A series of questions for those in favor of drug legalization

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Opium poppies need no chemicals added to be used as a drug.

Throw poppy seeds in ground...
Months later when the swollen pods appear you scrape them with a knife,
let the sap run out and harden a bit and then scrape it off.
You can take do this multiple times to each pod.

The resulting 'sappy' material needs to be 'cooked' to get a pure opium substance... but this only involves heat, water, and a pan. No chemicals.
The resulting substance is VERY powerful and VERY dangerous.

Should a plant like this be legal?... Probably not.

Cannabis, on the other hand, most certainly should be legalised and heavily taxed.

PS: I only know this cause I did a paper on Opium poppies many years back.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

one more comment and then i'll slink back to the DC forum where I belong

Yes I know that opium doesn't need chemicals but it is normally"processed" in ways other than just drying as FrancesBeansRevenge pointed out. I farged that one up. oops

<<Oh, you don't legalize, you DEcriminalize.>> <--YUP, exactly!

Basilisk420 i think hit the nail on the head with his comments on how tough it would be to control weed. Those that smoke know how wasted you can get and being behind the wheel whilst stoned is not generally a good idea, one of those "public safety" issues. and since there isn't a quick/easy way to tell if someone is DWS( Driving while Stoned) it would be tough to enforce "under the influence" type of laws that would obviously have to be made if Weed was Decriminalized.

see ya in the DC forum

 

[tweakmm]

<<

<<

<< I give for example poppies, harmless plant but when chemicals are added then....well you get the picture. >>


I dunno man, opium is some prety crazy 'ish >>



Yeah and how is Opium used? does it take more than drying to be redily useable? - Ummmm....Yes
EDIT - this state is false as pointed out by tweakmm and I realized I was not thinking of the correct drug. oops my bad
I guess thats what I get for not actually using "drugs" - of course that is my definition of "drugs"
So I guess my natural theory is shot all to hell then huh? >>


well, to be fair, I don't do any "drugs" either. I never have and I don't want to, but I still knew what opium does to you

cheers
Mike

 

[Moonbeam]

Tweakmm: "Who decides what's harmful and what's healthy and normal?" That's easy too. Those who know the difference.

 

[Mountain]

 

[AndrewR]

It seems like there's a fair consensus for the legalization of marijuana only with the continued prohibition on hard drugs (cocaine and opium derivatives). Therefore, a great many of the arguments against the war on drugs do not apply because the border interdictions and the overseas activity (Colombia, etc.) apply to coca and opium production, not marijuana. Is that fair to say? The drug cartels don't make their money from marijuana.

Unless someone wants to argue for the legalization of hard drugs as well? The "survival of the fittest" stuff doesn't apply because that could apply to all government laws, and the social cost of absolute legalization would be too high (the burden on the government, and thus the public, would be immense).

Interesting.

 

[AaronP]

licking frog ass should be LEGALIZED! hehe

 

[Mountain]

living in an area that is fairly conservative and having smoked (and enjoyed) many things listed above, I believe that those against legalization believe they are correct on moral grounds. They actually believe in the "Dr. Jeckyll(?) and Mr. Hyde" myth and believe one can ingests something that will block their personal control to know, and do, right from wrong. of course they have not used, but they believe morality should prevent them from doing so. All legal, logical, medical and political arguments will never convince this group. only, and I'm not being silly here, the religious authorities can bring some sense of equity to this debate, and I am going to bet this scenario is a long way off. But good luck anyhow.
One word about smoking the opium. When i smoked opium there was this strange little almost itch in the back of my neck the next day which was almost like a thought, saying, "sure would be nice to smoke a little more today." this funny feeling does not exist with pot, for me.
Remember there was no need for laws against an Indian getting totally blown away because he was not going to kill anyone by running into them with his canoe, but that is not the case today. Causing others grief while driving intoxicated should be dealt with by the severest of consequences. I have heard the hospital floor filled with screams of my sister suffering from an accident caused by a drunk(all weekend long) driver. And I know of crack related deaths. A rat, given the choice of food or cocaine, will cocaine themselves to death. Some, not all, people are like this too.
the bottom line is that most, not all, of the grief caused by illegal drugs is from the illegal aspect, not the drug aspect.
maybe before i die I can smoke one bowl as a free man. oh well until then. inhale.

 

[walrus]

The most dangerous drug by far, alcohol, is legal, and the most deadly, tobaco, is legal.Both, very adictive. And they put an adictive, mild stimulant, caffeine in childrens drinks. This country dosn't have a rational drug policy. It is religous dogma forced on the population by a bunch of religous fanatics .

If schools have a zero tolerance policy, how can they sell Coke and Pepsi on campus?

 

[AndrewR]

The most dangerous drug by far, alcohol, is legal, and the most deadly, tobaco, is legal.Both, very adictive. And they put an adictive, mild stimulant, caffeine in childrens drinks. This country dosn't have a rational drug policy. It is religous dogma forced on the population by a bunch of religous fanatics .

If schools have a zero tolerance policy, how can they sell Coke and Pepsi on campus?

Ok, let's bring some facts back to the debate here. "Most dangerous drug" is alcohol? Excuse me? I just had a glass of wine last night, and I didn't hallucinate or kill anyone. "Most deadly" is tobacco? There were guys today in my class who were dipping, and they didn't drop dead or threaten anyone else's life. While tobacco is addictive, the vast majority of people are not addicted to alcohol -- alcoholics are. And caffeine? Please.

 

[Triumph]

I have a friend who says, "No way, if you legalized drugs, you'd have hopped up people all over the streets causing havoc!"

I was so flabbergasted by her argument (and this was the only one), that I couldn't come up with a good rebuttal, other than "What?!?! How the hell do you figure that??"

 

[BoberFett]

<< Ok, let's bring some facts back to the debate here. "Most dangerous drug" is alcohol? Excuse me? I just had a glass of wine last night, and I didn't hallucinate or kill anyone. "Most deadly" is tobacco? There were guys today in my class who were dipping, and they didn't drop dead or threaten anyone else's life. While tobacco is addictive, the vast majority of people are not addicted to alcohol -- alcoholics are. And caffeine? Please. >>

OK, I'll try to bring some facts in which you seem to conveniently ignore.

How many people have you seen after smoking pot that had hallucinations or killed anyone? How many dropped dead? How many threatened other peoples lives?

Get real.

 

[Maetryx]

Drugs should be legalized ONLY if society is willing to allow people to self destruct and die. I don't want my tax dollars going to support vegetative burn outs that put themselves into that situation. If the government would guarantee that no tax dollars would be spent on any drug caused disability, then I would vote to legalize drugs.

Until that point, only marijuana should be decriminalized. Or, conversely, alcohol and tobacco should be criminalized. It is inconsistent that I can legally smoke a cigarette and drink beer until I'm smelly, stupid, and dying, yet I cannot legally smoke a joint unitl I'm smelly, stupid, and dying.

I think it would be appropriate for the federal government to legalize ALL drugs for 1 year to see what happens. Make the law mandatorily expire after 1 year. If things are demonstrably better, or at least no worse, then it should be reauthorized, or made permanent. No matter what though, marijuana should be legalized.

Now for my disclaimer: I have never in my 30 years touched marijuana. I have no desire to do so. I don't fight the cause of marijuana because I don't like the people that generally are involved in that cause.

 

[Maetryx]

<< I have a friend who says, "No way, if you legalized drugs, you'd have hopped up people all over the streets causing havoc!" >>



Yeah, that is a really stupid argument. It reminds me of all the folks who were certain that concealed carry permit laws for handguns would result in people ending every disagreement with a shootout. It totally didn't happen. The crime rate for legally carried concealed handguns is microscopic, even negligible.

 

[b0mbrman]

<< I don't really care if any are legalized but...

Bongs are already sold in a lot of stores, so are pipes, and hitters. >>



You got it...on Telegraph Ave. here in Berkeley, there's a few different stores that sell them and street vendors sell them too...

 

[Lucky]

I am sincerely interested to find out

 

[BoberFett]

<< Now for my disclaimer: I have never in my 30 years touched marijuana. I have no desire to do so. I don't fight the cause of marijuana because I don't like the people that generally are involved in that cause. >>

I've never smoked a joint either, but I fight for drug decriminilization. Why? It's simple.

The government (that includes federal, state and local) spend incredible amounts of money fighting a losing battle. We ended prohibition. We pulled out of VietNam. Why the fck are people so stubborn about drugs?

Don't believe the hype.

 

[brxndxn]

Pot should be legalized..

Also, when you say that Joe Smo shouldn't be able to spend his entire paycheck on heroin, you are using flawed logic. If heroin was legal, it's price would not be near as high. In fact, legalizing drugs is the only way to put Columbias drug lords out of business.

BTW, heroin should not be legalized... but the penalties for it are ridiculous.

 

[Moonbeam]

Follow the money. Whose interests are served by which drugs are legal and illegal. What ones cause people to say things like, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?"

Billions are spent sheep shaping the culture. Do we need people running around with heightened insight? People with understanding can be extremely disturbing. Trust me, I met one.

 

[kamiam]

I'm sorry...My eyes must be playing a trick on me...did moonie just say something . succinct
and intelligent?!?!???:Q




hehehe

 

[Moonbeam]

something . succinct and intelligent?!?!???

There, I just said it.

 

[Mill]

<< heroin >>



Heroin does have medical use. It is a very powerful painkiller. It also can help with sleep.

 

[jteef]

Do you think legalization + high taxes are going to solve anything? I sure dont at this point.

You'd still be able to get it from your regular dealer at a much lower price most likely. These dealers are going to be totally unregulated plus they get the benefit of being able to legally possess drugs. The cost of doing business in the illegal narcotics world will go down dramatically. So guess whats going to happen? the money the government makes off of their taxed drugs isn't going to begin to cover the increased welfare, health care, education and what not. Then these folks called "Democrats" will chime in, and ask for your money to help these poor people who screwed their lives up over a ridiculous law. When you tell them no, they'll pass a law forcing you to pay more taxes which will increase until your childrens children die or our government falls, whichever comes first. (I suspect the latter)

There is only going to be one shot at this kind of law. If we legalize drugs, there is going to be no way we'll ever be able to ban them again. Same as what happened during prohibition. I don't think its a good idea.

If we were really serious about it, I suggest we convince our friends in the north to do it first and commision a lot of in depth studies before making a decision.

jt

 

[Maetryx]

<< I'm sorry...My eyes must be playing a trick on me...did moonie just say something . succinct and intelligent?!?!???:Q >>



Not that I noticed. It started out well ( "Follow the money...") but then ended with a personal experience ("I met one.") I didn't get it at all, which is too bad. I have a feeling that the "follow the money" notion is correct, but I don't have a clue who would purposefully enrich the drug czars. Or why.

One other thing: there's more than one way to skin a cat. I don't agree that the only way to stop the drug war is to legalize all drugs (although I did advocate trying that earlier in the thread). We could simply employ are military capabilities against Columbia (for one). One day we drop leaflets that say "This narcotic village is going to be destroyed tomorrow." The next day we burn the place down.

Then we start running our borders like we run our airport security.

 

[Jagoff]

weed: yes | hard stuff: no