc, etc, etc. This might start an entire new discussion about the proper role of government, but this is probably not the place for it. Back to drugs. The biggest difference between criminalized and non criminalized substances is, IMHO, the fact that nobody is mugging your grandmother for the money to buy the non criminalized ones. And if you are serious about personal liberty and the ability to choose what you want to do with your own body, you should be at liberty to consume whatever you please. There should only be sanctions if your behavior is harmful to others. MarkS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST,little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 09:31 PM Efter a wee scoot aroon the net here's whit ah came up wi.Noo ye realise ah'm no promotin onythin apairt fae Maryjane an Corned Beef here,ok.
The Emperor has nae Claes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Jun 01 - 08:26 PM So it was legal to buy booze under prohibition but not to sell it? They could try something like that with pot, I suppose.
But it still doesn't asnwer the question - if they needed a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit the manufacture, sale or transportation of booze, how come they didn't need one to prohibit the manufacture sale or transportation of the hitherto perfectly legal substance marijuana?
When Islamic governments do this kind of thing it's regarded as shockingly oppressive... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Jenny the T Date: 12 Jun 01 - 08:22 PM And the result was just what you get when you subvert what was originally a natural right--the ability to make use of plants growing in your fields--with legalistic double-talk and "findings" based on fiction. God knows why we still insist on doing it to ourselves. JtT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST,Karen Date: 12 Jun 01 - 08:11 PM Hi McGrath, I certainly see the inconsistency but, just so you know, the 18th Amendment actually never was against the CONSUMPTION of alcohol. It "prohibited the 'manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors' and their importation and exportation." Limiting terms, to be sure! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Jun 01 - 07:47 PM Maybe some American could enlighten me about this: when, in their infinite wisdom, the powers that be in the USA decided to prohibit alcohol, they had to have a constitutional amendment in order to do that.
A few year later,after they'd backed off and had another constitutional amendment to make booze legal again, they decided to introduce prohibition in respect of another drug, which till them had been legal, marijuana. But this time they didn't seem to need any kind of constitutional amendment to do it.
And now I gather that the Supreme Court has ruled that even if States try to legalise it, even for medical purposes, and after consulting the voters, they aren't entitled to do so.
Can anyone explain how the legal eagles manage to justify that kind of inconsistency? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 07:09 PM Sorry aboot that ah wis firin up anither joint. ljc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 07:06 PM Ah Karen ah widnae hae mentioned yer typo because jist bein stoned ah dinnae gie ah shit. ljc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 07:04 PM Ah Karen ah widnae hae mentioned yer typo because jist bein stoned ah dinnae gie ah shit. ljc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST,Karen Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:59 PM There! Happy? Now you can't bug me about writing "included" and I'm still sober!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST,Karen Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:58 PM Oh lighten up, LJC! You have to admit having it there spelled incorrectly IN CAPS was very tempting! Really though it's all about moderation. You can go overboard on alcohol or drugs. Personally the Happy Hours I attend don't included stumbling, argumentative drunks so I don't see how grass is "better than booze". It just depends on how an individual handles it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:50 PM Show me the typo apart from WRED.KAREN. LJC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:45 PM Right on Jenny, ljc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: GUEST,Karen Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:41 PM Evidently you can't type it on grass either! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: little john cameron Date: 12 Jun 01 - 06:38 PM OK,i'll jump in at the deep end.I have been Smoking waccy baccy and its' relatives for 30years and i am still sane ha he ha.Many nights spent in bars trying to entertain Drunks.There is no comparison between someone who is stoned on Weed and a Drunk.The fight against Maryjane is a losing battle as the narc squad well know.My point is it is all a game.Do y'all know why Marijuana was made illegal in the first place?When i have a draw is am a very enteraining person and sing with lots of feeling,but on the booze and I would fight with my grannie.As you should realise by now I am talking about Grass and Hash, anything else is a no- no.BTW I AM WRED NOW.Could i type this on Booze? I don't think so!! ljc |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Legalise Drugs ? From: Jenny the T Date: 12 Jun 01 - 05:11 PM This thread has been one of the more enlightening ones I've seen for a good while, with a great many good and thoughtful points. You'll have no argument from me if you say "heroin [or crack, or alcohol ...] addiction is wrong, bad, harmful, and to be avoided." Arguing in favor of legalization is not, however, the same as arguing in favor of addiction. A minor, but telling, statistic: the Netherlands, where marijuana may be obtained without much fear of prosecution, has a rate of teen marijuana use roughly half that of the United States, where the reverse is true. The US has a tremendous lead, however, in the number of lives destroyed as a result of marijuana use. This is much more a result of our draconian narcotics laws than any property of marijuana itself. There is, to me, a defensible rationale for regulating and restricting the synthesized products of laboratories, as there is for any manufactured product. I can see no such logic in attempting to ban a plant that grows, naturally, right there in the ground. Especially given the high-handed tactics--"is this a plant in your field, farmer Bob? Consider your farm confiscated. Is your passenger holding a joint, driver Joe? Say goodbye to your truck"--employed by the various layers of secret police devoted to its suppression. We tried all these same tactics seventy-odd years ago, against moonshiners. We caused about the same amount of misery, and enriched organized crime, and fostered gangland violence, and didn't really do much to stop the bootlegging. Our approach, and the results, are no different now. Is this any way to treat your citizens? Why can't we learn? The fact that the US has more inmates in prison than any other nation, including the People's Republic of China, many on charges of simple possession ... well, it doesn't sit well with me. Neither does the fact that many of the laws that put them there are based on deliberate lies and God-knows-what backroom dealings. We need to quit trying to demonize an innoccuous plant, that grows in the ground. We need to quit abusing our citizenry, and quit basing laws on half-truths and propaganda. Maybe if we did that, we could actually start _helping_ drug victims, instead of creating them. JtT
|