Annual Causes of Death in America: Tobacco: 435,000 Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity: 400,000 Alcohol: 85,000 Microbial Agents: 75,000 Toxic Agents: 55,000+ Motor Vehicle Crashes: 43,000 Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs: 32,000 Suicide: 30,622 Incidents Involving Firearms: 29,000 Homicide: 20,308 Sexual Behaviors: 20,000 All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect: 17,000 Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin: 7,600 mar1juana: 0 http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm
it baffles me that this stuff is still 100% illegal. the fact that these people want to divert attention from harder, highly addictive drugs like coke and smack to pot is absolutely absurd. why is pot considered such a dangerous drug when almost every credible study has said the contrary??? i mean, what is it about pot that our society (as a whole) is so f*cking scared of??? pardon the language, but this is one issue that just frustrates the hell outta me.
Actually it was harmless ribbing, hence the ---> You're the one with the .02 added to fuel your doobie lighting fire. Shouldn't you be more mellow on the Ganja? STEREOTYPICAL X FILES FAN. You want to dig up the truth? Again, I thought "liberals" could laugh. Appearantly that's only while toking. Then, I guess you'd laugh at your self as much as I do. DRUGGIE <---- this must be the accurate description of anyone who defends the legalization of pot. I'm rubber, you're glue... bounces off me... and you sniff it. The frustration over this stuff not being legal just seems to indicate CRIMINAL behavior. Way to help your cause. EXPOSE your "family values" on us some more. I am no "neo con." I'm an old line conservative... your worst nightmare. I believe a drug free society, including even alcohol and tobacco, would be the best. However I realize that will never happen. That's why I live in a dry city, with no smoking allowed in a public place. If you wanna doobie that's your business. But it's illegal. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Several studies have PROVEN a correlation between the introduction of mar1juana into the system as a first step into harder drug use. If you try to argue with that, then you must have already depleted some brain cells, puff daddy. Is that intellectual enough for you? How about this? STOP trying to legalize drugs in my home country. I live here too, and my kids don't need your filthy habit as an option. Move to Columbia, or Afghanistan. That better? Or should I tell you how I really feel? KEEP PROVING YOUR LACK OF BRAIN POWER My mother died of Cancer in 1994... and they had pain pills that were approved, and worked, to relieve the pain. Don't give that "medical use" excuse CRAP. DRUGGIES are just looking for a loophole to score legally.
Well guess what, you have no clue about my reasons behind drug legalization because I don't smoke. A very close family member was killed by police in a drug raid looking for a POT DEALER where he worked. The suspected dealer wasn't there. He was sitting with his back to the door and when the police busted in he jumped up, a normal reaction. Then they shot him. Had pot been legal he would be alive. Just remember when you assume, it makes an ass out of you...
There is only one person avoiding the truth here, and it is not the people who are against prohibition. IDIOT <-------- would be the accurate description of anyone who defends prohibition as a workable system. Personally, I think that "family values" would be better served by a system that ACTUALLY keeps drugs out of the hands of our children AND helps addicts to recover. Instead, we are stuck with a system that doesn't have any positive impact, takes parents away from their families, increases the number of deaths due to drug use, and encourages kids to use drugs while they are young. A true conservative would be (and the true conservatives are) distraught with the amount of money spent on this "war" when compared to the lack of positive impact on our society. In addition, a conservative would be enraged by the intrusion of the government into private homes. That is the point. There is no GOOD reason to ban mar1juana and there are MANY good reasons to regulate it. This myth has been debunked many times. Here are a couple of scientific studies.. http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/266/randreport.shtml http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/172/ajphgateway.shtml If you are an example of someone who has never used illegal drugs, then you are not exactly the one who should be arguing about depleted brain cells. Your near inability to form a logical, rational argument on this topic clearly shows how little thinking you have done on the subject. Your kids have a 50% chance of using drugs before they leave high school with the system we have today. Compare that to Holland, where kids use drugs at about HALF the rates we see here and you will see that prohibition is INCREASING the chance that your kids will use drugs while they are young. Drugs ARE ALREADY an option and your children will have easier access to illegal drugs than alcohol for as long as prohibition is the policy we try to use to control drug use. Yeah, I'm the one with the lack of brain power. And there are MILLIONS who get better results with mar1juana. I am truly sorry about your mother, but a single example of someone who had good luck with pill forms of medicine does not equal empirical evidence about the efficacy of mar1juana as a medicine. You are wrong.
education is a wonderful thing, it cures ignorance don't you trust your own parenting skills? if you did, you wouldn't be worried about what your kids will do take responsibility and teach your kids to think for themselves stop trying to tell other adults what they can and can't do in their own homes and with their own bodies educate yourself on these issues (gateway, brain damage, etc ), once you find out the truth, you will feel pretty dumb for your last post
The percentage of young adults aged 18 to 25 who had ever used mar1juana was 5.1 percent in 1965, but increased steadily to 54.4 percent in 1982. Although the rate for young adults declined somewhat from 1982 to 1993, it did not drop below 43 percent and actually increased to 53.8 percent by 2002. (NSDUH, SAMHSA, U.S. Government Office of Applied Science).
You're leaving out some population increase numbers there, and some transportation/technology issues. Several intangibles that you cannot say did not make these numbers subject to misinterpretation. Furthermore, you're basing the responses in surveys done in 1965, during the "beginning" of the drug culture revolution in the U.S. - and when people were not as brazen and bold as they are today, or in the subsequent studies, thus making them less likely to have admitted "yes" to smoking weed. We had a MUCH more conservative society then that was MUCH less tolerant of people's admission to drug use... and again, after the beatnik ('50's -early '60's), then later the Hippie culture's rapid spread throughout the country from 1965 to 1967, which lasts even to this day, it's obvious that the numbers would soar. Anytime more people know of something, (there need only word of mouth and "sub-culture" transmission of the phenomenon associated with any "new drug"), then the numbers of said users will grow. But hey, I'm an idiot. And NEVER try to say you feel sorry about my mother's passing while being snide and smug in the same sentence. THAT is highly inflammatory, I don't care who you are. There are plenty of legalized, regulated, controlled usage, monitored NARCOTICS for goodness' sake. I should know, my mom had them PRESCRIBED. Hello? Narcotics, not "tylenol 3." There is plenty medicine already in production for use in killing pain and making the "quality of life" bearable. I'm sorry for your ignorance (which means lack of personal experience or knowledge) and your lack of compassion (which means personal understanding from having been through similar). Chump, if I was trying to tell someone not to break the law in their own homes, I might be called a "legislator." Don't like the law? Break it then, criminal. It's not name calling... that would be the accurate description of someone who breaks the law... "criminal." Also, I fully trust my parenting skills. It is the society around my children that I wish would grow up and take responsibility for the good of our youth. You can't blame me for wanting drugs to stay illegal. I live by the laws of the land. If you choose not to, well, I'd say, "hope you don't get caught" and especially if you have children of your own. They deserve a better example than drug use as a way of acceptable life. That's not judgemental, that is just true. Next stop? Pass out condoms, and mary jane in schools? Looks like that's what you guys want... sure wouldn't want to tell anyone they may be wrong, or doing something unhealthy, with possible side effects and life-long ramifications. Wouldn't want that. Don't tell people to stop it, just equip them legally to keep blazin'. btw all - a "shill" is someone that is set up as a diversion during a scam. Like the person planted to help distract someone in a shell game, in order to have their money taken. "Shill" is hardly the "idiot" in that situation, so hey, call me "shill" all you want. A synonym for "idiot" however could be a "criminal" since they both do things they know better than to do. Another synonym would be "fool." Education is a very wonderful thing, you should try it. In the case of new vocabulary, it helps to use new words in context... You may have to actually read the definition of a new word to get the correct usage of it, and in order to place it into context.
First of all, the numbers I gave were based on percentages and thus should be consistent despite the population growth. I don't know how you think transportation and technology issues impact the rates of drug use or how "intangiables" could explain a 45% increase in rates of drug use by young people. As far as responses, I would argue that the demographic in question would answer more accurately in the 60s, when there wasn't a threat of SUBSTANTIAL jail time like we have today. I think you are being willfully ignorant of how much prohibition has CAUSED our young people to want to experiment with drugs because of the "forbidden fruit" aspect. Exactly. With the WOD, the government has put the spotlight on drugs to the point that kids are aware of them at a MUCH earlier age. Combine that with creating a black market that would rather sell to kids than adults and you have a situation where kids are VERY aware of drugs, completely mistrust the government line because of the lies and distortions, and have easy access to the most dangerous chemicals out there. I would argue that on this topic, you have simply not done enough research. I understand that it is FAR easier to just parrot the "Just Say No" lunacy, but the problems created by prohibition FAR outweigh the problems created by drug use in our society. You are not an idiot (which implies lack of intelligence), you are just ignorant on this subject (which only implies lack of research and study). I believe that if you will open your mind up to facts and evidence, you cannot help but come to the conclusion that regulating the sales of these substances is the only viable model for the future. I DO have a ton of empathy for your situation with your mother. My wife and I watched her mother shrivel up and die from pancreatic cancer so I know first hand how difficult that is. It does not change the FACT that neither your mother's case nor my mother-in-law's proves ANYTHING about the efficacy of mar1juana as a medicine. The research is clear and overwhelming and science says that smoked mar1juana is FAR more effective for some patients than even the strongest narcotics. Yes, there are and based on the scientific research to date, mar1juana should be one of those regulated drugs. AS I explained, I am neither ignorant about cancer nor do I lack compassion for you losing your mother. And once again, this is the crux of this debate. We are not arguing whether these drugs are illegal or not, we are arguing about whether they SHOULD be illegal. There is not a single piece of scientific evidence that points to prohibition being the best way to approach the issue of drug use and abuse. There is a TON of research over the last century that prohibition does more harm than good. I would challenge you to name a single positive impact that prohibition has had on our society. I fully trust my parenting skills as well, I would just prefer it if my son found it more difficult to get illegal drugs than alcohol. If we are to take responsibility for our society, we would commit to getting drugs out of our young people's hands by ANY means necessary. We have proven DEFINITIVELY that prohibition will not accomplish this goal and I contend that it is FAR past time to find a policy that will (like in Holland where, despite their half-a$$ed decriminalization, young people use drugs at around HALF the rates we see in the US). OK, this one is an idiotic statement. Nobody is advocating giving out drugs (or condoms for that matter) in school. If you support prohibition, then you are supporting the policy that PUTS drugs in our high schools and makes it so that teens have easier access to drugs than adults do. mar1juana will remain in our schools until we step up to the plate and create a system where only legitimate businesses and the government are responsible for distributing these drugs. If you would read my proposed system of regulation (http://bbs2.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63243) you would find that I favor a system where BEFORE one is licensed to purchase drugs, they would be required to attend education sessions to teach the potential users about the ramifications of their drug use. We would point out signs of abuse, side effects, problems with cross-reactions, penalties for providing drugs to minors, and ways to get help if problem use develops. After that, we allow adults to be adults and to decide what they want to ingest. Education IS a wonderful thing. In fact, education is the one thing that is proven to reduce drug use and abuse. Unfortunately, there is no true education about drugs, especially when it comes to young people. There is government propaganda (drugs are bad mmmmm-kay) that kids dismiss as soon as they see their friends smoking pot and not going insane or dying. I want our drug policy to be based on healthcare and education rather than the criminal justice system. That is the only way we will reduce drug usage rates in the long-term.
Homeland Security Officer Charged in Tourist Beating By Carolyn Thompson Associated Press Writer Published: Jul 23, 2004 BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) - A Homeland Security inspector who forcibly subdued a Chinese tourist he mistakenly believed was involved in mar1juana smuggling was charged Friday with violating her civil rights, officials said. The incident occurred late Wednesday at the U.S.-Canadian border in Niagara Falls, after Customs and Border Protection officers confiscated mar1juana from a male pedestrian. Officer Robert Rhodes, mistakenly believing the woman standing nearby was involved, allegedly sprayed her with pepper spray, threw her against a wall, kneed her in the head as she knelt on the ground and struck her head on the ground while holding her hair, according to witnesses. The woman, whose name was not released, was treated at a hospital and released. An agent who interviewed the victim through an interpreter several hours later noted in an affidavit that her eyes were nearly swollen shut, and she had bumps and bruises on her face and head. A telephone number listed for Rhodes was disconnected Friday. In a statement written by Rhodes as part of normal procedure, he said the Chinese woman and two other women ran when he asked them to come into the inspection station. He said he grabbed the nearest one and sprayed her with pepper spray when she swung her arms at him, then the woman scratched his arm and they both fell to the ground. Rhodes could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted of violating the woman's civil rights. LINK This War on mar1juana has got to stop.. This is just insanity..
If you want end the drug war, vote Libertarian. Here is an article detailing their stance: http://www.lp.org/issues/relegalize.html
I like the Libertarian platform for the most part, but IMO, they go a bit to far on economic issues, which outweigh the drug war even in my mind. Still, I vote for many Libertarians in the Congressional and state races, but... ...there is something more important that needs to be accomplished in November as far as the race for President is concerned.
Oh the irony... I get the Libertarian news letter from Harris County. They used to advertise legal weed in it quite frequently. I still don't like the idea in-full, andymoon. Though you have thought this out quite a bit. I know the arguement is basically, "Just look at the 20's with alcohol prohibition," etc. But answer me one question. How many alcohol related accidents, deaths, diseases, etc. would have been prevented if the "drug" wasn't made legal and "regulated?" Sure, illegal alcohol consumption was erradicated, but was it? I don't think it stopped under-age drinking did it? What else has benefitted from it? Money hungry corporations that sell the "drug" to disriminating adults that don't know better than to destroy their livers? But hey, it's their "right" to destroy their own livers... Okay then, that's speculative, so add another "food for thought" question? What categories will go up in the accident, deaths, diseases, etc. department when/if pot is legalized? Lung cancer? (but hey, the pain from it will be easier to cope with, so its a trade off) Emphyzema? (but hey, the pain will....) Less glaucoma? (but then more lung problems?) What is that? Some future model. How 'bout... "No." That's right, I just say "no" to legalizing illegal drugs. I'm sure herion is a good pain killer too. btw- I'm sure you've got several "'studies" to show that pot is healthy compared to tobacco cigs... and on several levels I may see the point, but you will still "resin" your lungs on pot, and that destroys cilia.
