Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & World News' started by LordOpie, Jan 31, 2008.
Well, now I can't vote for Hillary.
Please register to disable this ad.
for all his shortcomings, this is a very sound position, especially with the added weak dry-rub of war on drugs. the biggest incentive for the cartels is economic. you flood the market w/ availability, and the supply is more broadly distributed, greatly reducing the cartel's incentive
not sure if that plays any part in his reasoning, but it should.
what it does play to is the little green stash of the typical liberal...
yeah, cuz Newt Gingrich never lit up when he was a college professor.
And we won't bother mentioning the harder drugs taken by President Asshole.
he needed something to get over the grieving of his bed-ridden wife.
oh wait, i thing that was poontang
It frees up the justice system from wasting time and money prosecuting people on something that should be legal.
It's a fiscally conservative move if you think about it.
Oh I'm sorry. It's n8.
Don't think, paste.
Coke is so much more conservative. Or does the right ONLY use scripts now? I know Rush would be better off with a bong hit these days.
The war on drugs is the biggest waste of time and money ever.
Good for Obama.
What about the "War on Terror"?
I feel safer by the day...
I missed the war on the Homeless, did we win that one?
Wasnt there another president who wanted to legalize pot? Oh yeah thats right, Carter. Whatever happened to that?
At least he made it legal to brew beer at home.
It hasn't been going long enough to be the abysmal failure that is the war on drugs. The 30yrs of the war on drugs has just imprisoned a lot of people in nice expensive jails, while the cost of drugs has gone down and availability up.
I know you can score smack IN prison! WtF?
The war on pot is a waste. **** like meth could use some war'n. They should decriminalize all non addictive drugs and focus on the addictive ones.
No, they should legalize it all.
Or, failing that, we need to start treating alcohol and nicotine the same way we treat cocaine.
It always amuses me, and by amuse I mean sicken to the soul, that the war on drugs kills more than it saves.
Anecdote- In the late 90's control of the herion trade in Australia passed from the Lebanese gangs to the Vietnamese syndicates. Now the Vietnamese being the honest businessmen they are wouldn't truck with this "cutting the smack" deal. They sold it as is, at purities approaching 80/90%. Of course the junkies, used to the 20/30% licorice allsorts from the Lebanese started dying like flies. One year (possibly 1999) more people died in Melbourne from herion overdoses than from car accidents.
After that the availability of herion became less through a number of factors related to supply (law enforcement cracking the importers) and demand (all the customers were dead) so much so that in 2006 the number of overdose deaths in Melbourne was less than 10. Now, as could be expected with margins so high, herion is becomong more available again and you can expect the overdose numbers to rise accordingly. It's an absolutely insane state of affairs and largely avoidable if the politicians had the guts to approach drug use as a health issue rather than a legal one.
You can send someone to Rehab 90 times, but if the patient isn't ready to quit, it does absolutely nothing for them. That is the biggest reason it's not viewed as a disease by most. Not to mention, cancer patients arent knocking over corner stores for crack money. Doctors can't "cure" people of addiction. Being cured comes from inside the addict's own head.
I never realized any of this until I finally (after at least 10 tries) Quit smoking cigarettes 5 years ago. Every other attempt ended in "just one smoke"... When I was finally ready to quit, I just did it. And it really wasn't all that hard at that point. Over 3 packs a day. Cold turkey was all that worked for me. (although it doesn't work for most).
Poor arguement on a number of fronts. First there is no safe dose for cigarettes while the opiates are primarily medicinal. Used safely one can be addicted to opiates for many years and still be a fully functioning member of society with very little detriment to your overall health. My mother, for example, has plantar fasciitis, a debilitating and extremely painful foot condition. She takes oxycontin every day. She is, by her own admission, a junkie, but is otherwise healthy. Of course her addiction is monitored by a trained physician, herion use is by definition outside of supervision.
This the same reason cancer patients don't knock over liquor stores, they get what they need, whenever they need it, as they should.
Second-Not all drug users are addicts. There are millions of recreational herion users all over the world who lead otherwise normal lives. The prohibition on drugs endangers them every time they use. Sure they could stop using but they won't, it's folly to think otherwise. If we're serious about saving lives harm reduction would be the major focus. As it is 10 times as much is spent on the prohibition than harm minimisation.
Finally, all addicts are different. Some find it easy to quit, others find it nearly impossible. For all the tobacco and alcohol abusers out there help and support is easily available. Because of prohibition treatment for illicit drug use is difficult and puts users at risk of a capricious justice system. This cycle of idiocy must stop.
Look, ending prohibition won't end the problems and different strategies should be used for different drugs, but with all drugs the number one focus must be harm reduction. It must be better than the head in the sand approach we have now.
Not to mention that cigarette/nicotine addiction is rather different to heroin addiction. The withdrawal symptoms of heroin are a lot harder to deal with than those of nicotine. Whilst the health risks associated with smoking are much worse than those associated with herion use (assuming a decent supply).
Well put, couldn't agree more.
and for that, he is one of our finest presidents.
does this all mean obama's releasing another book: "The Audacity of Dope"?
Why not, aren't they the same drug's that Lord Obama took?
By no means am I trying to say cigarette addiction is as bad as Heroin.
All I'm saying is that until an addict is ready to quit anything they need to be ready "in their own head". Or NO treatment will work. at all.
You're mother isn't a Junkie, she has a medical condition that ended up causing an addiction. She probably never would have tried OC's if she didnt need to. There is a Huge difference.
If someone uses on a regular basis they Are an addict, even if they don't admit it. There is no such thing as a "casual" herion user. Calling it a disease is a PC cop-out, people's decisions cause their addictions. Every person who's ever tried any drug made the decision to do so. Including the first beer, joint, or whatever, myself included.
There should definately be more help out there for addicts, but being on methedone is no picnic either. thats why so many addicts on methedone end up taking their own lives. I've lost 2 good friends in just that way.
I'd love to see the whole war on drugs BS get tossed out like yesterday's garbage. But Herion & Crack are Scary, just freakin scary.
FP, I know a couple of people who've used crack "casually" in the past and are not addicts by any stretch. I dont see why heroin would be any different.
Trying something once or twice is not "casual" use. Using weekly or so for a period of time would be "casual" usage.
Well I guess if we get to make up our own definitions of words like "casual" then you got me. But from what I know of the English language, the word "casual" simply means, "not seriously."
still, if you sucked one or two dicks, you'd still be cocksucker
I couldn't help but picture this:
I'm the nekkid guy in the office on Fridays.
The opiates are most definitely physically addicting, to suggest it's all in the mind is to believe you can cure cancer by wishing yourself well. The vast majority of people who have used herion can be categorised as casual users in that they don't become addicted to the drug. Just as having a few beers every now and then doesn't make me an alcoholic nor does the occasional use of herion make one an addict. That's a myth that the war on drugs has perpetuated.
The reason why someone became addicted is not important in my view and it's counter-productive towards the goal of harm minimisation as it creates a acceptable addiction/unacceptable addiction type of hierachy. An addict is an addict, the circumstances of the addiction are not important. The heroin doesn't care how it hooked you. We don't make these kind of distinctions with alcoholics we shouldn't with "illicit" drug addicts.
It's true, we are.
I can quit you any time I want, bitch. You know I've done it a hundred times before.
leave the light on
but just a casual one...maybe even a social cocksucker...you know, one or two, but only when you drink.
In the UK, sucking a fag means something a bit different.
Did the local's mislead ya?
Good article talking about the casual use of heroin.
Had to go to the 3rd google page before I got past the "drugs are bad m'kay" bullsh*t.
like peter tosh said 'legalize it'
Funny that the alcohol you so love to use in your fruity woman drinks is much more dangerous than the pot those liberals want to smoke.
I think the political battle of pot is a war of silly attrition. Attrition is the slow process which laws surrounding marijuana are weakened until they no long exist.
The silly part is the ridiculous incidents which support the war, like "Did not inhale" or my favorite, the Canadian PM supporting a snowboarder who failed a drug test during the Olympics.