legalising drugs , why not?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

TheGreenMonkey said:
jmdirt, medical marijuana is a different case than just using it for pleasure and if it works as a medical treatment then it seems reasonable to use it.

The majority of my stance, after seeing what it has done for my mom, is legalizing marijuana products for medicinal use on a national level. Honestly though, I don't have an issue with legalizing marijuana for recreational use.
 
I honestly can't understand why you would do drugs. The same way some people don't understand tattoos, I guess. And above all, I don't know why this should be considered a priority debate. That artcicle about Portugal seems a bit deceiving, or does not tell the whole story. Will try to elaborate a bit tomorrow.
 
@TheGreenMonkey @BigMac - But the topic is not about whether it's right or wrong to take drugs, but whether they should be illegal.

Also, some have picked up on the tax implication, but this is really a side-issue or fringe-benefit. Incidentally, if you're concerned about tax on street drugs then you should be equally concerned about tax on fast-food, fizzy drinks and similar, which are certainly worse for you than, say, magic mushrooms.
 
...................so a consideration might be 'how bad are drugs for ones health?'...............USA

bans drugs...............accepts firearms....................right!

+ OP just states drugs which is pretty stooopid...........more drugs are legal than illegal.........

but illegal drugs are not consistently detrimental to health / civic order

Mark L
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
Re:

BigMac said:
I honestly can't understand why you would do drugs. The same way some people don't understand tattoos, I guess. And above all, I don't know why this should be considered a priority debate. That artcicle about Portugal seems a bit deceiving, or does not tell the whole story. Will try to elaborate a bit tomorrow.
You would have to admit this BigMac. We have huge problems with obesity in the UK and the States.
In the UK every weekend in every town there are thousands rolling around the street off their faces on cheap Booze " binge drinking" causing endless issues and putting our ambulance and police resources to the test.
A&E's are stretched to there limit on Friday and Saturday night full of drunks,,,not drug addicts.

The death toll for people taking E for example does not even average to 10 deaths a year for the last few years. Yet when someone does die It make the news headline and all the papers.
There are over 33,000 deaths a year in the UK from drinking. Not one makes the headlines or newspapers.

so what's worse drink or drugs?

We are led down a false path by the media, puppet politicians and a lot of people making a lot of money from the way things are.
The media and the politicians are setting the moral standards for most people and those standards are about profit not the benefit of our society = 33.000 deaths a year from Alcohol less than 10 a year from taking a E.
and 20 people a year die from falling out of their bed

Should we stop sleeping in beds ,Its more dangerous than taking a E......

I'm not advocating that we all get high every day, my only vice right now is a glass of JD the weekend.
But the system is Fu$$ed up and its all in the name of profits IMO
 
Re:

BigMac said:
I honestly can't understand why you would do drugs. The same way some people don't understand tattoos, I guess. And above all, I don't know why this should be considered a priority debate.
You see BigMac, that's exactly what I told you a few months ago in PM. Since the fall of the USSR and the discovery of the horrors of it, the "Left" gave up the defence of the working class, a better wealth distribution etc, if they ever did defend that and fell back on other issues that are meaningless of the whole population and that the labouring classes are radically opposed to: drug legalisation, gay marriage, etc. Stuff for "Fortunate Sons" on university campuses. They are not social but liberal.

Good to read that from you. You still have common sense but don't fear ostracism. By the way, I don't understand tatoo but won't hate Rui for that. :p
 
Since its 4/20 today:

Can we all agree that anyone using the rhetoric "pot its a gateway drug" should be ignored. Dropped the canned blah-blah and show us some data. Since there isn't any, maybe they can use the data on beer being a gateway drug.
 
I think there are some studies that correlate a drop in domestic (crap) beer spending relative to marijuana accessibility. That's probably one place to start. Dutch tourism stats not applicable.

Hard drug usage is a sociological phenom that most aren't equipped to take on, but there are some well known anthropological studies of alcohol usage in "premodern" non expansive societies.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
Blaze away with your hippy lettuce. Not my problem.

Legalize it make money of the hippy lettuce.

Same laws about driving under the influence of "crap" beer should apply to the stoners. Can't go to work stoned etc. same with can't show up to work drunk. YMMV.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
Oh and forgot to say happy 4/20 to all you stoners. Hope y'all don't cause to much pollution and garbage /waste at the festivities. Surprised at how the stoners can be such polluters.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
Re:

aphronesis said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/30/obama-says-marijuana-should-be-treated-like-cigarettes-or-alcohol/

I don't smoke, but grew up with lots of people who do. Know professionals who "unwind" with it. Many people shouldn't be driving in any condition; let alone with phones. Infrastructure and habit keep them alive.

I figure job condition is discetionary to the occupation.
same here.

I don't buy the gate way argument either.

Phones are the death of us all.
 
Re:

jmdirt said:
Since its 4/20 today:

Can we all agree that anyone using the rhetoric "pot its a gateway drug" should be ignored. Dropped the canned blah-blah and show us some data. Since there isn't any, maybe they can use the data on beer being a gateway drug.
I think it can be a gateway drug, but not for the reasons usually given. Nowadays to buy weed you have to go to a drug dealer. More often than not he will sell other drugs apart from weed. To smoke it, some people end up spending more time with people who take coke and maybe even heroin, and eventually do so themselves. In other words, it can be a gateway drug because of who you have to frequent and associate with to buy it.

Make it legal and this doesn't happen anymore, as it is available in pharmacies and whatever.

Anyway, I see blutto is legally permitted to post high now :p
 
As I noted in another thread, the real hurdle that still needs to be cleared is allowing medical marijuana in every state. Right now, just 28 states have it legal. We're talking cancer patients, people with AIDS, glaucoma, chronic pain, tumors, etc. It's almost exclusively "red" states that forbid this still for some stupid reason.

While only a couple years old, Colorado's laws have shown almost no negative issues with use. In the first year they raised about $90m in taxes, which included some $400k in fines, as the sellers, shops and suppliers have been watched pretty closely by regulators. By the numbers, the state budget is about $28b, so $90m is a small amount. But it about equaled the total of refunded tax dollars to residents. So, depending on who you talk to, the overall thought is the law has been fairly successful, and not problematic.

When I lived in Oregon I think I had a chance to vote in such an issue a couple times. Every time I voted against it, simply because I didn't think the bills were written strictly enough, it looks like Colorado, and now some other states (including OR), are making it work it seems. I can't recall if I got to vote on it for medicinal use. If I did, I am sure I voted yes.

Hard drugs are another story. But this brings up an interesting point again, about people using them do deal with other issues, eg. pain. People going from painkillers, to illegally obtained painkillers, to heroin.

https://overdose.trendct.org/
 
Re: Re:

Brullnux said:
jmdirt said:
Since its 4/20 today:

Can we all agree that anyone using the rhetoric "pot its a gateway drug" should be ignored. Dropped the canned blah-blah and show us some data. Since there isn't any, maybe they can use the data on beer being a gateway drug.
I think it can be a gateway drug, but not for the reasons usually given. Nowadays to buy weed you have to go to a drug dealer. More often than not he will sell other drugs apart from weed. To smoke it, some people end up spending more time with people who take coke and maybe even heroin, and eventually do so themselves. In other words, it can be a gateway drug because of who you have to frequent and associate with to buy it.

Make it legal and this doesn't happen anymore, as it is available in pharmacies and whatever.

Anyway, I see blutto is legally permitted to post high now :p
I agree that there is potential that kids could be exposed to other drugs in that scenario, but when I was a teen there was always another kid whose dad (or other family) grew several plants. Oregon and Washington are so close to here that a lot of the pot is from dispensaries.

I'm not sure that I would use it, but I should have it as an medical option (read the story I typed above about my mom). From a recreational standpoint, I don't see it pushing Patron or beer out of the top spots for me, but I should be able to make that decision for myself. Is it any worse for people/families/society than booze and/or pharma?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
Brullnux said:
jmdirt said:
Since its 4/20 today:

Can we all agree that anyone using the rhetoric "pot its a gateway drug" should be ignored. Dropped the canned blah-blah and show us some data. Since there isn't any, maybe they can use the data on beer being a gateway drug.
I think it can be a gateway drug, but not for the reasons usually given. Nowadays to buy weed you have to go to a drug dealer. More often than not he will sell other drugs apart from weed. To smoke it, some people end up spending more time with people who take coke and maybe even heroin, and eventually do so themselves. In other words, it can be a gateway drug because of who you have to frequent and associate with to buy it.

Make it legal and this doesn't happen anymore, as it is available in pharmacies and whatever.

Anyway, I see blutto is legally permitted to post high now :p
I agree that there is potential that kids could be exposed to other drugs in that scenario, but when I was a teen there was always another kid whose dad (or other family) grew several plants. Oregon and Washington are so close to here that a lot of the pot is from dispensaries.

I'm not sure that I would use it, but I should have it as an medical option (read the story I typed above about my mom). From a recreational standpoint, I don't see it pushing Patron or beer out of the top spots for me, but I should be able to make that decision for myself. Is it any worse for people/families/society than booze and/or pharma?
growers need to blaze up. Cause that's what stoners do.

Drinkers need to get drunk cause that's what drinkers do.

All the same to me.
 
Re: Re:

Brullnux said:
jmdirt said:
Since its 4/20 today:

Can we all agree that anyone using the rhetoric "pot its a gateway drug" should be ignored. Dropped the canned blah-blah and show us some data. Since there isn't any, maybe they can use the data on beer being a gateway drug.
I think it can be a gateway drug, but not for the reasons usually given. Nowadays to buy weed you have to go to a drug dealer. More often than not he will sell other drugs apart from weed. To smoke it, some people end up spending more time with people who take coke and maybe even heroin, and eventually do so themselves. In other words, it can be a gateway drug because of who you have to frequent and associate with to buy it.

Make it legal and this doesn't happen anymore, as it is available in pharmacies and whatever.

Anyway, I see blutto is legally permitted to post high now :p
A lot of this is down to the individual anyway. In high school a friend passed by some older guys' place in order to buy some pot on a way to a party. In the living room were two scene fixtures, a couple of 20 somethings turning green and encrusting themselves into the furniture on the nod from smack. I had an immediate visceral reaction and thought "no thanks". A few years later another friend (a year younger) from that group overdosed. No one could pull him back: not me, not his girlfriend. A few people from that time in Seattle/SF still get high on pot occassionaly, but most have careers and/or families with no time for that.
 
Interestingly, after I posted the above I rode home to find two cops on the sidewalk staring at my brownstone. The guy who lived on the floor above mine (a programmer/telecommuter) had gone "missing" from work. Five hours later and the civil servants have all left the building.As I and others thought possible, he apparently drank and smoked (cigarettes) himself to death. He was 38 but walked like an infirm 70 year old. I've never known marijuana to impact anyone that way. People will do what they do, criminalizing pot is a false issue
 
Feb 23, 2017
125
1
0
I'm against legalizing drugs because in countries that have legalized it drug use has gone up. In those countries people reporting the use of cannabis, cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, ecstasy, you name it, it's all gone up. At the same time, there has been an increase in drug-related deaths. In addition to that there has been increased costs associated with treatment and prevention programs, welfare recipients went up as did disability benefits and skyrocketing healthcare costs, these cost have put Portugal in a precarious financial predicament. But Portugal and Netherlands are different from the US, two different cultures, if the US legalized drugs we'll have havoc in the streets, people behind the wheel getting high killing cyclists (I added that in for effect but one of the effects will be cyclists among others like pedestrians and other motorists), mass hysteria, and suicides.

But the question is that if we continue to keep drugs illegal how do we stop the cost of law enforcement who spend a lot of time, and time equals money, to prevent or at least significantly reduce it? By taking the roadblocks out of the way that give all the rights to criminals so busted criminals stay busted and stay busted a lot longer. It seems like America law enforcement goes after the snake's body but leaves the head alone which all that does is still leaves a snake head that can still bite, which tells us two things about law enforcement, some are on the take, and the rest didn't do their due process, which is highly complicated and favors the criminal so they get off on technicalities, and those that do managed to get busted don't spend enough time in prison and some continue their operations from behind bars. I also think to reduce the cost of law enforcement against drugs is not to go after and arrest the user but concentrate on the sellers.

The problem is that what's hiding behind the curtain is once you legalize such things you open a black box that contains other things that are illegal that people will scream that they want legalized which will lead to a debased society.

don't forget, it's just an opinion.
 
Re:

froze said:
I'm against legalizing drugs because in countries that have legalized it drug use has gone up. In those countries people reporting the use of cannabis, cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, ecstasy, you name it, it's all gone up. At the same time, there has been an increase in drug-related deaths. In addition to that there has been increased costs associated with treatment and prevention programs, welfare recipients went up as did disability benefits and skyrocketing healthcare costs, these cost have put Portugal in a precarious financial predicament. But Portugal and Netherlands are different from the US, two different cultures, if the US legalized drugs we'll have havoc in the streets, people behind the wheel getting high killing cyclists (I added that in for effect but one of the effects will be cyclists among others like pedestrians and other motorists), mass hysteria, and suicides.

But the question is that if we continue to keep drugs illegal how do we stop the cost of law enforcement who spend a lot of time, and time equals money, to prevent or at least significantly reduce it? By taking the roadblocks out of the way that give all the rights to criminals so busted criminals stay busted and stay busted a lot longer. It seems like America law enforcement goes after the snake's body but leaves the head alone which all that does is still leaves a snake head that can still bite, which tells us two things about law enforcement, some are on the take, and the rest didn't do their due process, which is highly complicated and favors the criminal so they get off on technicalities, and those that do managed to get busted don't spend enough time in prison and some continue their operations from behind bars. I also think to reduce the cost of law enforcement against drugs is not to go after and arrest the user but concentrate on the sellers.

The problem is that what's hiding behind the curtain is once you legalize such things you open a black box that contains other things that are illegal that people will scream that they want legalized which will lead to a debased society.

don't forget, it's just an opinion.
I'm loaded with those! :lol:

The reason that your opinion has some validity is that alcohol is a legal drug and it causes a lot of problems in society. The question though, does it cause more problems when its legal or illegal? If its legal and we tax it, does that help offset the financial costs? In the USA pharma addiction is a growing problem of its own, but is also contributing to other substance abuse problems.

EDIT: I just read this:
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/a-sticky-situation-legal-weed-linked-to-increased-collisions/

If you using any substance that can impair your CNS and driving that is irresponsible.

EDIT #2: Does legalizing a substance "cut the head off of the snake"? It should get rid of the "drug lords", but maybe it just replaces them with a different (government) head.
 
The new USA budget includes a $45 Billion for opioid addiction treatment! :eek: My first thought is why aren't the pharmaceutical companies who made Billions while creating this mess paying?! There is a lot of dejavu here! How did the pharma companies get off of the hook? :mad:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY