Legalise drugs [Archive]

Hegemonicretribution

2nd July 2005, 18:23

First of all (being picky) age restrictions will not work very well, in much the same way as the prohibitions and restrictions don't now.

I am definately not anti-drugs per se, but after experimentation, and living with drug addiction, and addicts, my view has changed slightly.

In my oppinion legalisation is a must. The actual effects of drugs on peoples lives are mostly down to risks that are taken in the dealings with them. Heroin may be addictive, however (assuming people are sensible towards cleanliness) the lifestyle surrounding it, the majority of health risks associated with it, the social isolation and stigma, as well as the effects on work, rest and play can be directly attributed to its restricted status. If any one is sure how, I will happily go into more detail about any one point.

I do think though that there is a bigger issue about drug use in general. A lot of people here realise that prohibition causes problems, but I often get the feeling that people tend to be pro drugs. This is a little more concerning.

I believe drugs have more effects than people credit them with. There are reasons why people do drugs, but the question is why? Is it Boredom? Escapism? Insomnia? Addiction? Right of passage? I have taken various drugs for all of the above (and more) reasons. Do people actually need to lower their inhabitions, or alter states of perception and reality?

Enertainment is one reason for using drugs, although I think the thing to bear in mind is that drugs can only stimulate, or suppress what is already there. Your body gives you the effect, drugs can only manipulate these effects. I know myself, and what makes me actually feel good (especially sober), far better after experimentation. I also discovered that they are not neccessary (although I do still dabble a little/moerately heavily).

In my own personal utopia there would be no drug restriction, and also far less drug use, more evenly spread out.

Parkbench

2nd July 2005, 18:28

Using drugs for exploration purposes is perfectly valid--using htem for pure hedonistic entertainment is also valid. Even using them to ease emotional pain can be very therapeutic--the problem occurs when users rely on the substance and do not fix whatever problem caused them to use it in the first place.

Drugs can be a very intelligent, adult decision in a less-restrictive society (they are now, but it's much more secretive), and the main issue is what we treat it as: a crime. Even looking at it abstractly, you're going to arrest people because they like putting something in their nose? The netherlands are a step in the right direction--treating it as a public health issue and not a crime.

LSD

2nd July 2005, 18:56

but I often get the feeling that people tend to be pro drugs

Well, I'm "pro drugs" in the same way that I'm "pro swimming".

I like it, I find it fun, and I honestly don't care whether you do it or not.

Do people actually need to lower their inhabitions, or alter states of perception and reality?

"need to"? No.

Want to? Sure!

Enertainment is one reason for using drugs, although I think the thing to bear in mind is that drugs can only stimulate, or suppress what is already there. Your body gives you the effect, drugs can only manipulate these effects.

But that's true of anything, isn't it?

All that we can percieve is what our brain processes. A sensation caused by an ingested chamical, therefore, is equaly "valid", as one cased by external pheonmena. As far as we are concerned, they are both nothing more than firing neurons.

codyvo

2nd July 2005, 19:23

I haven't quite made up my mind entirely on the drug issue, but I definately do think that marijuana shuld be legal and all drug sales should be subsidized by the government immediately.

Anarchist Freedom

2nd July 2005, 23:32

Drugs Need to be Legal. When drugs are illegal it leaves a blank space of mis infortmation. When its illegal intelligent users of drugs are limited to a few people. If drugs where legal we sould sell them just like we would sell alcohol and cigs. We would have harm Reductionism classes teaching teens about SAFE drug use. We would have place to use the drugs with medical personal on the spot. Obviously one would no injest LSD then go to the clinic. This clinic would be mainly for meth heroin and cocaine addicts.

danny android

3rd July 2005, 01:09

Ok I do believe that marajuna should be leagle I really don't see anything wrong with it or whatever and really wouldn't mind to try it sometime. However not all drugs should be leaglaized in my opinion, for example methanphetamines. There is an ass load of meth in my town and in my state in general. That shit should never be leagle. IT seriously just like destroys people. It is freakin nasty as all hell and not natural at all. If your going to leaglize a drug make it an organic one.

Anarcho-Communist

3rd July 2005, 01:15

If drugs a legalised, people wouldn't get and adrenaline rush from doing things that are currently illegal. If they were legal everyone would do them and we would have more and more poor people out on the streets because they had blown all of there money on drugs, and as danny android said "IT seriously just like destroys people."

LSD

3rd July 2005, 01:21

That shit should never be leagle. IT seriously just like destroys people.

So what?

Who are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell me what I can or I cannot ingest?

If you don't want to use meth or you want to try and convince others not to, that's your right.

But preventing me from ingesting what I want at gunpoint?

How is that right?

If your going to leaglize a drug make it an organic one.

"organic" as opposed to what?

You mean those damn "synthetic" drugs like, say, tylenol? :lol:

Why do I have a right to smoke a plant I grow but not to drink a chemical I make in my basement? What, exactly, is the moral difference there?

If they were legal everyone would do them and we would have more and more poor people out on the streets because they had blown all of there money on drugs

Firstly, that's the fault of capitalism, and another good reason that it should be fought.

Secondly, there is absolutely no reason to believe that if drugs weren't illegal "everyone would do them" to excess.

Thirdly, even if there were, this is a matter of basic human rights, and people must be able to control the contents of their body and mind.

RedStarMilitia

3rd July 2005, 02:36

"If drugs are legalised, people wouldn't get and adrenaline rush from doing things that are currently illegal" - I agree, if you are going to legalise drugs you have to legalise all because if only marijuana is legalised dealers will take the rush of dealing harder drugs.
Also, the big dealers of the world will not take to having their multi-million industry taken away which could be good as we can fight capitalism but there will be major bloodshed.
Also, even if drugs are legalised for clinics, blackmarkets will still arise and they will be sold cheaper there - noone wants to get stoned under supervision, they wanna smoke the cone in the comfort of their own home.
Children are educated in alcohol now-a-days but they still die from it's abuse.

My verdict, at first tackling the dealers will be difficult yet worthwhile, a large part of capitalism will die. less people will die and people might not bother with drugs if they have to be done at a clinic, a clinic will prevent HIV which is good.

I believe at first the percentage of the poor will increase and people will die, the big world dealers will not be happy but after deaths it will be worth while because it will secure drug safety in thew future. I'm not justifying these deaths but from a utilitarian point of view less people will die in the future.

Legalisation could be good, maybe there are setbacks I have not forseen

Parkbench

3rd July 2005, 02:59

"IT seriously just like destroys people."

Worst argument in the history of mankind.

It shames me that people come here and try to talk about issues and they just do these skate punk things--where they hate or like things and they don't know why, and they really have nothing to back up any of their statements.

LSD put it perfectly.

Hefer

3rd July 2005, 05:51

Only Marijuana should be legal IMO. This will reduce crime, and it can also generate some money too :D; which could help fund education, improve freeways, higher more police etc. . I see it no different than tabacco or alcohol. People know the risks, if they want to smoke, it's fine by me. But it should have the same regulations as alcohol.

violencia.Proletariat

3rd July 2005, 05:55

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 11:51 PM
Only Marijuana should be legal IMO. This will reduce crime, and it can also generate some money too :D; which could help fund education, improve freeways, higher more police etc. . I see it no different than tabacco or alcohol. People know the risks, if they want to smoke, it's fine by me. But it should have the same regulations as alcohol.
why the hell would you want to hire more police?

Clarksist

3rd July 2005, 07:39

Fuck no drugs should NEVER be legalized.

They should be DECRIMINALIZED. That way anyone can do it, grow it, make it, etc.

And I'm not saying just pot or shrooms like most people, we should decriminalize everything. Why? Because its not anyones place to say what someone else should do.

LSD, peyote, meth, heroin, cocaine, special k, etc. Everything should be decriminalized.

But again don't legalize it, decriminalize it.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

3rd July 2005, 07:50

I disagree, legalisation allows for greater quality control.

Xiao Banfa

3rd July 2005, 11:52

Pot should be decriminalised and addictive drugs should be medicated by the state hospital. Meaning actual heroin instead of 'done.

Redmau5

3rd July 2005, 14:38

Legalise 'em all.

Hegemonicretribution

3rd July 2005, 15:28

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 2 2005, 05:56 PM

but I often get the feeling that people tend to be pro drugs

Well, I'm "pro drugs" in the same way that I'm "pro swimming".

That isn't what I mean by pro, I am not going to stop using drugs either, and I also don't care what people think. When I say pro, it is the way that people more than just advocate, but dismiss non-users. I am having trouble with the language at the moment but I guess drugs should be drugs...not this "drugs are good" "drugs are bad" bullshit that floats around.

For a couple of years I smoked pot whenever I would of had a fag break, I worked with a partner (we both dealt) and after work we would go and get stoned, drug use was rare, because that was (In my mind) only when I had the odd like of charlie, or felt like tripping. By the end of it I was nearly a complete wreck, being sober (when I got over the fact I wasn't stoned) was like being on pills or something. I was hyper, happy and felt like I was 14 again. I see no problem with pot at all and still smoke, but when your life becomes it (your ashtrays, posters, clothes, destination of 60% of wages etc..) it is counter productive. This was mostly a result of pro cannabis culture. If cannabis was seen as just cannabis then cool, but it wasn't it was something neccessary and positive. That is why it got out of hand.

Anarchist Freedom

3rd July 2005, 16:14

Originally posted by Anarcho-[email protected] 2 2005, 08:15 PM
If drugs a legalised, people wouldn't get and adrenaline rush from doing things that are currently illegal. If they were legal everyone would do them and we would have more and more poor people out on the streets because they had blown all of there money on drugs, and as danny android said "IT seriously just like destroys people."
Its Been shown that once a drug became legal not everyone was trying it. The reason being is that many people try drugs because its a forbidden fruit. When something looses its shock value it also loses its entertainment value for many.

bolshevik butcher

3rd July 2005, 16:33

I'm for legalization. Especially softer drugs, for instance by keeping cannabis illegal it presents more of a danger to users. Heroin subistutes have been found in cannibis shipments before, is it right that someone wantong to amoke weed should have heroine sustitute running round their system?

Hefer

3rd July 2005, 18:42

why the hell would you want to hire more police?
:blink: Your right, what the hell went through my head.....no more local news for me.

CEWS

3rd July 2005, 22:54

Bolshevist

3rd July 2005, 23:12

Drugs are a tool used for escaping the current reality, it numbs down the working class. While we should lower the laws concerning drugs, allowing them to flow freely through our countries and let it infect the people is nonsence. Focus on rehabilitation, not increasing the problems itself.

LSD

3rd July 2005, 23:16

Drugs are a tool used for escaping the current reality,

They can be, but even when they are, it is still a matter of choice.

While we should lower the laws concerning drugs, allowing them to flow freely through our countries and let it infect the people is nonsence.

Drugs don't "inflict" anything. They are used by people.

Look at this rationaly. Are you seriously telling the working class that they have a right to freedom, to equality, to control their own labour, to rulling their own lives ...but not ingest what they want?

Don't you see the obvious hypocrisy in this?

Major. Rudiger

3rd July 2005, 23:28

HEY hey... Dont say every drug numbs the mind and excape this normal realty. Sure you escape it, but drugs opens the doors of metaphors and a unquie way to look at life. Some of the most interasting poeple I know experiment with drugs. And some of the dumdest people dont expiremnet and like to stay in there bubble of hash or booze.

I think Timothy Leary was right on alot of things. He talked about full legalitions and regulation. Like you cant go to your local coner store to buy LSD, but your going to have to go to the "Mind Docter" and talk to him to persribe you some LSD. LSD is a wonder drug, it turns on parts of the brains that we dont even use (or we use and we dont know what it does). Also he Tim talk about licenses that you would get to try drugs... Its brillent really, if you are really want to try this drug you would learn about, have a test, and get license to try the drug. So you well be propared what in store...
Theres my two cents about legalistion of drugs... Now to Marijuana

We cant just jump into FULL legalstion of all the drugs in the world... Its going to take time... But i hope by the time when im a grandpa, sitting under a appletree, smokeing my hash pipe. All the drugs would be legal. But if we could legalize Cannabis we can smoke it freely, tax it and educate on safe use... Thats all...

monkeydust

4th July 2005, 02:10

I basically agree with LSD, although I think he's grossly over-simplifying the issue, and I take his side of the argument for different reasons to his own.

Granted, people have a right to do what they want with their own body. But in practice the issue will be much more murky than this.

For example, let's suppose we have a man hopelessly addicted to heroin, and going downhill...fast. If he asks for more shall we simply say "yeah - that's your right pal!"? Or should we deny it to him in order to help him?

Any such blanket reply as "it's his right to have it" seems a lot less clearcut if such a person is acting not on rationality, but on chemical addiction alone. Moreover, it begs the question precisely where this "right" comes from. If it is not "metaphysical" in its origin then I see no reason why in this case we could not compromise it for the guy's own sake.

This is an extreme example, of course. Perhaps my judgement's a little clouded by the fact that I actually knew someone who died of a heroin OD two weeks ago (it happens all the time). But I think the general point and ones similar may arise in many practical cases.

Xiao Banfa

4th July 2005, 03:26

Acid is a drug that can send you insane after one hit. Theres this guy that walk around Wellington handing out flyers for metal shows who is a dribbling moron- he has flipped- he has no dignity. That was from one acid hit.
It's ever SO cool to be ultra laissez faire about drugs. We should focus on harm minimisation which involves some liberalisation. But such policy involves STATE ENFORCEMENT AND REGULATION.

Xiao Banfa

4th July 2005, 03:30

Kundalini meditation can get send you to some way-out places. LSD does this artificially. Russian roulette with yr sanity.

LSD

4th July 2005, 03:37

Acid is a drug that can send you insane after one hit.

That is an urban legend. It is simply chemically untrue.

Theres this guy that walk around Wellington handing out flyers for metal shows who is a dribbling moron- he has flipped- he has no dignity. That was from one acid hit.

I can't speak to anectodal examples, but it's more than likely that what he used was not in fact LSD.

Tainted or deceptive drugs are quite common, largely because those people willing to make it are usually doing so for profit and so are not the most scrupulous in terms of quality.

Just another reason why it is nescessary to legalize drugs such that there can both be some mechanism of quality control and also so that the industry isn't dominated by criminals who don't give a damn about the health of their clients.

Anarchist Freedom

4th July 2005, 04:53

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 09:10 PM
I basically agree with LSD, although I think he's grossly over-simplifying the issue, and I take his side of the argument for different reasons to his own.

Granted, people have a right to do what they want with their own body. But in practice the issue will be much more murky than this.

For example, let's suppose we have a man hopelessly addicted to heroin, and going downhill...fast. If he asks for more shall we simply say "yeah - that's your right pal!"? Or should we deny it to him in order to help him?

Any such blanket reply as "it's his right to have it" seems a lot less clearcut if such a person is acting not on rationality, but on chemical addiction alone. Moreover, it begs the question precisely where this "right" comes from. If it is not "metaphysical" in its origin then I see no reason why in this case we could not compromise it for the guy's own sake.

This is an extreme example, of course. Perhaps my judgement's a little clouded by the fact that I actually knew someone who died of a heroin OD two weeks ago (it happens all the time). But I think the general point and ones similar may arise in many practical cases.
we would treat serious addiction to drugs just like we treat a serious addiction to alcohol.

danny android

4th July 2005, 18:02

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 01:59 AM

"IT seriously just like destroys people."

Worst argument in the history of mankind.

It shames me that people come here and try to talk about issues and they just do these skate punk things--where they hate or like things and they don't know why, and they really have nothing to back up any of their statements.

LSD put it perfectly.
What the crap. I know CHILDREN in the fith grade how are using meth. These kids are being torn apart by this shit. It is easy to see the effects of this crap on people. Just look at there faces after a few weeks, imagine what it is doing to there whole freaking body.

If children are getting a hold of meth in my town when it is illeagle think about how easy it would be for them to get a hold of it if it were leagalized. We all know how easy it is to get a hold of tabacco and alcohal when we are underaged, it would be just as easy to get a hold of other drugs.

MrT

4th July 2005, 19:07

Double post. Please delete

MrT

4th July 2005, 19:09

ELMOS ESSAY ON THE LEGALISATION OF CANNABIS
TAKEN FROM =REB ALLI=

I’m thinking about moving my views of the legalization of cannabis to a new level, and ive write a draft essay. Just want to see what you all think.

I also believe its important for people to know that those bidding for the liberation of cannabis users aren’t just hop heads, and have serious political agenda.

1) The lies - No evidence of scientific fact has ever been produced by an independent research study group that has not had capitalist government intervention, saying cannabis causes psychosis in a majority consumer or any terminal disease caused by the THC.

2) Why would the government lie though? - Cannabis is known for bring self reassurance and confidence within one self to not have to produce under society. Therefore those that consume cannabis do not produce enough labor to keep the government rich, because the labor we perform that they get wealth of, is stopping. Also, you can tax alcohol and cigarettes because only big corporate business can sell it due to the process of manufacturing they must go through, but cannabis is ready to sell from the plant, therefore anyone can sell it, and it cant be taxed, so the government cant gain profit of it.

3) Liberation of our rights - To live in a state in which i can not reap the harvest from the ground of which ive sowed, is walking over my rights to consume what i produce.

4) Ignorance - Those whom want to ban cannabis haven’t been liberated by the freedom it gives.

5) The freedom of cannabis - Cannabis is viewed by the brainwashed as another way of not being able to deal with reality, but it is instead a "alternate" view of life. It is a free and liberated view upon life in which there is no pressure or stress, the materials needs and greed of humanity are overcome. It is in this we can overcome capitalism, because we no-longer depend on the material offers they dangle in front of us, saying "you can have this pool, and stream jet if you work hard" when really by working hard were getting them pools and air jets. With this we can see that with the pool and the air jet we are nothing, but when we reach a level of satisfaction mentally without materials, it can never be taken away from us

6) Wasted taxes - Policing cannabis costs the state over 50 million GPB a year. What could the NHS do with 50 million more a year?

CEWS

4th July 2005, 20:17

LSD

5th July 2005, 03:18

What the crap. I know CHILDREN in the fith grade how are using meth. These kids are being torn apart by this shit. It is easy to see the effects of this crap on people. Just look at there faces after a few weeks, imagine what it is doing to there whole freaking body.

The reason this is happening is that children see drugs as a "forbidden fruit". Something to do to "rebel".

Furthermore, there's a complete lack of information regarding these drugs. Children are taught that drugs are BAD and then expected to simply accept this. Well, human beings are more curious and independent than this.

And, by the way, the number of fifth graders using meth is miniscule. Mosly, it can be correlated to social problems in their lives. Children don't just "decide" I'm going to fuck myself over, but if they have nothing worthwhile in their lives....

Also, it's often actually much easier to get illegal drugs than achohol or tobacco. Drug dealers, you see, don't card.

And, regardless, none of this is relevent. Of course, we should try and keep developing children away from drugs, but that is a seperate issue. If we prevened children from doing everything than adults can do ...we'd have to ban a lot.

Instead we allow adults all possible freedoms, and keep our kids educated, informed, and responsible. In the end, that's all we can really do.

che-Rabbi

5th July 2005, 05:18

Well first of all we have plenty of legal drugs, uhh lets see here
-cigarets
-cigars
-Rum
-wiskey
-beer
-you get the point

Alcohol kills more than heroin and cocaine combine, but those arent the taxed drugs, the governement needs our drugs money so they can build roads in the middle of Texas so hicks can get drunk and drive on them. Also the tax money the government recieves from tabacco companies is easily drowned out by how much we spend on healthcare to fix these shit smoking fucks (in Canada anyways).

Vallegrande

5th July 2005, 06:15

The main proponents of keeping drugs illegal are the big time dealers and the gov't officials, who make money off it.

The most basic problem about drugs is that none of them are pure now. That is why there is a scare on whether or not drugs should be legal. I believe legalizing would make the drugs safer than what they currently are now, as has already been pointed out. Meth (of all drugs) would also be produced pure without all those other chems. Keeping it illegal creates a situation for people to find drugs cheaper, i.e. glue and paint thinner. That shit is quite legal all around the united states and it doesnt take much to learn how to sniff glue. I say making drugs legal so that the ones who desire it can get it safely.

American_Trotskyist

5th July 2005, 12:11

What the crap. I know CHILDREN in the fith grade how are using meth. These kids are being torn apart by this shit. It is easy to see the effects of this crap on people. Just look at there faces after a few weeks, imagine what it is doing to there whole freaking body.

If children are getting a hold of meth in my town when it is illeagle think about how easy it would be for them to get a hold of it if it were leagalized. We all know how easy it is to get a hold of tabacco and alcohal when we are underaged, it would be just as easy to get a hold of other drugs.

Yes I have friends who have ODed and died on Meth, too, the reason why it needs to be legal. If you get a bad batch of this shit it will kill you, it is like moonshine during prohibition, blinded some people but booze haven't done that since it was regulated.

Quiet frankly you are being very stupid about this. If kids are getting it now more police won't do anything, it has never worked and will never. It needs to be legalized, all from Pot to Smack to Crack to Meth, because it needs to be controled and who the hell are you to dictate to someone what they can or cannot do?

viva le revolution

5th July 2005, 16:19

Soft drugs should be legalized because not only are they taken for recreation but are found to have medicinal purposes too and are effective painkillers.
&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp; Hopwever cocaine and heroin and other "hard" drugs should not be legalized because of their infinitely more harmful effects and their high tolerance and addiction levels.
&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp; P.s Acid does not make you go insane that is simply untrue. I am speaking from experience.

cccpcommie

5th July 2005, 16:23

no i dont believe drugs should be legalized..people will be walking around fucked up on drugs..kids will get them so much easier..more than they already can..there will be more deaths of over doeses.it will be fucking mayhem..guys will try to break in your house all fucked up on drugs to steal your shit. fuck that if drugs are legalized id kill the people who legalized it myself. :angry:

LSD

5th July 2005, 23:22

Hopwever cocaine and heroin and other "hard" drugs should not be legalized because of their infinitely more harmful effects and their high tolerance and addiction levels.

So what?

It's still my choice if I want to do them or not, and you no right to tell me that I can't poison myself if I want to.

Education is a good idea, so are warnings. But, in the end, it must be my choice what I ingest into my own body.

no i dont believe drugs should be legalized..people will be walking around fucked up on drugs

You mean like how everyone walks around drunk all the time?

...oh wait.

kids will get them so much easier..more than they already can

Except, they'll be properly educated on drugs, the drugs will be better controlled, and there won't be the appeal of the "forbidden" in using them.

Also, since kids are getting their hands on drugs anyways, at least if they're legal, they will be pure and so there will be far less death and injury.

And by the way, today it is actually often easier for kids to get drugs than alchohol or tabacco. Drug dealers don't card.

Not to mention, what does "kid" mean to you anyway? 18?

Not for nothing, but you do realize that that is a completely random age, right?

Certainly there's an increased danger of drug use for developing children, but there's no indication of an increased risk for, say, a 16 year old over an 18 year old.

there will be more deaths of over doeses

NO!!

Exactly the opposite! They'll be far fewer overdoeses if drugs are legal, properly controlled, quality tested, and people are able to get accurate information on them.

Not to mention that people would be much more willing to go to the hospital and take others to the hospital if they are no longer afraid of getting "busted".

guys will try to break in your house all fucked up on drugs to steal your shit.

Why?

Firstly, if drugs are cheaper that will not be as nescessary.

Second, people are doing that anyway.

Thirdly, that speaks to the flaws of capitalism, not of drug use.

fuck that if drugs are legalized id kill the people who legalized it myself.

hmmm...

In this thread, the drug users have offered logical rational argumentation. You have threatened violence and murder.

You did you say was the threat again?

Vallegrande

6th July 2005, 02:45

kids will get them so much easier

Like I said, it is pretty easy to get glue or paint from the store to get high off of. I'd rather see someone smoking a bowl than sniffing paint.

cccpcommie

6th July 2005, 06:08

because you teach a kid somthing doesnt mean they will listen..comon i bet most of you stole or did somthing you were taught not to do. what about kids who are taught not to touch daddies gun..and blow their best friends head off..i know what alcohol does to my body..it doesnt mean i wont drink to get fully destroyed..drugs react different to everyone..a first time user could be allergic and die first hand..that may not happen if the drug is not as abundant as if were to be legal. kids WILL get to them one way or another..i think its good that we have laws on drugs..because you know as well as i do you will see many people in public who u say should not have those kids because of how they are treated..i know a girl who got drunk and got stabbed with a needle and injected with drugs her boyfriend had.(shes DEAD) now if that were legal, the punishment would not be as harsh..
and now i can never see nor talk to her again

LSD

6th July 2005, 06:29

because you teach a kid somthing doesnt mean they will listen..comon i bet most of you stole or did somthing you were taught not to do.

Maybe so, but the more information that kids have the better.

The fact is, kids may not like "following the rules", but if you tell them that going over X amount of cocaine will kill them ...they'll probably listen.

If you tell them not to do cocain because it's "wrong", they probably won't ...for good reason!

know what alcohol does to my body..it doesnt mean i wont drink to get fully destroyed.

Exactly!

So why do you assume that people will do so with other drugs?

drugs react different to everyone..a first time user could be allergic and die first hand

Which is why more information and quality control is essential.

..that may not happen if the drug is not as abundant as if were to be legal.

Why not?

People who really want to get drugs will do it anyway.

The people who want to do drugs, but don't because they don't want to break the law are the type of people that will probably do some research before they do drugs anyways.

That is the reckless ones, the "carefree" ones, who are most liable to "jump into" using drugs ...they're already doing them!

kids WILL get to them one way or another..

Then isn't it better that they be pure and not laced with poisons and impurities?

Isn't it also better that they be better informed before hand by a more open and unserstanding society?

i know a girl who got drunk and got stabbed with a needle and injected with drugs her boyfriend had.(shes DEAD)

Well, that's hardly relevent to whether drugs should be legal or not.

Clearly she didn't do that voluntarily and no one is proposing making assault legal.

now if that were legal, the punishment would not be as harsh..

Sure it would. It's assault and manslaughter.

bombeverything

6th July 2005, 07:19

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 03:23 PM
no i dont believe drugs should be legalized..people will be walking around fucked up on drugs..kids will get them so much easier..more than they already can..there will be more deaths of over doeses.it will be fucking mayhem..guys will try to break in your house all fucked up on drugs to steal your shit. fuck that if drugs are legalized id kill the people who legalized it myself. :angry:

Haha, someone sounds a little paranoid. What right do you have to tell other people whether they can take drugs or not? Surely it should be up to the individual. There is a difference between recreational drug use and addiction. Would you get yourself addicted to drugs if they were legal? If not, then why would you assume that others would? Keeping drug use illegal will only increase the profits of those profiting from the illegal drug trade: governments.

You also seem to be ignoring reasons behind excessive drug use. Drugs are fun, in moderation. Drugs are not 'evil'. Your views on drug users are judgemental and incorrect. And for a 'communist' you seem to be particularly protective of your property.

Bugalu Shrimp

6th July 2005, 11:30

Keep drugs illegal! Goverments will tax the shit out of them and the independent growers will lose out.

Besides we don't want smacked up kids wandering around off their mash on ecstasy pipes, spliff smoke bellowing out of their drug ends.

LSD

6th July 2005, 11:54

Keep drugs illegal! Goverments will tax the shit out of them and the independent growers will lose out.

You could still grow your own if it were legal.

The key difference is that you're less likely to wind up in jail.

Besides we don't want smacked up kids wandering around off their mash on ecstasy pipes, spliff smoke bellowing out of their drug ends.

We have that anyway.

Drug prohibition only keeps drugs more dangerous, funds organized crime, and fills prisons with non-violent "criminals".

Bugalu Shrimp

6th July 2005, 12:23

I used to take LSD regularly, it is both the best and worst drug. For £3 you can witness the most amazing events of your lifetime.

Drug prohibition funds organized crime,

Exactly, keep it illeagal ;)

On a serious point there was an experiment a few years ago looking at a viable way to commodify cannibas, how they would market it etc.. The consensus was that it would be best sold as chocolates to the elderly.

Word of caution.
I am actually addicted to skunk, the effects of withdrawel are not only physchological but become physical as I find it impossible to sleep unless spliffed up.

che's long lost daughter

6th July 2005, 12:25

I am against its legalisation but hold nothing against people who use it or wants it legalised. The thing is once it gets legalised, those who use it should be aware of the consequences and be ready to face them.

LSD

6th July 2005, 14:30

The thing is once it gets legalised, those who use it should be aware of the consequences and be ready to face them.

Of course.

Anyone you uses any chemical, be it recreational, medical, legal, illegal, should be aware of the consquences.

I am against its legalisation

Why?

Surely if you support worker's rights to control their own labour, you must support their right to control their own bodies!

Bugalu Shrimp

6th July 2005, 14:55

So who picks up the tab when all these whacked out space hoppers go sideways?
The tax payer that's who.

LSD

6th July 2005, 15:29

So who picks up the tab when all these whacked out space hoppers go sideways?

What "tab"?

Most drug users don't require medical attention, and drug related costs will almost certainly go down whith legalization.

ODs will drop, impurity related illnesses will virtually vanish, and there will be dramatically less transmissions of infectious diseases such as HIV and Hep C.

Overall, the "tax payer" saves money.

Besides, fuck the "money", this is an issue of fundamental freedoms. We'd probably actually save money if we outlawed alchohol, it causes more deaths than all recreational deaths combined, but people have a personal right to ingest into their bodies what they chose.

Bugalu Shrimp

6th July 2005, 16:06

Actually the legalization of drugs will see the emergance of a black market selling cheaper lower quality drugs. Much like the illegal cigarette and alcohol trades which flourish.

People say alchohol's a drug. It's not a drug it's a drink.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

6th July 2005, 16:09

People say alchohol's a drug. It's not a drug it's a drink.

It is a drug because it alters your mental state. Just because you drink it does not make it any less of a mind-altering substance.

Bugalu Shrimp

6th July 2005, 16:14

My sense of humour obviously doesn't work anymore. I advocate the complete legislation of all known or unknown drugs, I'm just having a laugh.

LSD

6th July 2005, 17:24

Ah... sorry.

I think I've gotten so used to stupidity that I no longer recognize sarcasm. :lol:

Mr Flibble

6th July 2005, 20:28

Drugs are apart of our society, we can pretend they dont exist and try and hide it in the shadows but its still there. By making drugs ilegal we have discredited countless individuals forcing them into the underworld making them criminals just because they took some substance. In my my mind this is insane; we should not encourage drugs but we should legalise them and help the addicts back into society by realising what they do will happen if we want it to or not. By doing this we can adress the subject why ppl take drugs and then maybe offer an alternative

Vallegrande

6th July 2005, 21:45

I have thought about why marijuana has been so difficult to legalize now. First off, the prohibition on alcohol was ratified in the constitution, in which it was luckily changed. However, I believe the gov't officials had better idea of keeping marijuana illegal, by not putting it in the amendment, and instead created the Marijuana Tax Act.

From what I learned, people didn't even hear about marijuana before it was illegal. Further, if they still wanted to grow marijuana, they could by this stamp that would allow them to keep growing. However, no one even knew they could do that, because it was kept strictly secret. Over time, all these drug agencies have popped up, new regulations and such keeping marijuana out. The gov't has built itself a fortress to prevent marijuana's freedom. People who think these "drugs" should be illegal should think twice about the history of this "drug" and how it came to be illegal.

From Tenacious D's own words:

The first decree is to legalize marijuana.
The tyranny and the bullshit's gone on too long.
You old fuckin' shrivs who, blocked it's legalization,
you're banished from the land!

Kleng

10th July 2005, 13:31

I think marijuana should be legalized, but not harder drugs.

LSD

10th July 2005, 16:10

...why?

Purple

10th July 2005, 18:08

I think that marijuana should be legalized as a perscripted drug, as it has been well proven that it can have positive effects for certain illness, and as an alternative painkiller. It is wrong that it has been categorized as an addictive, and unhealthy drug, just because of un-scientific, religious, and biased propagandha.

Redvolution

10th July 2005, 19:16

I say we legalize marijuana, mushrooms, peyote, and perhaps LSD.

But.....I'd say many hard drugs cause a lot of problems in society. Yes, I agree, experimenting with drugs or using them occasionally is alot of fun, but there are people out there that will steal or even murder to get their next fix. Perhaps this is false assumption I've gathered, but I know my brother stole from my father at least once. That's just...

I've seen what drugs do, my brother's in deep shit legally for them right now, and I hope he can change. The once super funny and intelligent person my brother was is pretty much now gone, and he'd only been on them for probably 4 years. I can't even imagine what others are like.

Sorry if I sound too cheesy or whatever the fuck, but it's how I feel.

Joe Strummer explained it best:

The Clash
Hateful
Well, I got a friend who's a man
What man?
The man who keeps me from the lovely
He gives me what I need
What you need? What you got?
I need it all so badly
CHORUS
Oh, anything I want he gives it to me
Anything I want he gives it, but not for free
It's hateful
And it's painful that I'm so grateful to be nowhere
This year I've lost some friends
Some friends? What friends?
I dunno, I ain't even noticed
You see, I gotta go out again
Again? My friend
I gotta see that mainman
I killed all my nerves
My nerves? What swerves?
And I can't drive so steady
I've lost my memory
My mind? Behind!
I can't see so clearly
CHORUS

While there are those who would only experiment or use occasionally (like myself), legislation is meant to adress the majority. And it seems to me through my experiences (which is what we are, right?) that hard drugs tend to fuck you over and ruin yourself. And by ruining individuals, it isn't exactly promoting the best society in the world.

Just some thoughts.

Vallegrande

10th July 2005, 19:43

There are still plants or herbs we dont even know about that could be more potent, or even more risky, then these known herbs. And the fact is they grow all over the world, it's just that people have to notice it and study it. Take a look a scotchbroom, that plant is really invasive, although it restores nitrogen to clearcut land. Another thing about this scotchbroom plant is that some people have understood it to be hallucinogenic. Apparently, when dried right, it will produce a mold that gets one high.

So the fact is, there are plants all around us that we have no idea are mind altering substances. But what isn't a "drug" nowadays? The food we eat alters our minds all the time. So what's a drug and what isn't, because I see how everything changes our minds, including food, water, environment, it is all drug induced if one wants to consider a simple marijuana plant to be a drug.

LSD

10th July 2005, 21:00

But.....I'd say many hard drugs cause a lot of problems in society.

Yes they can ...and so can alchohol ...and so can a lot of things.

But it isn't anyones's place to tell you that you can't ingest what you want.

Education is good, as is treatment. But making it a "crime" to drink or eat or snort of inject into myself what I want?

That infringes on my basic freedom to control my body and mind.

You can tell me not to use drugs, you can beg me not to use drugs, but you have no right to force me, at gunpoint, to not use drugs. What I put into myself is my choice and must remain so.

Anything else is oppression.

Vallegrande

10th July 2005, 21:34

I agree with LSD. It is an oppression if people are not allowed to use a drug of their choice, as every person reacts differently to certain substances. Shit, people are allowed to buy pharmacy drugs that have worse side effects than these current illegal drugs. It really should be the peoples' choice and not their dictatorial big brother.

chaval

10th July 2005, 22:42

the problem with legalization is that it costs the government and therefore us a lot in producing pure drugs, controlled drugs, distributing making sure it gets out legally etc etc so basically we end up paying with our taxes for people to get their fix when this money can be going to medical care, welfare etc. (personally i think there are better uses for the moeny)

also, the gov would have to basically tax the crap out of the drugs just like cigarrettes are mostly tax. otherwise the stuff would be way too cheap, no revenue would exist, and the whole thing wouldnt work. so now that its taxed a new problem comes up: people want their drugs cheap! who do they go to? the same people they used to get them from: drug dealers. these people can run illegal operations at a minimal cost and add impurities to make the drugs stronger etc. legalizing wont drive these guys out of business. and if you think about driving them out of the market through price wars well then as soon as you bring prices up again theyll come back (i.e. it takes very little investment and time to start a marijuana growop.)

the peoblem with drugs is that usually they go hand in hand with other things such as importing illegal weapons and other criminal activities. i know that the something tigers (forget there names) in Canada funded their terrorist operations through drugs as well as the hell's angels.

the general poplation will no doubt be influenced by legalization. more people will try it which increases the risk of more addicts on our streets and more cost to us. the economy will go down as more energy, time, and even labour is lost to the cost of the drug business.

a country also has international responsability to other nations as well. lets say poland legalizes. suddenly this country becomes a great base for drug operations and drugs can be legally bought in poland and smuggled into the surrounding states. hmm in fact tahts exactly whats happening in holland. many of the surrounding countries have threatened to close most of their borders to holland! why? because of the great influx of drugs seeping into their countries.

holland is a great example cause it really isnt working out that well for them. everyone around them is complaining, crime has gone up, and economy has gone down.

conclusion: short run ya maybe youll fix it, long run though, no one benefits. the solution is to control it and maybe decriminilize small quantities of the less powerful drugs such as pot (which has been done in many places including here in vancouver).

besides, legalize it and you lose the street cred from doin sumthing illegal ;)

chaval

10th July 2005, 22:45

and to "anarchist communist" sometimes lines have to be drawn. go ahead and do the stuff as long as you don't get caught but you can't drag everyone else down with you. after all isnt communism about the greater good of everyone? its about a collectivistic set of mind, the kind of culture that already exists in eastern asia. sometimes personal sacrifices have to be made for the greater benefit of those around you. taking a bullet for the team.

Vallegrande

10th July 2005, 23:50

so now that its taxed a new problem comes up: people want their drugs cheap! who do they go to? the same people they used to get them from: drug dealers. these people can run illegal operations at a minimal cost and add impurities to make the drugs stronger etc. legalizing wont drive these guys out of business.

If it was legal it would practically grow everywhere, people wouldn't have to go to drug dealers anymore, can grow their own, and even form a community based on the cultivation of these medicines. That's my idea of how it would stop the danger of also getting involved with guns or shady business. It would be community based, because no one would be afraid to grow herb anymore. There are some places where people get free medicinal herb already, like California.

About taxing it, that's always the case. The gov't makes more money off illegal business then legal. Legalizing would destroy the entire drug business in my view. No funding for piss tests, no funding for drug busts, that would all go to shit. Then that money could go to other things besides busting people. Welfare in America has gone to shit anyways, I dont see how this drug legalization would affect welfare or medical care. The real drug dealers in my view are the Health Industry and their chemists.

LSD

10th July 2005, 23:53

so now that its taxed a new problem comes up: people want their drugs cheap! who do they go to? the same people they used to get them from: drug dealers

You mean like how after prohibition, people still went to the the rum barrons to get their moonshine?

Oh wait...

legalizing wont drive these guys out of business

Yeah!

It's not as if it drove the illegal alchohol trade out of business!!

Oh wait...

the peoblem with drugs is that usually they go hand in hand with other things such as importing illegal weapons and other criminal activities.

Yeah, because they're illegal!

Drugs are illegal hence only criminals run drugs. Criminals tend to break laws.

In the thirties, rum running went "hand in hand" with illegal activities, that's how crime works!

the general poplation will no doubt be influenced by legalization. more people will try it which increases the risk of more addicts on our streets

Perhaps, but alot of people are doing it now. At least if drugs are legal there are some quality controls and we ensure that if people are going to do drugs they can do it safely.

People will be more willing to ask questions, to do research, to go to hospitals.

There will be far fewer ODs and dangerous reactions.

It will make society safer!

a country also has international responsability to other nations as well.

Perhaps, but not on issues of fundamental human rights.

Does Japan have an "obligation" to stop all that nasty "free expression" from seeping into China?

Does Cuba have an obligation to have less doctors because it's making the Domincan Republic "look bad"?

Those nations with drug prohibition are vioalting human rights. I can honestly say that I don't care if they're "put out" by liberalization.

go ahead and do the stuff as long as you don't get caught but you can't drag everyone else down with you.

"drag us down"?

"down" to where?

HELL? :o

after all isnt communism about the greater good of everyone?

No, it's about the greater good of every person.

It's about respecting every person's fundamental right to food, water, health, dignity, and to control their labour.

How can you empower the workers to cast of the shackles of capitalism...but tell them that they can't grow what they want in their back yard?

How can you tell them they have a right to control the means of production, but not to control what goes into their bodies?

Communism without freedom is contradictory!

the kind of culture that already exists in eastern asia

You mean midievalist "clan" thinking?

No thank you! :angry:

sometimes personal sacrifices have to be made for the greater benefit of those around you.

And sometimes they don't!

In this case they definitely don't.

The "people around me" are not bennefitted by oppression and tyranny, they are bennefited by liberation and freedom.

Freedom from capitalism, from class, from the state, and from you.

From you telling them what they can or cannot put into their own damn bodies!

It's not your decision!

Donnie

11th July 2005, 00:44

I'm for the legalization of all drugs. People should have their own choice of what they want to do with their own bodies.
What I don't like is when people force drugs on me. I used to smoke and take weed now and then but I got fed up with it.

But yeh I'm for the legalization of all drugs. I believe though, that most drugs should be bought, grown and taken in a clean environment because I don't want to see people getting diseases from old/shared needles. The needles and the drugs should be provided cleanly etc.

Also I've always associated drugs with an escape sort of thing. I've seen drugs as substances which people take to get away from the tough struggles of our present day system. So hopefully drug use would go down in a classless stateless society, but never the less they should be legalized all together.

Vallegrande

11th July 2005, 01:24

Drugs, or the more natural 'herbs' I should say, are essential to people of any culture. Who were the ones to come and heal the suffering, to take on the suffering? It was the shamans, who indeed had powerful herbs that were used for healing others. I dont know exactly how it was done, but I think both the shaman and the one suffering took the drugs together. And the Shaman is the one who has the intuition of what to use for what ailment. And to do that it takes a lot of experience with drug use. Who knows how many died before the correct preparation or ingredient was discovered, and for what sickness as well.

Drug users are shamans in a way for trying to understand their own self, but this is a time where the drugs are supposed to come from the laboratory, and not nature. Growing drugs is illegal, but it grows within our own laboratories, powerful drugs that we know nothing about yet. The people of America are the new experimenters (or guinea pigs) of drugs, and it is inevitable that people will die. That's what it takes in order to teach others about which drug does what. We are learning this now, with people dying from pharmacy drugs.

So there are people who think drugs should be illegal, but dont really dont have an explanation of why it should be. The argument is that it will cause more crime and addiction than ever. What's new? Addiction is human nature, people all have an addiction to something. That's why, as even the Bible notes, all people are inherently sinners, which is human nature as well. Who really benefits from keeping drugs illegal? What's the point anyways. The govt also noted recently that it does not have enough funds to continue a strong drug war anymore.

widget_man

11th July 2005, 04:33

i agree 100% that drugs need to be leagalized but people who keep saying that you cant tell me what to put in my body are right to an extent. for instance what happens if a man has a wife and 3 kids but is spending all the money on a hard drug and is messed up and going to die if he continues. so do you help him or say we cant help him because it is up to him what he puts into his body?

A second point is some people have surgested that you would have to go to a clinic to take more harder drugs which i think is a good idea but then some people say you can grow or make your own drugs. how will growing or making your own drugs make the purer and how will that stop dealers?

oh and Lysergic when you say how many people went back to drinking moonshine after the prohibition? oh wait it could be because alcohol is alot less addictive that certain hard drugsand also in england people are constantly pissed of with tobacco and alcohol tax that they always look at getting it in tax free countrys and organized crime has noticed this so starting selling ciggerettes with deadly doeses of poisen in them instead of proper ingredients.

Vallegrande

11th July 2005, 05:48

what happens if a man has a wife and 3 kids but is spending all the money on a hard drug and is messed up and going to die if he continues. so do you help him or say we cant help him because it is up to him what he puts into his body?
I dont know how to help that behavior. That is deep in American culture, it passes from generation to the next.

how will growing or making your own drugs make the purer and how will that stop dealers?
Simple, you get to choose what you put into the drug. If you choose to go the unnatural way, fine. But you would have a choice to make it pure and pleasant. About the drug dealers, why would you need them when you have your own? Dealers may still be around, it's just that you would have a choice of not having to deal for it. Plus your peeps could help you out and it wouldn't be anything like dealing.

in england people are constantly pissed of with tobacco
I heard they were growing their own now compared to buying it in stores. What's more is the people who smoked home grown tobacco noticed a better taste and not the addiction like industrialized tobacco. Is it like that over there?

praxis1966

11th July 2005, 07:28

Is it just me, or is anyone else sick of seeing reduntant threads like this one? This must be about the 40 millionth drug/marijuana legalization thread I've seen since I've been here.

LSD

11th July 2005, 09:36

for instance what happens if a man has a wife and 3 kids but is spending all the money on a hard drug and is messed up and going to die if he continues

That describes a good deal of alchoholics.

oh and Lysergic when you say how many people went back to drinking moonshine after the prohibition? oh wait it could be because alcohol is alot less addictive that certain hard drugs

I think you missed my point.

People stopped drinking moonshine because legal alchohol was now available. It was healthier, safer, better, and they didn't have to deal with organized crime to get it.

No one likes having to sneak around or having to deal with criminals. Once people could get their alchohol without having to do so, they almost overnight abandoned the illegal alchohol for the legal.

The same will happen with other drugs.

It's simply a matter of practicality. If I can grow my own drugs or buy them in pharmacy down the street, what's the advantage in going to a dark alley down town to get it from a "dealer"?

Drugs are currently controlled by organized crime because they are illegal and criminals tend to be the only ones willing to risk breaking the law to such a degree. Once drugs are legal, however, the number of legal producers will vastly outweigh the number of producers affiliated with crime. In fact, the market will become so saturated that it is highly unlikely that criminals will even bother to stay in it.

bolshevik butcher

11th July 2005, 14:24

If drugs are legal, they will be less dangeous, the government will amek life out of them and crime will go down. Who lsoes except the drug dealers?

widget_man

11th July 2005, 14:49

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 11 2005, 08:36 AM

for instance what happens if a man has a wife and 3 kids but is spending all the money on a hard drug and is messed up and going to die if he continues

That describes a good deal of alchoholics.

just because it sounds like alchoholics doesent make it right and alchohol is much cheaper than some harder drugs.

viva le revolution

11th July 2005, 23:01

Drugs... isn't this about class conflict?
Legalization of drugs will only lead to another avenue of the already vast capitalist web opening up. Another tobacco industry, another Phillip morris to deal with.
Don't waste your time talking about such redundancies, it will only benefit the capitalists. Sure you have a right to injest what you want, take cigarettes for example, you have a fag all is good, but where does your money go? to the capitalist, the very people we are supposed to fighting. so don't get worked up on this issue at this time, Drugs should only be made legal if nobody profits from addiction.

spartafc

11th July 2005, 23:21

for some reason I find the attached image quite funny.

LSD

11th July 2005, 23:27

just because it sounds like alchoholics doesent make it right

My point was that the existance of alchoholism is not a sufficient justification for prohibition. Neither is drug addiction a sufficient justification for drug prohibition.

and alchohol is much cheaper than some harder drugs.

Actually, often the reverse is true.

...and so what?

The difference is still tiny. The fact remains that addiction is addiction, whether it's to a "hard' drug or a "soft" one.

Legalization of drugs will only lead to another avenue of the already vast capitalist web opening up.

Perhaps, but that's already happening now.

Don't pretend that organized crime isn't a part of the free market. It may be in a "black" area, but there as capitalist as anyone!

Legalizing drugs will move drugs from one market (underground) to a differnt one (public), but either way they are part of the capitalist system.

In a capitalist society, there is simply no way from something to not.

Sure you have a right to injest what you want, take cigarettes for example, you have a fag all is good, but where does your money go? to the capitalist

And if you keep drugs illegal, where does your money go? To the capitalist!

Drugs will be a part of capitalism no matter what. At least if they're legal we can dispense with the crime, violance, and danger that presently accompany them.

Not to mention that many drugs will be able to be made at home. Certainly marijuana is a relevent example.

This will actually reduce the need for turning to the market and will decrease capitalsit profits!

Drugs should only be made legal if nobody profits from addiction.

But right now, many people "profit from addiction".

Legalization won't change that, of course. It will simply change who profits.

But what it will also do is make society safer, makes drugs safer, keep more people out of prison, and respect basic human rights.

Moonfire

12th July 2005, 06:41

Using mind altering substances like Marijuana or LSD for exploration or pain relief or whatever I think is not a problem. I've done experimenting with different drugs and not once have I ever had a dependency or a craving. Just highly addictive drugs like cocaine and heroine need to be done away with.

Vallegrande

12th July 2005, 07:01

I heard some type of mushroom can help someone not feel like wanting to smoke, or feel sick thinking about doing it. I don't know what mushroom it is though, but apparently it's used for addiction to smoking. And it's hallucinogenic!

Mr Flibble

12th July 2005, 09:48

a double plus

voice of the voiceless

12th July 2005, 14:41

No drugs should not be legalised. Legalisation is almost an advocation of drug use. I dont think drug users should be arrested but drug dealers are scum. Name a nice drug dealer?

I dont want to stop anyone taking drugs, i just think they should be illegal purely for the fact of saying they are illegal, even if the law is not enforced it at least shows some moral stability.

And dont forget how a lot of synthetic drugs are made, Im sure people who make drugs are serious victims of wage-labour and hyper exploitation, and even if drugs were legal; how would you feel making drugs? how many lives you have affected, changed and so on. And no its not your decision to take drugs, yes maybe for the soft ones but addictive drugs are different, you are no longer in control of your own mind.

In a communist society, people should work because they love their job, correct? what satisfaction is gained from making or distributing drugs?

LSD

12th July 2005, 15:00

I dont think drug users should be arrested

Well that's what happens when drugs are illegal.

I dont want to stop anyone taking drugs, i just think they should be illegal purely for the fact of saying they are illegal

That's ridiculous.

The government is not in the "morality" business. No one has the right to dictate to me what is "right" or "wrong" for me to do with my own body, it's none of their business.

Making laws to "impose morality" is dogmatic and oppressive.

If a law doesn't serve a practical purpose then it has no reason to exist.

Keeping empty laws around "just because" is the hight of stupidity, especially when said laws are infringements of basic human rights!

even if the law is not enforced it at least shows some moral stability.

And what is "morally" wrong with drugs?

Don't I have a "moral" right to ingest whatever I want to?

And dont forget how a lot of synthetic drugs are made, Im sure people who make drugs are serious victims of wage-labour and hyper exploitation,

Absolutely, yet another argument for legalization!

"Black market" businesses tend to be the most exploitative and oppressive, since there's no recourse if one is being abused.

While legalizing drugs won't end market oppression, it will make it better for those in the industry.

Long-term, of course, we need to abolish capitalism. But as long as capitalism is around, drugs are going to be bought and sold. At least if it's done legally, there can be some degree of control.

and even if drugs were legal; how would you feel making drugs?

Pretty damn good.

And no its not your decision to take drugs

That's a ludicrous statement.

Of course it's my choice.

Even if I am addicted, addiction is not "mind-control", people break addictions every day.

Yeah, it's tough and it's hard. But saying that drug-use isn't a choice is lunacy!

In a communist society, people should work because they love their job, correct? what satisfaction is gained from making or distributing drugs?

The same satisfaction that comes from making any product that people use and enjoy.

...like tennis rackets.

Vallegrande

12th July 2005, 19:50

No drugs should not be legalised,
Are you saying all drugs should be legalized?

Legalisation is almost an advocation of drug use
Whats wrong with that? Perhaps people will get to see a beautiful bud on t.v. rather then a pill for boners.

Name a nice drug dealer?
George Bush.

Gianandrea

15th July 2005, 21:28

Drugs are part of a bourgeois self indulgent way of living life, they are no use in advancing the plight of the people. How can a true socialist believe that drugs are a good thing, such indulgences only damage society.

One also should not forget that unfortunately many areas were drugs are grown should infact be used to grow food, but those farmers must grow drugs instead. In a communist society the time used upon them would be of further waste and against pushing for equality.

However if one insists upon the legalising of drugs please also accept that no social medical care should have to waste resources subsidising the care needed for those who suffer from taking of drugs. If someone as become a drug taker in an age of social disfunction then one can justify saving them, however if society is even then the suffering of drug takers would be acceptable as the bought it upon themselves through their call for legalisation of the drugs.

American_Trotskyist

15th July 2005, 22:28

Well being in Britian I have some interesting comments on this.

To my suprise Mushrooms are legal over here. I was very happy to find this out and I bought some, packaged, created by a company. I expected it to be a some magical enthogenic experiance, but it was absolutly not that. I then began to think about it after I had yelled at the manager about false advertising. Legalization doesn't mean better quality.

When illegal the drug market has no way to advertise and has to get customers from word of mouth, thus to move the product they have to have a better quality to get better satisfaction to get more customers. However, when it is legalized one knows where to go, how much it will cost and there is no need for the dealer to create satisfaction. So you can find non psylisibin mushrooms mixed with psylisibin, because they don't give a damn if you don't like it, it will cause no laps in profits for them.

So when illegal the dealer or pusher is much more likely to lase their drugs with harder things to get the word out so more people will go to them. If it is legalized and regulated it would ensure product safty and it would probibly end the problem of mixing the drugs together to get more product. That is just my experiance.

Vallegrande

15th July 2005, 23:21

One also should not forget that unfortunately many areas were drugs are grown should infact be used to grow food, but those farmers must grow drugs instead.
How would there not be enough land? What about kicking out all the meat packing industries, which takes up more space then food or drugs.

However if one insists upon the legalising of drugs please also accept that no social medical care should have to waste resources subsidising the care needed for those who suffer from taking of drugs.
I agree. Can we say the same for the pharmacy users who sue for malpractice all the time?

Oglaigh na hEireann

18th July 2005, 08:54

I believe that most drugs should stay illegal, except for ,marijuana. The amount of crime surrounding the growing and distribution of marijuana would decrease by a very large margin because either the government would make it, or private companies would be contracted out to do so, so the marijuana is kept cheap.

Yet another idea is the full legalization of the drug, so there would not have to be marijuana growing companies, because you could grow it in your own yard, and this way there would be no competition to make the most amount of money selling because it would be free, and abundance.

-Sean

Taiga

18th July 2005, 12:42

Originally posted by Oglaigh na [email protected] 18 2005, 10:54 AM

Yet another idea is the full legalization of the drug, so there would not have to be marijuana growing companies, because you could grow it in your own yard, and this way there would be no competition to make the most amount of money selling because it would be free, and abundance.

-Sean
In Communist society there will be no excessive use of the legalization of drugs, because noone will profit from it. The problem with legalization of drugs in modern capitalist society is that it will feed drug corporations, that will definitely appear. Yes, they exist now on the black market, but legalization will help them to expand. They won't be afraid anymore. Not everyone will grow drugs in his own yard. Some will prefer to buy it. So legalizing will not exterminate drugs business, I'm afraid <_<

Vallegrande

18th July 2005, 18:13

The reason there are so many drugs is because they have been discovered. We will continue to discover countless more. The drugs are neutral, it's the people who divide the line.

Xvall

18th July 2005, 21:32

Acid is a drug that can send you insane after one hit.

No, contrary to what McGruff The Crime Dog told you, that isn't true. Lysergic Acid can not make a person insane. What is can do is cause latent psychological conflictions to surface - however, those sympoms would have occured regardless of whether or not the recipient of the drug used it or not, at a later date.

Xvall

18th July 2005, 21:40

Just highly addictive drugs like cocaine and heroine need to be done away with.

Why? (And both of those drug, by the way, still have a lower relapse rate than tobacco, which is still the most addictive substance on the face of the planet - should alcohol be illegal as well?)

Drugs are part of a bourgeois self indulgent way of living life, they are no use in advancing the plight of the people.

On the contrary, a lot of drugs have pissed of the bourgeois quite a lot. Remember that the "reckless" use of LSD helped propell the 60's movement along the way.

How can a true socialist believe that drugs are a good thing

How can a true socialists call for restrictions on what an individual can do with his or her own body? More importantly, who elected you to be the "chairman" of socialism? Since when do you determine what a "good socialist" does or does not do.

such indulgences only damage society.

I fail to see how smoking marijuana in the later afternoon, taking LSD at a park, or consuming some mushrooms in my spare time is detrimental to society.

Yes, they exist now on the black market, but legalization will help them to expand. They won't be afraid anymore.

But at least in the public market, the substances could be controlled and inspected, preventing them from being impure.

Ownthink

18th July 2005, 21:44

Originally posted by Drake [email protected] 18 2005, 04:40 PM

Just highly addictive drugs like cocaine and heroine need to be done away with.

Why? (And both of those drug, by the way, still have a lower relapse rate than tobacco, which is still the most addictive substance on the face of the planet - should alcohol be illegal as well?)

Drugs are part of a bourgeois self indulgent way of living life, they are no use in advancing the plight of the people.

On the contrary, a lot of drugs have pissed of the bourgeois quit a lot. Remember that the "reckless" use of LSD helped propell the 60's movement along the way.

How can a true socialist believe that drugs are a good thing

How can a true socialists call for restrictions on what an individual can do with his or her own body? More importantly, who elected you to be the "chairman" of socialism? Since when do you determine what a "good socialist" does or does not do.

such indulgences only damage society.

I fail to see how smoking marijuana in the later afternoon, taking LSD at a park, or consuming some mushrooms in my spare time is detrimental to society.

Yes, they exist now on the black market, but legalization will help them to expand. They won't be afraid anymore.

But at least in the public market, the substances could be controlled and inspected, preventing them from being impure.
His/her arguments just destroyed that persons in his quote.

Xvall

18th July 2005, 22:02

The fact of the matter is that drugs don't make a person do anything. People are responsible for their own stupid decisions.

If people are becoming lazy, fat, 300 pound pieces of shit you don't wage a war against cholestorol and criminalize candy - they made their own choice when they decided to stuff their celluloid faces with twinkies and it's their own damn fault when they drop dead of a heart attack at the age of fourty.

The same thing applies to drugs.

If some dumbass junkie spends his entirely life shooting up, it isn't my fault, and I'm not going to let anyone restrict my freedoms because of his stupid actions that, in all likelyhood, only physically affected himself. There's nothing you can do to stop stupid people from doing stupid things, and restricting the freedoms of the smarter ones is just going to make us all very angry.

Ownthink

18th July 2005, 22:09

Originally posted by Drake [email protected] 18 2005, 05:02 PM
The fact of the matter is that drugs don't make a person do anything. People are responsible for their own stupid decisions.

If people are becoming lazy, fat, 300 pound pieces of shit you don't wage a war against cholestorol and criminalize candy - they made their own choice when they decided to stuff their celluloid faces with twinkies and it's their own damn fault when they drop dead of a heart attack at the age of fourty.

The same thing applies to drugs.

If some dumbass junkie spends his entirely life shooting up, it isn't my fault, and I'm not going to let anyone restrict my freedoms because of his stupid actions that, in all likelyhood, only physically affected himself. There's nothing you can do to stop stupid people from doing stupid things, and restricting the freedoms of the smarter ones is just going to make us all very angry.
Well said comrade, I agree with all of that.