|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 26, 2009 17:36:37 GMT -5
Let me just write a quick disclaimer here that the views of others are not to be belittled, that this thread is here for the sole purpose of intelligent, civil conversation. It is such that I ask any participants to please act on their best behavior and reply responsibly. Thank you.  Alright, so here it is. I don't smoke pot, but I have views contrary to my actions. First off, from various sources, in and outside of the police department, I've heard that pot really isn't too far off from alcohol. Some sources advocate that pot is infact safer, that it doesn't encourage violence like alcohol can. Infact, it is said that pot can invoke relaxation and peace for the ill, those who are suffering from painful treatments such as kemo (for cancer patients). When we spend thousands upon thousands of taxpayer dollars to support tearing down an invaluable resource, we could be legally marketing it to those who medically need it -- and for home use like alcohol. I believe that it can be regulated as such, just like alcohol, that drivers and workers are not to be under the influence, with the policy that it's to be used responsibly. Infact, I support the ideal that it could very well help our economy, as long as it's regulated and taxed by the government. One more resource that could infact better our very way of living in America. What are your views on this topic, and why? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Sept 26, 2009 18:05:34 GMT -5
May you illuminate me as to what "pot" is? xD The only one I know is the souvenir one.  From context it seems to be most definitely a drug though. |
|
|
|
Post by Ranzor on Sept 26, 2009 18:11:19 GMT -5
DIE, YOU DEGENERATE POT HEAD, DIE!!!
Just kidding. xP
I agree with the opinions you posted. Having smoked (and inhaled), I can tell you that it certainly doesn't make you more violent, quite the opposite, really. The real problem with it is that it affects your reflex speed, and can make you a little dumber while you're under the effect. Actually, all this useless war on marijuana originated in the early days of Edgar Hoover, when he was trying to find a scapegoat to further his ambitions. A shame, really.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 26, 2009 18:15:18 GMT -5
May you illuminate me as to what "pot" is? xD The only one I know is the souvenir one. From context it seems to be most definitely a drug though. Pot, Weed, Marijuana, Mary Jane, the list goes on.  The real problem with it is that it affects your reflex speed, and can make you a little dumber while you're under the effect. Exactly, which is all harmless as long as we as a country develop and obey a set of ground rules. Alcohol does all of that and a bag of chips -- invoking violence, enhancing depression, inducing vomiting (which, by the way, sources cite that pot prevents/relaxes vomiting), and so much more. We may not have perfected our regulation, as there are a few irresponsible drinkers, but we have prevented several possible dangers by enabling its use and regulating it. To be more specific: more irresponsibility, and quite possibly another thing to label as 'drug cartel' -- if alcohol were illegal, fighting off 'alcohol smugglers' would be just as bad for the economy, more taxpayer dollars would go into enforcing such a ban, instead of coming from the legal purchase and use of alcohol. Alcoholics are essentially paying to eliminate marijuana, in a strange, hypocritical twist of fate. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Sept 26, 2009 19:27:22 GMT -5
Oh, I read once about that before. Legalizing it, though, I don't really know. I don't actually know all of its risks and benefits, so... I really am not in a good position to say a thing. =s Despite having read about it before
No matter what is legalized or not, humans will keep doing stupid shit anyway. xDDDD
|
|
|
|
Post by arukimi on Sept 26, 2009 22:51:49 GMT -5
Is it really that close to alcohol? Isn't there like, a reason why people wouldn't say that more (As in, it's the first time I'm hearing that and I'm quite surprised for it not being mentioned before, so I'm kind of doubtful. I never really did an uh, research about the matter though.)
I'm thinking maybe it's more addictive than the typical alcohol/tobacco? (Oh right, I'm bringing up cigarettes while we're at it, lol)
Oh btw, I don't have much of an opinion about the matter. I was just really curious about the alcohol comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 27, 2009 1:22:07 GMT -5
From Wikipedia (under ' Cannabis') Yeah, that's a pretty good reason...  Just sweep it under the rug! All the better reason to legalize it, instead of keeping it where it could really hurt the American population! As for everything else you want to know, harmful effects and benefits, just click the link above and see for yourself. Oooo... breast cancer! Now that's a real big issue, actually! Say, aren't women marching for that cause? Don't they want some kind of treatment? Well too bad! Such a treatment is illegal! Because America is apparently RACIST! Just a thought... |
|
|
|
Post by Incog Neato on Sept 27, 2009 7:07:02 GMT -5
DRUGS ARE BAD! >:O!
Well, only if you're dumb and abuse the stuff. I mean, seriously, anything can be bad for you if you use it irresponsibly. D:
But if it's for medical reasons and can help patients in some way then all the more power to the people taking (prescribed) marijuana.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yakra on Sept 27, 2009 9:49:27 GMT -5
Actually.... in this case, I kind of very much totally, 100% agree with wyrdwad. This... might just offend loads of people, but if I had it my way, I would probably ban and put all drugs under nuclear-weapon-level security and ban mankind from it. (And just send all cigarettes and cigars into the endless oblivion of DOOM~ X'D). I'm not against using these drugs for medicinal purposes. But if they are to be used for so, they should be handed out only through strict prescriptions, and even in that case... the doctor should take care that he just doesn't get the patient addicted.  It's kind of because... drugs do ruin lives. I've seen it happen loads. All addictive things do! Even alcohol, cigarettes, even.... potato chips. Only in the case of potato chips, I kind of feel there's a 50% chance that one won't end up selling one's wifes and children for one more bag.  And if one is going to say a dose of hash doesn't make one violent.... well, no it doesn't. But~! Once the craving starts, one does end up.... going to all extreme ends. And if one gets highly addicted, and even gets sent to rehab, and gets cured, even then, I've hardly ever seen those people the same as before. They're mere shells of their former selves. Soooo... dangerous stuff this. Humans be stupid and love sticking their noses in such stuff. And while making something illegal makes it all the more tempting, making pot legal, methinks, would be on the level of putting a baby who has just taken a bath and not been dried in front of a electric socket and saying 'Hallo Sir! Ye may not stick thine finger in there! No ho~! Stare and admire only! DX' *lame example giver* |
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Sept 27, 2009 10:24:16 GMT -5
God, I'm in extreme danger now. XD French Fries too. =s Anyway, it's hard to say what should be legalized or not. Ideologically, I'm with Wyrdwad and Yakra, but I know what matters the most and by far is what nunuu said about using and doing things with responsibility and not in excessive amounts. For example, following the ideal, i.e. non-smokers > smokers. However, I have met TONS of really, really nice people that smoke (sometimes too much) that were many times nicer than people that didn't drug themselves at all. Of course, said people perhaps could turn out even worse if they started drugging themselves. xD But still, my point is valid. (Obs.: Alcohol is also a drug.) One thing I'm certain about is that there is no right or wrong decision to all this... it all will depend of the point of view... for example, if you were to value FREEDOM more than many other things, you could say anyone should be allowed to drug oneself with anything one wanted. By forbidding something, you're taking away this person's freedom, partially. Afterall, who's is to say that said person will misuse the drug? We can't know. Likewise, we can't know the contrary either. Some say drugs make people different. It's not that this statement isn't correct, but so do MANY other things. Sometimes it's really hard to notice. Watching TV, for example: that at times can be even more harmful than drugs. Using a computer all day, too... that can make you someone else, someone different from the you from before you started using it. Who's to say the changes were for the better? Or the worse? It's all relative. =/ Brainwashing... we see this all the time. Mis-education... this happens in so many countries, so many places... Eventually, I don't know what to think anymore. People could use the same arguments against drugs, but to ban EVERYTHING, and so could people that support the use of drugs to allow EVERYTHING. I have no opinion formed on this Mary Jane matter, specifically, as you can see. |
|
|
|
Post by Lunar on Sept 27, 2009 12:54:30 GMT -5
When it gets to the point where your very existence is synonymous with drugs or alcohol(and believe me, I've met many of those in my time), then it becomes a problem. However, either weed or alcohol in moderation isn't really bad at all. I think the problem that keeps actual politicians from ever getting anywhere on this issue is that the extreme cases generally get the most coverage..
The MAIN issue I have with this debate though is the tendency for proponents of either side to adopt a 'holier than thou' attitude on the matter. I've heard time and time again so many people say something to the tune of 'well I feel like X on the matter so I'm better than you' or something, and I think that's a much bigger issue than whether or not you decide to light up every once in awhile
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 27, 2009 15:31:22 GMT -5
I hear that more about politics in general, I think. A lot of Democrats I know, for example, will consider themselves better than someone else because that person is a Republican. I don't hear that very often about drugs, though... I must say, BTW, this is actually a really fascinating topic on here. We're such an international bunch, it's interesting to hear all the different viewpoints.  -Tom Likewise, I agree with you. Democrats and Republicans fight like cats and dogs because a lot of them oftentimes lose sight of their true goals and only argue that their side is better because their ideals are somehow better, thus belittling the ideals of another, perfectly functional human being. It's sad, isn't it? We've witnessed first-hand what a thing like that could do to us. // I'm a Democrat and I approve this message. As a matter of fact, I think that any system that pits multiple sides against one-another is just setting itself up for disaster and is no better than squalid dueling between drunks. It just next to impossible to have a civil discussion about such matters when everyone's so hellbent on being "right". Even if a side is "right" about something, that doesn't give it any right to belittle another side. It's a structure whose foundation overcomplicates itself on the belief that somehow, all of this needless fighting -- Americans against Americans -- is somehow going to better our country in one form or another. The fact of the matter is, if one chooses to participate in politics, they're adding to that which divides us Americans as a people. When "United We Stand" becomes a reality, that will be a glorious day for us all. |
|
|
|
Post by Ranzor on Sept 27, 2009 18:10:39 GMT -5
Yakra's comments are, in my opinion, a byproduct of ignorance (mind you, I'm not criticizing her, it's just my view on how things are, generally speaking). People don't know the specifics and tend to demonize drugs putting them all together in the same bag. I gotta tell you, knowing many people who smoke, that it's very rare for someone to get addicted to pot (as in really NEEDING it). People being led to violence by the need to buy more herb simply doesn't happen (or if it does, I've never heard of any case). In fact, pot is EXTREMELY less addictive than, say, cigarettes. Also, it's certainly less harmful, if even for the fact that someone who's really into it smokes maybe a couple per day, and a heavy cigarette smoker may smoke 20-60 per day.
As for banning every drug, while it can sound good, only leads to more violence. People will always want stuf that makes them feel good, so you'd be just handing that segment of commerce over to criminals. In fact, that's why I'm in favor of legalizing all drugs (keeping a tight control on it, of course). By taking drugs away from criminals, you're taking away a large part of their revenues, and therefore taking away a big part of their power. And THAT would really bring down the deathcount related to drugs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 27, 2009 18:32:22 GMT -5
We must also keep in mind, that we must remain vigilant; that we can't make comments that knowingly, could potentially cause another member to become defensive. I just want to take this opportunity to intervene and assure everyone that they can relax and take it easy (Pre-emptive measures on my part, as a fellow forum-goer.), that these are just examples and are in no part meant to offend anyone or belittle their opinions. With that said, I agree for the most part. However, I can't see too much reason to legalize the more harmful substances -- cocaine, pcp, and so on and so forth. This could be ignorance on my part, perhaps even lack of education, but unless there's a decent medical use for said substances, they must be kept out of the reach of all mankind. I'm intrigued, I would certainly like to hear more about your thoughts on this matter -- such as the good it can do, aside from decreasing criminal activity related to said substances, versus the harm it could do. Perhaps almost all things considered harmful, could be considered harmless, if regulated carefully? |
|
|
|
Post by Ranzor on Sept 27, 2009 21:47:42 GMT -5
Well, first off let me say I know this is a controversial matter and I, by no means, consider myself to be the owner of truth. My opinions are just my opinions, and I just hope to add to an interesting debate, not offend anyone.
My thoughts on legalization are mostly due to the amount of violence drugs cause all over the world being outlawed. Living in Brazil, maybe that's more evident than in many other places: Rio, for example, is a fantastic city, but every year the body count equals that of countries living in war, mostly caused by the big drug lords that rule the slums and their fights for territory, their fight with the police, and innocent bystanders that get caught by stray bullets. But that's just an example: all over the world countless lives are lost in this war, including many people that never once used any ilegal drug. It may not be as apparent in rich countries, but in places like Brazil, Colombia, Mexico (just to name a few I know best), there's a real war going on every day. Also, I don't have the numbers, but I can safely say that drugs are among the biggest revenue providers to criminality all over the world, topped only maybe by weapons and human traffic. Those are the main reasons why I'm for the legalization of drugs.
On the other hand, drugs can certainly be very dangerous and many lives are destroyed by addiction to it. Of all ilegal drugs, the harmless, in my opinion, is marijuana. It certainly can be harmful, if one should start to get stoned every day and lack the energy or focus to do anything else. If a student, for example should start smoking a lot, his grades are certainly gonna suffer. If one should drive stoned, chances are he'll get distracted and crash his car. But it isn't, in my opinion, any more dangerous than alcohol, for example.
Other drugs, like heroin, for example, are much more dangerous. People can get chemically dependent and do anything for the next fix. People can take too much and die of an overdose. People can forget about everything else in their lives and live for the drug. But it's impossible to, as you said, keep it out of reach of all mankind. If someone wants it, they'll get it. My whole point is that it's impossible to "win" the war on drugs - they'll always be out there.
So, my opinion is that drugs should be legalized, but with varying levels of control over it. For marijuana, I think that a scheme like the one in Netherlands is ok. For more dangerous drugs, control should be tighter, specially for those drugs most prone to cause chemical dependance, and that, of course, should include heavy education on what are the effects and dangers of each drug. How it should be done is open to debate, and there are no easy answers, but I think that, if done right, the gains we would have over criminality and violence would largely out weight any losses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yakra on Sept 27, 2009 21:55:07 GMT -5
Yakra's comments are, in my opinion, a byproduct of ignorance (mind you, I'm not criticizing her, it's just my view on how things are, generally speaking). People don't know the specifics and tend to demonize drugs putting them all together in the same bag. I gotta tell you, knowing many people who smoke, that it's very rare for someone to get addicted to pot (as in really NEEDING it). People being led to violence by the need to buy more herb simply doesn't happen (or if it does, I've never heard of any case). In fact, pot is EXTREMELY less addictive than, say, cigarettes. Also, it's certainly less harmful, if even for the fact that someone who's really into it smokes maybe a couple per day, and a heavy cigarette smoker may smoke 20-60 per day. Perhaps I am a bit ignorant. :'D I've never really smoked, drank, or gotten high on drugs. (I am addicted to potato chips though. :B) When one says pot, I just automatically assume it includes drugs such as cocaine and hashish. Two of which I've pretty much always heard are the most addictive. Soooo.... if pot means light airy fairy, happy joint-drugs..... I'm sorry. But if one talks about these heavier two, people selling their babies off for one more dose is.... not unheard of over here. I suppose it's not like that with ye all's country's. But then again, this is the place where half the population is so steeped in poverty and ignorance that.... well... women be trading tools anyways (for a certain class, mind ye! I'm not saying everyone is like that. There's a lot of.... class segregation and different behaviours accordingly. *ramble*) Such as exchanging a daughter for a paying a debt off! Or even in the latest cases, for a flour bag. For that very reason, I'm very against the legalization of drugs. Right now, they be illegal, therefore expensive, and the common addict would think twice before thinking he gets his fix or feeds his family. If it was cheap.... then.... what if he very easily squandered away that food-money on his drug-needs?  Er.... for me, well, I would not want them legal because, even if people will smoke up, no matter what, one can try to stop them the best one can, no? It's sort of like, when you go out, one does make sure one's pet is well cared for and well supplied with food and not meandering lost in the street, ne? Obviously, it's not certain that your pet will get run over. But you try to do your best for those who you care, and try your best to keep them out of harms way. If they still go off and get themselves hurt.... then it's their problem? About drugs and politics - that's one thing that's not an issue here! People are too busy screaming at the government for being able to buy sugar and flour without getting killed. |
|
|
|
Post by Ranzor on Sept 27, 2009 22:23:02 GMT -5
Yakra, I know there are a lot of pressing items in countries like ours. But I think drugs are a serious problem for the whole world, even Pakhistan. Terrorism, for example, gets a big part of its financing from drugs. And even when drugs aren't directly involved, all the money made from it circulates worldwide in criminal circles.
Also, I get you when you say we want to protect our loved ones. But you forget the part where I said there it should extremely controled. I don't think drugs should become cheaper, and when I say control, I mean also that it shouldn't be a free market with selling points on every street corner. As I said, it must be done right, and there's no easy solution, but it's not about making it easier to buy drugs, but to take the power away from criminals and make it easier to prevent and treat drug addiction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranzor on Sept 27, 2009 22:54:05 GMT -5
Wyrd, that statement is, I'm sorry to say, pretty innocent. The drug market is a billion dollar market and that can't be said about burglary (and certainly not rape). Poor people with no opportunities will likely rob others, but taking away the career opportunities offered by drug traffic certainly is a good thing, and taking away the millions earned through drugs is even better. I'm not talking about the drug dealers on the streets, I'm talking about the ones that control all the operation. They're the ones who really get the money, and they're linked to even bigger chains of criminality. Or terrorism.
Your view on the deaths caused by traffic is not accurate, either. Like I said, in richer countries it may be less apparent, but all you need to do is look south of the border to get an idea how things are in other places. To talk of a place I know, I'll tell you how it is over here: the poorest places in the big cities are controled by drug lords, and every day there are shoot outs with the police or with rival gangs. Now, there are a lot of hard working but poor people living in those places, and every day people are killed in the crossfire, their only fault being not have more money to live in a better place. Also, a lot of crimes over here, like bank robbery, kidnappings, etc, are a means to finance these operations, for buying more weapon and drugs.
So, you see, you can't just look at a part of it and forget about the big picture. Drugs sold in the USA finance the violence in Colombia, for example. Drug dealing is just one piece of a much bigger thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Sept 28, 2009 1:55:51 GMT -5
I agree. Plus I'd think it'd reduce human trafficking for drugs in Yakra's country, if done right. A daughter for a bag of flour? That's tragic! |
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Sept 28, 2009 11:53:59 GMT -5
Taking the power away from the drug lords and circles, that's quite... interesting. Hm, but I wonder if it's even possible... I mean, if given politicians were to legalize all those drugs and therefore ruin the "underworld" drug market, before such legalization happened, those guys would probably try to do something to stop it. Like rampaging in the cities in protest. Or treat said politicians, making them worry for their very lives and family. In São Paulo's/Brazil's case, for example, I can't help it, but to recall the events occurred in 2006 by the PCC. (However, that was something else, since the events didn't have anything to do with drug legalization). If at all possible, I more or less agree with Ranzor (allow all drugs to be sold), as long as VERY strict control or administration goes along with it. Because, the thing is, we CAN'T deny legalizing drugs also has its bad sides, too; all the drugs will be more accessible. It doesn't matter that "whoever wants the drugs will get them in a way or another", the problem is that there are people that end up consuming a drug because of social pressure/circumstances, and since there will be a larger variation of drugs available, the final damage will be much higher. To make myself a bit clearer, I'll give a real example: in 2005, I went to a certain party of a friend from highschool. In the party, there were many alcoholic drinks brought by people, as well as some legal smoking drugs. I didn't really drink anything, and I most definitely didn't smoke. But I recall that in the party, a certain long-time "friend" (more like colleague), whom I didn't know that smoked, was sucking the hell out of a cigarette while calling my name out. (Kind of sad it was, to see him in that state.) He was offering to me a pack of cigarettes. I simply refused it, but he insisted. Thing is, I have to admit I felt VERY tempted to get it and try it out, even if for a second. I know I would have accepted it if I was the "me" from an year back or so. Thing is, he offered me a cigarette, but if all drugs were legalized at the time that party happened, that guy could have offered me something else. Heroine, or offer me some cocaine to sniff. As if it was like eating a food or drinking water. And to think I could have accepted such stuff, if I was a slightly different person. I believe most people that start smoking and/or taking drugs have only started doing those things because SOMEONE presented them such a thing (people don't look for those stuff SOLELY by themselves). It works like a virus that contaminates everyone around, being the virus the very society. Heavy education won't nullify this problem, as well. Probably won't even help much, because every school already makes the students learn how bad drugs are. It just that they don't give it a fuck. The people who give it a fuck, like myself, won't do it. My point is, not much about the education can be done to prevent the people from consuming the recently legalized drugs, if so happened. The sad part is, however, no matter how this all ends, those harmful drugs will always bring disgrace: the only thing that changes is the kind of disgrace. I only wonder if maybe we could create a "drug" that would be the MOST addictive of them all, and at the same time not be harmful AT ALL. Like, a way to trick one's own addicted mind. And to make sure people would go for it instead of other drugs, trying making it popular, like giving it a "cool name", like Little John or Pearly Rainbow or something, and so on. xD But I think I'm being too idealistic and irrealistic here. |
|
Just sweep it under the rug!
And if one is going to say a dose of hash doesn't make one violent.... well, no it doesn't. But~! Once the craving starts, one does end up.... going to all extreme ends. And if one gets highly addicted, and even gets sent to rehab, and gets cured, even then, I've hardly ever seen those people the same as before. They're mere shells of their former selves.
