Marijuana. - who stands where? [Archive]

Saint-Just

10th May 2003, 23:01

Quote: from the SovieT on 10:55 pm on May 10, 2003

I'd ban it all. Do you think Marijuana was legal in the USSR. Do drugs problems not exists in capitalist society?

I'd imprison all suspected drug dealers, and maybe some crack users too.
carefull comrade...

you will find that most partys arent in favor of the criminalization of drugs..

in fact..

most partys are in favor of the decriminalization of them..

and i must say that i share the same opinion..

legalization means making it avaiable to all population..,
this meaning kids and such...
it is potentialy dangerous to legalize...

yet a decriminalization allows you to treat and cure drug adicts since they arent penalized for consuming it..

We've breifly talked about this before I think. Yes, but not Marxist-Leninist parties. Marijuana is not particularly harmful, but it can perpetuate laziness. Do you not agree that alcohol is far better? therefore we have no need for marijuana. But for certain we should be harsh on drug dealers, I am sure everyone agree with that. In addition drugs such as crack are for bourgeois degenerates, actually its just a personal issue on that one, I don't really care.

Invader Zim

10th May 2003, 23:11

Legalise, as long as you dont smoke it in public places. Only in your own home. Just to stop inconvinience to other who hppen to be near by.

Guest1

10th May 2003, 23:15

full legalisation

UnionofSovietSocialistRepublics

10th May 2003, 23:15

I agree with chairman mao, i cant see any benefit in legalizing any drugs, especially when i look at some people i know and how see how much it has wrecked them up and they are wasting there lives

Sandanista

10th May 2003, 23:26

There are 2 sides to this coin, i think in the present system we need to help the drug addicts, rather than push them to one side, when the revolution comes there will be no drug addicts as we will all be socialists.

Anyone who has leftist leaning just becoz of the hash thing and doesnt give a shit about the rest of it is a fookin eejit

commie kg

11th May 2003, 00:00

Legalize it like alcahol or cigarettes are today.

I think people should be allowed to smoke it, although it isn't something I personally partake in. ;)

CubanFox

11th May 2003, 00:29

Legalize them. Legal age 25 so you don't have a bunch of idiots smoking the stuff and fucking their minds to be 'cool'. Education programs in school and so on.

atlanticche

11th May 2003, 01:24

it should be allowed
though while still having eduction isnt a good idea, so if it is legalised it should have a high enough age limit to rule out students under important education GCSE's and so on
but it shows that mainly younger people use it for the pleasure of it or to be cool

it would only really be suitable to legalise it for medical use

not that im against it or use it

abstractmentality

11th May 2003, 02:48

"Do you not agree that alcohol is far better?" -Chairman Mao.

what are you talking about? marijuana is 15x better than alcohol ;)

im for the legalization.

Soul Rebel

11th May 2003, 03:00

Chairman Mao- I must correct you on something. Crack is actually a drug mostly used by poor blacks. Why do you think there is a harsher penalty for crack than cocaine- even though it is the same drug, but used differently? The drug issue is very much a racial issue.

As for the lazy thing about weed- its a stereotype!!! Those that are lazy are those that believe in the stereotype. They believe that to be a pot smoker you must be lazy. Ive mentioned it on other boards- I have been smoking it for 11 yrs. now and never once did i slack, neither have my friends or anyone i know. its just those people that believe the stereotype.

And alcohol is a lot more damaging than marijuana- its been proven many times. Marijuana is not addictive, while alcohol is. Alcohol can damage your body in many ways whereas marijuana doesnt.

Please check the norml website to get some facts on marijuana: http://www.norml.org :)

Umoja

11th May 2003, 03:25

I'm for Decriminalizing it come to think of it. It does promote "lazyness" because it encourages people to get away from everyday life with some THC(or TBH or whatever the chemical is in Marijuana) instead of actually dealing with their problems. Many people will point out they do it for "fun" but why can't you have fun when your fully aware?

Iron Star

11th May 2003, 04:19

I think it should be legalized.

Ghost Writer

11th May 2003, 12:34

Marajuana is for morons, the likes of which frequent this bulletin board.

atlanticche

11th May 2003, 12:55

i am not a pot smoker but I do know those that are and there fine
im not against marajuana being legalised
marajuana is not a moron thing if anyones a moron its Ghost Writer

dopediana

11th May 2003, 12:59

legalize it. but not for use in public. put a limit on how much one can consume, ie: buy in a certain period of time. and then with this whole decriminalization of it, we'd have less young people in jail.

i do see a downside to legalization though. it could definitely end up turning into a huge industry, like tobacco or alcohol, from which major profits could be reaped. and most of us on this board don't like big business.

atlanticche

11th May 2003, 13:52

the amaryllis is right

it could cause a deterioration in society

kidicarus20

11th May 2003, 14:12

I'm straight-edge but I'm all for legalization.

mentalbunny

11th May 2003, 14:34

Decriminalise it, research it, educate people as to its effects. Regulate rpoduction of it, find some way of identifying black market weed (the black market is the biggest problem). Also have organic weed. Make sure growers in other countries get a decent wage cos sometimes it's shit for them. Crack down (great pun!) on heroin/cocaine/crack dealers. No prison for users, only rehab. Tough sentences (like life, I mean life) for big time dealres. Dealer-addicts should get rehab but in a secure environment where they can't walk out, so it's losing your freedom as punsihment but only for a certain amount fo time.

These are not my final thoughts on the matter, I don't know everything about drugs so obviously there might be some big flaws in my ideas, but this seems to me to be preferable to the current situation.

The US needs a complete overhaul in the way they treat cannabis-related crimes like cultivation and use.

Invader Zim

11th May 2003, 16:08

The argument of big buisness making profit from it is irrelavant as big buisness already does make large profits its sale. These big buisnesses are just not legal thats the only differance.

Saint-Just

11th May 2003, 16:59

'I agree with chairman mao, i cant see any benefit in legalizing any drugs, especially when i look at some people i know and how see how much it has wrecked them up and they are wasting there lives' El Marko

Yes, even Marijuana, ever seen any 'real stoners', they have no personality, and are very much simply lazy. Reasonable consumption of Marijuana has no side-effects particuarly.

'Chairman Mao- I must correct you on something. Crack is actually a drug mostly used by poor blacks. Why do you think there is a harsher penalty for crack than cocaine- even though it is the same drug, but used differently? The drug issue is very much a racial issue.' Senora Che

Where I live there are hardly any poor people or black people let alone poor black people. Those who use Cocaine are therefore not poor or black. I do not care, its just someone close to me uses crack and when I criticised them for it they got very, very angry so I don't really like it + they all take crack and have great free-love orgies which isnt really moral if you ask me particularly if one crack user had personal relations to you.

Yeah I know in inner-city U.S. your point is very much true.

'And alcohol is a lot more damaging than marijuana- its been proven many times. Marijuana is not addictive, while alcohol is. Alcohol can damage your body in many ways whereas marijuana doesnt.' Senora Che

Yes but alcohol releases a chemical in your brain that makes you happy, therefore it is better and the risks are acceptable.

'As for the lazy thing about weed- its a stereotype!!!'

Its true for people who smoke weed excessively, which I know is not so many people.

I think the situation would be better if most people didn't consider drugs at all.

Edelweiss

11th May 2003, 17:17

Yes but alcohol releases a chemical in your brain that makes you happy, therefore it is better and the risks are acceptable.

LOL, you can't be serious on this one...What the fuck does that proof? That's by far the most stupid and reactionary thing you have ever said on this board. Nearly every drug, and alcohol IS a drug, realeses chemicals in your brain that makes you happy! That's why you are taking drugs. Alcohol kills millions of people all around the globe every year, alcohol is physically addictive, and harms your body in a pretty serious way. It is a much more dangerous drug than marijuana, the only difference is that it's culturally more accepted by the (petit-)bourgois people like you. I won't deny that heavy marijuana consumption is dangerous too, I don't wanna play down the risks of it, but still alcohol is much more dangerous for you and the whole society, since also many many crimes are commited after alcohol consumption, it's a drug that makes you aggresive and unpredictable, marijuana makes you peaceful and just a bit lazy. Actually I think if more people would smoke pot, the world would be a better one ;)
Damn, I will smoke a joint now :)

mentalbunny

11th May 2003, 17:25

Well yeah, excessive pot smoking does slow you down, my chaplain's half-bro is a rasta and smokes copious amounts of ganja and apparently is pretty slow. I wouldn't want to end up like that, but I do enjoy a joint once in a while, infinitely preferable to getting drunk, you don't throw up and you don't get hang-overs, at least in my experience. It's also easier to be moderate with weed than with alcohol, well in my opinion.

Other drugs are an entirely different matter. Personally I wouldn't want to take anything other than weed cos I'm too scared of the long term effects it could have. I think essentially we need more research, but msot especially with cannabis because we really knwo so little about it and everyone has different theories. Also if it came to animal testing, I prefer the thought of loads of animals getting stoned to loads of animals having chemicals sprayed in their eyes!! (That's not supposed to be serious, ok?!)

:cool:

Xvall

11th May 2003, 17:25

Marijuana is not particularly harmful, but it can perpetuate laziness.

So does alcohol, and so does television and the internet. Indeed, Marijuana isn't a very productive thing to do with your time, but niether is getting drunk off your arse.

Do you not agree that alcohol is far better?

No. Marijuana does not cause nearly as many problems as alcohol seems to. Seldom do I hear of instances where people get really high on the road, and crash their cars into pedestrians. Cell Phones are more harmful than marijuana is as far as the road is conscerned. Additionally, I rarely hear of someone getting stoned and beating their wives. Most 'drug problems' in the United States usually aren't caused my marijuana. And most drug problems exist not because the drug is bad for the person, but rather because the person looses all their money because the drug is illegal and more expensive, or because people are getting thrown in jail for smoking a joint in their household; at the same time people are getting drunk and endangering the lives of everyone in their vehicle, getting little more than a fine and a suspension.

therefore we have no need for marijuana.

Then we have no need for alcohol either. It is just as bad; probably far worse.

But for certain we should be harsh on drug dealers, I am sure everyone agree with that.

I agree. I'm not really a big advocate for legalizing drugs, but rather for decriminalization. That is, if we do happen to find a person who has a drug problem, we can try to help them out with therapy, etc. rather than just throwing them in jail.

In addition drugs such as crack are for bourgeois degenerates, actually its just a personal issue on that one, I don't really care.

Understandable. Like I said, I'm not just some druggie trying to legalize everyone. I just think that in a world like this one, drugs are of very little concern right now. I agree that a person who uses powerful drugs constantly to the point where they can't really do anything at all isn't very useful. I think that the best way to avoid drug problems is to consider for a second that they didn't exist. Campaigning against them seems to only make a lot of people curious. Oh well.

Som

11th May 2003, 21:03

Without some all pervasive police, prohibition of drugs simply doesn't work.

A fun set of numbers is that in the netherlands, after it was legalized, drug was eventually went down. It shot up at first, but now its lower then when its illegal.

i do see a downside to legalization though. it could definitely end up turning into a huge industry, like tobacco or alcohol, from which major profits could be reaped. and most of us on this board don't like big business.

A gang is just as much a big buisness as a corporation is, except theyre slightly more inclined to shoot people.
Better big buisness than gangs and the like.

Anyway, if it was legal, people could just grow their own.

All in all, it doesn't matter much, because if someone wants to smoke themselves into a fat slow lazy burgiouseoiuse degenerate, thats their right.
(not implying they would, just playing off the stereotype)

Dirty Commie

11th May 2003, 21:31

Legalize cannibus, but like in the Netherlands, limited to hash bars and your home.

Guest1

11th May 2003, 21:39

there isn't a dedicated natural receptor in the brain used only to accept alcohol. there is one for THC, which is not naturally found in the body, which suggests an evolutionary link between our ancestors and the consumption of marijuana. It is much less dangerous than alcohol, this has been proven time and time again.

Urban Rubble

11th May 2003, 22:00

Chairman Mao, it suprises me to see you make such blatantly misinformed comments seeing as how you usually know what you're talking about.

First, you don't even know the difference between cocaine and crack. Cocaine is a relatively clean but highly addictive powder drug. It is mainly snorted by white upper or middle class people. Coke is mainly dangerous because it is addictive. Crack is cocaine cooked down in chemicals into rocks and smoked by poor people. It is the equivalent of jabbing your brain with a needle.

With that said I also think it amazing that you believe alchohol "makes you happy". The truth is, alchohol intensifies whatever mood you are in at the time, happy, sad, angry, horny, depressed. It is also physically addictive, meaning if you quit after being addicted for awhile you'll get withdrawls.

But go ahead, drink up, while you're running into shit and falling down I'll be smoking by joint totally clear headed laughing at you.

Saint-Just

11th May 2003, 22:08

Quote: from Malte on 5:17 pm on May 11, 2003
Yes but alcohol releases a chemical in your brain that makes you happy, therefore it is better and the risks are acceptable.

LOL, you can't be serious on this one...What the fuck does that proof? That's by far the most stupid and reactionary thing you have ever said on this board. Nearly every drug, and alcohol IS a drug, realeses chemicals in your brain that makes you happy! That's why you are taking drugs. Alcohol kills millions of people all around the globe every year, alcohol is physically addictive, and harms your body in a pretty serious way. It is a much more dangerous drug than marijuana, the only difference is that it's culturally more accepted by the (petit-)bourgois people like you. I won't deny that heavy marijuana consumption is dangerous too, I don't wanna play down the risks of it, but still alcohol is much more dangerous for you and the whole society, since also many many crimes are commited after alcohol consumption, it's a drug that makes you aggresive and unpredictable, marijuana makes you peaceful and just a bit lazy. Actually I think if more people would smoke pot, the world would be a better one ;)
Damn, I will smoke a joint now :)

You are all used to me being serious; so I will be now.
I was only joking. What I was implying is that alcohol has more effect than Marijuana. Though you are precisely right about the cultural aspect to some extent. But for many (petit-)bourgeois cocaine is also acceptable.

'Chairman Mao, it suprises me to see you make such blatantly misinformed comments seeing as how you usually know what you're talking about.

First, you don't even know the difference between cocaine and crack. Cocaine is a relatively clean but highly addictive powder drug. It is mainly snorted by white upper or middle class people. Coke is mainly dangerous because it is addictive. Crack is cocaine cooked down in chemicals into rocks and smoked by poor people. It is the equivalent of jabbing your brain with a needle.

With that said I also think it amazing that you believe alchohol "makes you happy". The truth is, alchohol intensifies whatever mood you are in at the time, happy, sad, angry, horny, depressed. It is also physically addictive, meaning if you quit after being addicted for awhile you'll get withdrawls'

No, I don't know the difference betwen Crack and Cocaine. I don't know what negative effects cocaine has, I have nothing rational against it. And on some issues you can never be so rational.

I know alcohol intensifies your mood, I know very well. It does also give you a feeling of happiness very often.

It depends on the person. I have enjoyed the use of both of these drugs. And have never had a problem. I just have no will to preserve Marijuana because I think alcohol is a superior drug. It is more dangerous, I agree. However it does depends on the individual. All my views on drugs relate to personal issues. I have no problem with the use of alcohol personally. Rationally I don't particularly care about drugs apart from the problems arising from harder drugs or/and intensive use. I am not entirely sure the problems of alcohol can be curbed that well. Since it is difficult to control people when drunk, so telling them not to be unpredictable or violent does little since they cannot control it well.

I still would not ban alcohol. I don't like drugs personally on one level because they seem to demean people. Alcohol does the same thing, however I enjoy alcohol too much to criticise it in that way. Where as I do not enjoy other drugs.

(Edited by Chairman Mao at 10:13 pm on May 11, 2003)

(Edited by Chairman Mao at 10:22 pm on May 11, 2003)

lostsoul

12th May 2003, 00:06

I don't think its good for drugs to be legalised, since many people turn to it when times are bad. Kind of like an escapse of reality. Many people use it to try to forget about their problems and just chill, which makes them not usually take their problems as seriously.

Because of that, and a few other reasons, i agree with Chairman mao, users and dealers should be treated harshly inorder to prevent people from using it.

Its benifts are nothing compared to the problems it causes.

RedJaX

12th May 2003, 03:04

I'm definitely of the opinion that marijuanna should be legalized, and that's not because i smoke it. Look at the money the filthy government wastes on enforcing the laws everyday, when it could be put towards such better use. Weed is not nearly as harmful, or addictive as countless other things on the market, even alcohol, which is so often thought of as completely harmless. Anyone who has a real problem with my views, let me know, im sure we could have a very involved conversation about it. cheers.

Guest1

12th May 2003, 03:12

oh no, they use it to forget problems, that's so bad! face it, sometimes people just need to chill, if it makes them happy, whatever, as long as they don't become dependant. I drink and smoke weed. If I had to choose, I would rather my friend hit the joint when he's down.

Stop trying to control people. Punish them for hitting someone when drunk, not for relaxing on the grass in a park after smoking up.

lostsoul

12th May 2003, 04:22

Quote: from Che y Marijuana on 3:12 am on May 12, 2003
oh no, they use it to forget problems, that's so bad! face it, sometimes people just need to chill, if it makes them happy, whatever, as long as they don't become dependant. I drink and smoke weed. If I had to choose, I would rather my friend hit the joint when he's down.

Stop trying to control people. Punish them for hitting someone when drunk, not for relaxing on the grass in a park after smoking up.

if people could do it without being dependent, i would be for it. But even if one person gets dependent on it, it has ruined one life. As socialist, aren't we suppose to look after society? and don't individuals make up the society? so if one individual gets fucked, the society gets fucked.

hope my logic makes sense

Som

12th May 2003, 04:27

It doesn't.

Stop thinking you should run peoples lives for them. They get dependent, thats their fuckup, and their choice. The government needs no part in that.

(Edited by Som at 4:27 am on May 12, 2003)

death b4 dishonour

12th May 2003, 05:27

I'm for legalization. Police could be diverted from busting people for minor shit like pot and be assigned to more important things like looking for murderers/rapists.. etc.

Guest1

12th May 2003, 05:32

don't you think that the billions of dollars spent on arresting those who don't get dependant could be better spent on helping those who do? what happens when you send someone dependant into jail? he gets depressed for 5-10 years, YOU fucked up his life, then he comes out and he's smoking even more, maybe even doing crack or smack.

The problem with society is not drugs, the problem with society is arrogant people fucking up people's lives rather than helping them.

lostsoul

12th May 2003, 07:03

i can't debate this topic with you..to be honest i'm 50/50. I hate drugs and have seen it fuck up people's livies. Yet they make my weekends fun. I guess im just a hypicote.

But i still think a society without drugs would be alot better off then a society with them. Some people it has a good effect on, like some freinds smoke weed like cig. and drop e's every weekend and yet their in med. school. Others do simlair amounts and live in group homes and have problems holding down jobs. If everyone had postive effects i would legalise it, but it seems that many don't.

take care

Guest1

12th May 2003, 07:38

no I'm not saying it's harmless. I'm saying, yes if it was possible not to have any harmful effects, that would be great, but that's not gonna happen. All we are doing is:

a) driving problem users underground so they don't seek help for fear of arrest

B) wasting shitloads of money on arresting the majority, the non-problem-users when we could be using all of that money on building massive education campaigns and de-tox centers.

This reminds me of certain countries that still spend a shitload of money arresting people for anal sex instead of investing in education on the use of condoms in order to prevent aids and treatments for patients. It's the exact same thing.

notyetacommie

12th May 2003, 07:43

I would ban drugs along with the alcohole. I've been robbed in the street by 3 drug takers, I've seen a lot of kids who are alcoholics starting from age 4, who imitate their parents/other adults and screw their lives before they even reach maturity. I also know kids who go around selling drugs (as they are kids, they wouldn't be punished, that's what their parents rely on)

It is well-known that a person can become an alcoholic by starting to drink beer and then switching to stronger alcoholic drinks-in Russia it means vodka. The same can happen with drugs-once a person gets used to lighter drugs, they could be easely convinced to use heavier drugs. You know, what I read in this thread is shocking- so many "commies" are in fact stoners... Or would like to have other people be stoners...

Anyway, it is much easier to manipulate drug takers ( or alcohol takers, for that mater). As for the positive results, cannabis addiction and the effect on the brains- none of the stoners that I knew in college stopped smoking weed over 6 years since the graduation, they all smoked tobacco as well as weed, they all drank A LOT, none of them received the "honours diploma", so I think - no, I wouldn't want this to happen to my kids, I want them to live in a society where drugs=medicine, not the means of self-destruction, be they banned or legal(BTW, drugs are banned in Russia now, but everyone knows where to find the dealer, and the police... they are making money by protecting, "covering for" the mafia. Some are dealers themselves) If you make drugs as accessable as alcohole, you will have the same problems caused by alcohole, increased tenfold.

ÑóẊîöŉ

12th May 2003, 09:07

Let's get one thing straight; people will abuse substances no matter what their legality, be it alcohol, caffeine or marijuana.
notyetacommie, you say you have been robbed in the street by drug users. don't you think had they legally been able to grow/produce their own without fear of arrest or having to go to a drug dealer who probably sells drugs at an exorbitant price? Most junkies rob people to get money to fund their habit. so if they could produce their own for free, the they would not need to steal to fund their habit.
I say legalise most (If not all) drugs and make the knowledge on how to make/grow them widely available so that those who want to try drugs can do so without going to a dealer.

notyetacommie

12th May 2003, 12:19

What the difference will that make? They can grow it now as there's little that the police are doing to stop it. My point was: they probably started with marijuana first, then switching to other stuff in much the same way people start with beer and end up with vodka and (this is true!!!) pure spirits, technical spirits and eue-de-cologne. Anyway, all people that I know smoking weed tried heavier drugs as well. This spells disaster for those with lack of will.
Another point that I would like to make. My neighborhood which has a very bad reputation, is covered with used syringes, they are all over the place, by the door of my own apartment as well (someone took a shot right on the front stairs ). Having all these stoners and knowing that Irkutsk, my home town, a town with a population less than a million, goes third in Russia in terms of AIDS-infected, and that the pesthole of the disease (a technical school where most of the students have tried drugs at least once in their lifetime) is only 20-minutes away if you walk on foot - knowing all this, it's hard to want to make the stoners legalized. And if you do this, how will you be able to prosecute dealers who would be engaged in a legitimate business? Do you really think that those people who rob in the streets, once given the right to grow their own weed, while ALREADY being on heavier drugs, while having no jobs/skills, will grow weed and be satisfied? Bans could be different. For some reason, in the Soviet times in the USSR there hasn't been a drug problem THIS big. Yes, it might not have been the most democratic country imaginable, but talking about democracy for drug takers and criminals (which is what we de facto have now in Russia) and non-democracy that violates the rights of criminals and-yes,-drug takers so that law abiding citizens could enjoy a safer life - I am definitely for "non-democracy". This whole subject reminds me of the situation with Afghanistan. With the US invasion of Afghanistan, the drug traffic on the NIS borders has increased 5 to tenfold. An Americal military who was in charge of drug issues, when asked why didn't they destroy the poppy fields in the country said something like: Why should we? It's their business, they live off drugs, they make money growing poppy.

ÑóẊîöŉ

12th May 2003, 12:52

NYAC,
Like I said earlier in my other post, all substances can be abused. I reckon overuse of a mild drug (Marijuana) can lead to decreased sensitivity to that mild drug, resulting in the user seeking stronger drugs for greater effect, and so beginning a viscious circle. Remeber it's abuse of a substace that starts off this circle, and abuse is a sign of something that's wrong with that person. (Family troubles Etc.)
I mean, how many people drink beer, that legal drug, without abusing it or going on to pure spirits?

(Edited by NoXion at 1:47 pm on May 12, 2003)

notyetacommie

12th May 2003, 13:12

Many young people who are not alcoholics yet. A lot of them - like 50% or something- will be heavy drinkers by 40, some will die before reaching this age. Alcohol is one of the major reasons life expectancy for men in my country is 62 years. Anyway, you call it abuse-do you mean to ssay people will not be abusing drugs should they be made legal?

redstar2000

12th May 2003, 13:20

The next step in the "war on drugs"...

http://austin.indymedia.org/front.php3?art...8&group=webcast (http://austin.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=7348&group=webcast)

America, the land of shit!

:cool:

kylie

12th May 2003, 13:29

theres a number of different perspectives from which the idea of drugs under socialism can be looked at.
while it should be allowed to be consumed communist society, as to not do so would mean a decrease in rights, which can only be justified if it aids counter-revolution, i dont think it should be encouraged. just like all unhealthy activities should not be encouraged, smoking, cutting yourself, etc.
but thats just from a consumption point of view. for production, we would have to be in a very advanced communist world to be able to justify using labour on production of this. even if it just on a small scale, the resources and land when combined with all other small scale productions of it would result in a significant amount of the said factors.
But whether this benefit would be greater than the loss resulting from having to enforce this law is unknown, and only would be until after enforcing a ban on production.

(Edited by feoric at 1:41 pm on May 12, 2003)

(Edited by feoric at 1:42 pm on May 12, 2003)

ÑóẊîöŉ

12th May 2003, 13:54

Redstar2000: They did all that to go after Cannabis growers????? one of the milder drugs? I've never understood the the US's hardline stance on the tiniest ounce of weed, for which you can go to jail for. That is fucking ridiculous.

feoric: When I talk about growing/making your own, I assume that you will do it in your own free time, and therefore not cut into whatever work you're doing.
Also: As with drinking, if you are going to take drugs, especially drugs which affect you for more than a few hours (12-24 Hrs.) do it on a weekend or something so by the time you go back to work your brain is firmly affixed to reality.

Moskitto

12th May 2003, 15:46

use them in your own home or somewhere where other people don't mind you using them and leave it at that.

Although drink/drug driving should have severe penalties and blood samples should be allowed to be collected from unconcious suspects for conviction.

GWF

12th May 2003, 17:20

I come from Holland, were it is almost 100% legal, it is less harmfull than alcohol and hemp can be used 4 more than 150 goals, non drug like.

Legalize it, and shroomz too.

Harmless Games

12th May 2003, 21:30

Seems i have struck quite a sensative coord here. Well I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents. Weed may cause slight lazyness but much less so that someone who is drunk or under the influence of any other . I dont know about you guys but I'm on the school orienteering team, and I smoke while orienteering all the time, it is not some way to get away from problems or anything. If i have some project due and I smoke all i can do is think about the project, its strange and maybe its just me but i feel is helps motivate me to do things better or more efficiently. I write school papers while stoned on a regular basis, and go to work stoned even more. Am i addicted? no
I can go months without weed. Do i enjoy being stoned? Yes. Do i smoke cigarettes? No, and I dont drink alcohol or do other either, and i dont feel the need for a better high as I am so often told by people who have never smoked the stuff before, but what do i know? The key is moderation, if your going to go to work, dont smoke so much that you have to concentrate on breathing, so smoke according to your own situation, or as Marx would say "From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need" ok, so thats kind of a strech but oh well.

(Edited by Harmless Games at 9:38 pm on May 12, 2003)

(Edited by Harmless Games at 9:47 pm on May 12, 2003)

rAW DEaL bILL

12th May 2003, 21:45

if drugs were legalized there would be such a lower crime rate. there wouldnt be drug lords because u could buy the drugs at a convineint store. there wouldnt be drug killings for the same reason. not only that but u can make so much stuff outta hemp for cheaper than trees and shit. more food more paper etc... also marijuana is actualy a lot better for people than alchohal and a lot harder to get addicted too. other drugs are much more addictive and worse for the human body but like i said it would still lower crime and hey if people wanna fuck up their lives on heroin they can do it illegally just as well as legally except theres the murders and fucking people over for junk incvolved etc... i think all drugs should be legalised.

lostsoul

13th May 2003, 02:23

friends...

please explain something to me..
Why do people do/need drugs of any kind? why do people pay to get intoxiacated?

Don't you feel their are other more effective ways to acheive the results they wish for? also, don't you feel the money could be better spent?

do you not agree that drugs can cause addictions? Why would be want to go easier on things that cause our people to be addicted? we should be harsher on them.

Although i agree most countries spend alot of money on arresting dealers..i personally think its nessary. Yes, the finincial cost is high, but in efforts to sheild our people from addictions and altered consious(if we are to make our societies stronger, we need to constantly be in top mental condition..we should be promoting more studying..not legalising drugs..). Although weed is not bad, i consider it a gateway drug..no one(or anyone i have seen) started directly on herion or coke..first cigs.then weed...then harsh..then e's...then coke(or something else..at least that was my path).

take care

notyetacommie

13th May 2003, 02:34

lostsoul, I am with you here! Someone here said something like: " I 've been smoking weed for 11 years and I can say it's not addictive." Are you for real, lady? I would say doing something for more than 10 years IS addictive, be it consuming drugs or eating junk food.

lostsoul

13th May 2003, 02:37

Quote: from notyetacommie on 2:34 am on May 13, 2003
lostsoul, I am with you here! Someone here said something like: " I 've been smoking weed for 11 years and I can say it's not addictive." Are you for real, lady? I would say doing something for more than 10 years IS addictive, be it consuming drugs or eating junk food.

i admit though that many people do quit as they get older, it requires alot of will power, and ones that don't quit are the ones who are the reason it shouldn't be legal.

Right now only a part of the population does it, and many people are addicted. If an entire population was exposed to it, i would think their would be a higher addiction rate.

Som

13th May 2003, 03:41

Why do people do/need drugs of any kind? why do people pay to get intoxiacated?

Don't you feel their are other more effective ways to acheive the results they wish for? also, don't you feel the money could be better spent?

do you not agree that drugs can cause addictions? Why would be want to go easier on things that cause our people to be addicted? we should be harsher on them.

Because its their body, and their choice.

Thats the only reason you need.

People now often get addicted to the internet, they get addicted to chocolate, they get addicted to pain pills, addicted to tv, so on so forth. Should we just abolish anything on the vague concept that since something might be addictive for a few people, then its inherently bad?

Although i agree most countries spend alot of money on arresting dealers..i personally think its nessary. Yes, the finincial cost is high, but in efforts to sheild our people from addictions and altered consious

Why not just treat the people that people that need it?

That is a lot cheaper, and alot more effective.

Like i've said, without an overly powerful police force, prohibition just doesnt work. Prohibition, not drugs, causes a huge amount of crime thats just unneeded. America has something upwards of 1 million people in jail on drug related offenses.

Then again, I'm not sure if you support a police force with nearly unlimited power, if you do it hinders the arguments a bit.

The gateway drug argument is weak as well, you said first it cigarettes, should we ban cigarettes too? I'd be you find that before cigarettes people drank coffee, Going to ban caffeine too?

Right now only a part of the population does it, and many people are addicted. If an entire population was exposed to it, i would think their would be a higher addiction rate.

"But Greg, if marijuanas legalized, then people will smoke it"

... Too late.

Again, your not aknowledging at all that pot use went down in the netherlands after it was legalized.

Do you really need to waste all that money and time, tossing away alot more peoples lives than drugs would, just so people do things your way?

Soul Rebel

13th May 2003, 03:43

Notyetacommie: hmmm, im the one who said they have been smoking for 11yr, but i never said it in the way you put it. But since we are on that topic- i dont think i am addicted because i dont feel i need it to get by. I can go days, weeks, months without it and feel fine. i can function properly. i choose to smoke it though- like after a long day at my university writing 20 page paper, or after a long day at work. it is just what i enjoy to do. whats the difference between me sitting at home smoking a joint or bowl and kids going to a bar to get waisted on a thursday night after classes are over?

Iepilei

13th May 2003, 03:47

drugs are used as a means of escapism from the daily "nuts-to-the-grindstone" forced upon by the bourgeoise on the working class. it helps you get away from the curse of capital.

sure, legalise it, but it won't last long when people realise that their lives are actually worth living without the use of mind-altering chemicals.

Guest1

13th May 2003, 06:26

not our place to ask why people use it. why do people play videogames, go to movies or read when they could stay in this reality and go to a park?

if a socialist system is to work, the onus must ALWAYS be ont he government to justify its laws, not on the people to justify the desire to do something the government has banned.

so let's pose this more democratically: why should these people not be allowed to use substances as long as they don't harm other people?

lostsoul

13th May 2003, 07:08

the reason they should not be allowed is because we have already pointed out there will be addicts. Wheather one or a million. In a socialist system, everyone in the society is working and helping each other, if a member is doing good the whole society benfits, and likewise if members are doing bad then the whole society suffers.

I fail to see any benfits addicts can give a society. Therfore its in the socities best intrest to prevent these harmful agents from reaching its people.

People here talk about how the goverment shouldn't spend money on policing the drugs, and just spend it on helping the addicts and the ones who's livies have been lost. Although i agree with this, that these people need more care, i can hardly understand some people points that by giving people access to drugs, they'll be less addicts.

I also disagree that addicts are only messing up their own livies. If that were true, i doubt anyone i know would quit. Families suffer..wifes..kids..brothers..sisters...everyone who depends on you or who's life is somehow connected to you. Although i am kind of using an extreme example, but everyone' addiction affects the ones around them to some extent..

Som -
i agree with almost everything you said. I just personally feel right now, the time is not right for making it legal. I don't think people are ready for it yet. If they rush and go to fast, then the people will become highly addicted in large numbers..if they go to slow with the process then the people will get pissed off and the underground drug market will grow.

I hope i'm wrong, but right now i don't think it can nor should be considered, let alone be done since it will probally cause more harm then good at this point in time.

take care

ÑóẊîöŉ

13th May 2003, 09:12

Quote: from lostsoul on 7:08 am on May 13, 2003
the reason they should not be allowed is because we have already pointed out there will be addicts. Wheather one or a million.

And also wether drugs are legal or not. Legality makes no difference.

In a socialist system, everyone in the society is working and helping each other, if a member is doing good the whole society benfits, and likewise if members are doing bad then the whole society suffers.

Alcohol is legal, but is the entire population drunk? no.
It's all down to abuse. it's abuse, not responsible use, that causes problems. and getting stoned is about as detrimental to society as getting drunk at a party. you seem to think that if drugs were legalised, everyone would start taking them, even at work. do you drink at work? The key thing here is education.

I fail to see any benfits addicts can give a society. Therfore its in the socities best intrest to prevent these harmful agents from reaching its people.

Riiiight and how are you going to stop the flow of drugs? people will get them legal or not.

People here talk about how the goverment shouldn't spend money on policing the drugs, and just spend it on helping the addicts and the ones who's livies have been lost. Although i agree with this, that these people need more care, i can hardly understand some people points that by giving people access to drugs, they'll be less addicts.

Druglords often force their 'customers' to continue the habit. if by legalisation you get rid of the druglords, then there'll be less 'pushing' and therefore less addicts.

I also disagree that addicts are only messing up their own livies. If that were true, i doubt anyone i know would quit. Families suffer..wifes..kids..brothers..sisters...everyone who depends on you or who's life is somehow connected to you. Although i am kind of using an extreme example, but everyone' addiction affects the ones around them to some extent..

Again, addiction to anything can happen, and extremes happen less often tan you think.

Som -
i agree with almost everything you said. I just personally feel right now, the time is not right for making it legal. I don't think people are ready for it yet. If they rush and go to fast, then the people will become highly addicted in large numbers..if they go to slow with the process then the people will get pissed off and the underground drug market will grow.

As the British Government is so fond of saying, Education, education, education. Teach people about the dangers and pitfalls of drugs as you would drink. Always use in moderation.

I hope i'm wrong, but right now i don't think it can nor should be considered, let alone be done since it will probally cause more harm then good at this point in time.

I beg to differ, but that is my opinion.

take care

You too.

mentalbunny

13th May 2003, 16:19

I agree to a large extent, lostsoul, but sometimes it's nice to get wasted. However I really don't get people who smoke everyday and drink every weekend, but that's just me and I don't have the resources to do that even if I wanted to.

Rastafari

13th May 2003, 19:50

Legalize it, and don't criticize it
Or at least seperate Hemp from Pot legally so Hemp can be grown, bringing some money to the farmers of my homeland. At least make it medicinal in all 50 states, so patients can be treated decently.
Besides, its good for Pnuemarathrombosis, whatever the hell that is, acc. to Peter Tosh

Ghost Writer

13th May 2003, 20:44

Dont' Criticize it? I'm sorry, but lack of critical thinking is the sign of a real moron. Thank you for providing further evidence of the type of ignorance that popular music has the ability to foster.

Marajuana is not 100% safe, and its medicinal value is questionable. If marajuana were legalized, I would most certainly advocate putting its effects and medicinal use under the critical scrutiny of the sciences. Fact is, not enough studies have been done respecting marajuana.

A critical look at the substance is most certainly a necessity, especially if someone backs its legalization. Alcohol and cigarettes are legal substances. I think it would be pretty irresponsible of a society to take the same line as Peter Tosh, and state that these legal substances should not be subjected to any further scrutiny, based solely on the fact that they were made legal.

Although Tosh was an excellent musician, I would hardly look to a Rastafarian when it comes to political and scientific thinking. In short, don't be an ignoramous.

(Edited by Ghost Writer at 7:47 am on May 14, 2003)

Harmless Games

13th May 2003, 23:59

Do you know why not enough studys have been done? Because the goverment will not let colleges or institutes perform studies! The U$ goverment only allows its own studies which are heavily biased and only release information that will support he goverment in its views. Please those of you who dont support hemp go to your local library and pikc up the book "The Emperor Wears no Clothes" By Jack herer, hemp isnt just used as a dr(_)g, it can be used to make bio-degradable paper which doesnt involve the dying and bleaching of the pulp which causes huge waste, but also it can be used as an efficient gasoline alternative, can be used for food, medicines, cloathing, and numerous other things. hemp is fast growing and if it replaces the current lumber industry is could stop global warming within 5 years and could reverse the destruction of the ozone veyr quickly.

(Edited by Harmless Games at 12:01 am on May 14, 2003)

lostsoul

14th May 2003, 02:18

Quote: from Harmless Games on 11:59 pm on May 13, 2003
Do you know why not enough studys have been done? Because the goverment will not let colleges or institutes perform studies! The U$ goverment only allows its own studies which are heavily biased and only release information that will support he goverment in its views. Please those of you who dont support hemp go to your local library and pikc up the book "The Emperor Wears no Clothes" By Jack herer, hemp isnt just used as a dr(_)g, it can be used to make bio-degradable paper which doesnt involve the dying and bleaching of the pulp which causes huge waste, but also it can be used as an efficient gasoline alternative, can be used for food, medicines, cloathing, and numerous other things. hemp is fast growing and if it replaces the current lumber industry is could stop global warming within 5 years and could reverse the destruction of the ozone veyr quickly.

(Edited by Harmless Games at 12:01 am on May 14, 2003)

i have only heard rumors of its other uses, so thanks for pointing me out to the proper direction for furthur research.

Yet i disagree with you saying the goverment isn't doing things to understand drugs. A friend of mine works for the univesity of toronto, and was in charge of researching the effects of cocain on the human brain. They would give coke to rats, then put them in liquid nightrogine and freeze them fully..then cut their heads open and study their brains.(its actually pretty intresting, and i heard they got a few ounces of coke to work with). Researchers are getting access to drugs so they can understand it. Research has been put in..but perhapes maybe not to a level that sasfitfies you.

Urban Rubble

14th May 2003, 02:44

Lost Soul, you said that you fail to see how addicts can benefit from society. Are you serious ? Do you know how many people are "addicted" to caffeine that still go function as productive members of society ? I'm sure with the amount of herb I smoke that I would be considered addicted, but that does NOT cause me to be some piece of shit leeching off the system. I go to work everyday and function just like a normal human, the difference is I like to smoke a little weed to relax after work instead of drinking alchohol. Do you really consider me no good if I like to smoke ? That's ridiculous.

Also, whoever says there is no medical use is either A, a moron or B, someone who has never smoked. Weed is used to cure the nausea caused by chemo, not to take away cancer. I can tell you from first hand experience that weed takes away nausea perfectly. I can be sick as hell, smoke a joint and feel fine.

redstar2000

14th May 2003, 03:42

Consider carefully what you "ban"...because of what you create when you ban anything.

You create: prisons, prisoners, prison guards, police, courts, judges, lawyers, victims, corruption, brutality, sadism, homosexual rape, and murder.

Is your prejudice against a particular form of "chemical recreation" so great that you are willing to create this hydra-headed monster to...well, not to "stop" it because you can't do that no matter what you do, so, to reduce it?

Yes, every society has decided and will decide that some things must be banned no matter what the cost...premeditated murder, for example.

But that is not what we are talking about here. We're talking about a form of recreation that you "disapprove" of...that you maintain is "harmful" to the individual or to the individual's family or to society as a whole.

But think! How much harm would you do to all concerned by the erection of a monstrous police-state tyranny to enforce your prejudice?

I hope you all read that link that I posted; it may help you answer my question.

:cool:

synthesis

14th May 2003, 06:06

Rastafari, I do believe the word is "tubercolosis"...which marijuana has apparently been shown to help.

And I agree with Norman on just about everything... except the part about never taking a Rastafarian seriously. They had some damn good thinkers in their ranks.

notyetacommie

14th May 2003, 06:17

You seem to be making a strange point, redstar2000. You seem to be claiming that prisons, prisoners, prison guards, police, courts, judges, lawyers, victims, corruption, brutality, sadism, homosexual rape, and murder- all these are the direct result of banning drugs. DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS WILL ELIMINATE ALL YOU HAVE LISTED? What do you smoke, anyway? Everything that you listed has existed for centuries before the drugs issue was raised.
You will not only legalize drugs, you will also legalize narco mafia, baby.

ÑóẊîöŉ

14th May 2003, 10:09

Well, when you ban a drug you'll need prisons to keep the inevitable lawbreakers out of society, which creates prisoners. You will need prison gaurds to keep the prisoners in line. You will need to police to apprehend these lawbreakers. You will need courts to insure that 'justice' is done. Judges to decide the verdict. lawyers for defence and prosecution. Victims of drig abuse will be those who had their valuables stolen by an addict to fund his habit - he wouldn't have to pay a dealer to buy illegally what he should be able to make legally for next to nothing in his own home. Corruption because there's a lot of money involved in drugs, and some cops want cash as well.
Brutality will certainly be in the prisons mentioned earlier.
Sadism, homo rape and murder also happens in prisons.

Of course these things existed before drugs' legality was an issue. but these thing increased tenfold when drugs were illegalised.In my opinion the more you try and fit humanity into the straightjacket of Law, the more repressed a society you develop.
These things won't be eliminated. But they will certainly be reduced.
Does the current legal alcohol and tobacco industry use violence? maybe it does, but certainly not to the degree that illegal drug traffickers do. You think, if drugs were legalised, they wouldn't need to use violence to ensure the authorities don't know about their business.
Once the drug rings are turned into legitimate businesses, they will be pacified.

Moskitto

14th May 2003, 10:32

when you legalise drugs you remove the narco mafia because people are able to get drugs from legitimate sources and avoiding the narco mafia. Although you don't get rid of prisons, you save police time for more serious criminals, police should persue dealers, not users.

Guest1

14th May 2003, 18:24

Ok, let's make this simple.

Amsterdam.

In Amsterdam there was a small rise in the use of Marijuana just after effective legalisation, for a short period of time. People went out and tried it.

Then it dropped. To less than when it was illegal.

That's it. Simple.

Som

14th May 2003, 20:42

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS WILL ELIMINATE ALL YOU HAVE LISTED? What do you smoke, anyway? Everything that you listed has existed for centuries before the drugs issue was raised.
You will not only legalize drugs, you will also legalize narco mafia, baby.

In the United States 1 million people are in jail because of drug related offenses. A large percentage of these are even non-violent offenders.

Thats 1 million trials, thats 2 million lawyers, thousands of appeals, thats millions of police officers, thats hundreds of prisons, thousands of murders, billions of dollars in crime, and of course around 12% of the worlds prisoners.
and thats in the United States alone.

You don't legalize the gangs and the mafia, you get rid of their source of income, you destroy the gangs and mafia. When the risk is taken out, the prices and the profits drop, and no one will risk getting drugs from gangs when they can get it from the corner store.
It definitely wont 'legalize the narco-mafia', it'll just set up a new industry, which at least we can tax and wont be killing people over a few city blocks. That industry will be no more a gang than tobacco and alcohol.

Its also nice to mention its not just gangs in this country, american prohibition of drugs essentially funds all sides of the colombian civil war.

the reason they should not be allowed is because we have already pointed out there will be addicts. Wheather one or a million.

I'm addicted to the internet, going to ban that too?

There are plenty of alcoholics, going to try and ban that too? we've seen what happens when you try that.

If they rush and go to fast, then the people will become highly addicted in large numbers..if they go to slow with the process then the people will get pissed off and the underground drug market will grow.

No, they wont, and it makes about as much sense to say that as saying everyone over 21 immediately jumps into alcoholism.
But just like with alcohol, a good portion don't need it to be legal to abuse it.

But all that really neglects that alcohol is a substance ingrained into most western society, crack and heroin aren't. Chances are if someone was going to get addicted to that, they already have, and aren't just itchy to get their hands on something they cant get.

but im just repeating everyone else. ah well.

Harmless Games

14th May 2003, 21:59

I just want to know, how many people who have posted here drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes AND smoke weed?

Most will only smoke weed and not drink or do cigarettes or other , this is how it is with me and my friends, but i dont know about everyone else. Anyone who drinks alcohol better save their breath because i wont listen to any of your arguments about how weed causes addiction or problems, because in comparison to alcohol, weed is asprin.

I guess its true Weed has helped me to stay away from alcohol and cigarettes. So would it be politicaly incorrect to say that weed is my anti-drug?

WUOrevolt

14th May 2003, 22:31

commie for legilazation.

Invader Zim

14th May 2003, 23:24

I heard that legalisation of cannabis will reduse the number of people who take hard drugs as well. This because when you go to a dealer for weed then the dealer may offer you a stronger drug as well. Of course most people reject these drugs, however those that dontwould take the stronger drugs etc and get addicted over time. Legalise cannabis there will be no dealers, there for cutting out this element of the chain to hard drugs.

Well thats what i heard on some tv program anyway, whether its true or not i dont know... but it makes sense to me.

Urban Rubble

15th May 2003, 05:11

There is no excuse for doing a drug like heroin or crack or PCP. Almost everyone in the world knows that shit is bad for you, if you take it you are either stupid or weak willed, period.

lostsoul

15th May 2003, 05:33

you still haven't proven the cons of it over power the pro's.

Just because hemp can make clothes..or weed isn't as addictive as achocol, is no reason for its legalization.

Here's your logic:
Internet is addictive, but it is not banned so neither should weed.

Well. Drinking Gasoline is more dangerous then drinking beer. Maybe they should ban Gasoline too? Anything can be dangerous, although also its true anything can the potenial of getting abused. I feel some things are more likely to be abused then others.

I understand some points of how weed can be used for other products..but tell me, can weed be used to build schools? feed the poor? educate people?

Explain how it benfits society, please. and please don't post those messages "well..the profits from it can go into buiding..." thats retarded because the profits from selling cookies can go into doing good for the community too. All its benfits can be matched threw other things.

I am just personally against things that make people not think clearly..even if its for a short period of time.(yea yea..i know acholcol does it too..).

notyetacommie

15th May 2003, 10:57

Someone said here that drugs should be legalized because it's people's choice, it's their bodies they chose to intoxicate. Well, sounds like pushing people to suicide- "it is their choice!" Or euthanasia. Or prostitution, for that matter!

Guys, I know many of you are just kids, and your reasoning reflects your adolescence periode, but would you really like your children to live in the world where all kinds of drugs will be easily accessible?

In Russia, vendors sell alchohol and tobacco to 10 year old kids, no matter what regulations there are: I am sure this will also happen with hemp, or heroin, should they be legalised. And to prevent this, you will have to create new police forces, etc.

The same will happen in all the developing nations. Do you want this to happen?

Dhul Fiqar

15th May 2003, 12:35

You all seem to be making a very strange assumption:

"People don't do drugs because they fear jail."

To my knowledge this is totally untrue. Most people I know would never do drugs, and it has nothing to do with being afraid of jail! Do you think your grandma would be shooting up on heroin right now if she wasn't afraid of the 5-0 busting her? I don't think so.

There would be a marginal increase in usage, but it would taper off. There should be tight regulation of ALL intoxicants, including alcohol which is one of the most damaging ones, but making them illegal is ridiculous. Putting people in jail for taking a chemical and putting it in their own body is a joke and an insult to taxpayers and personal freedoms. Simple as that.

--- G.

notyetacommie

15th May 2003, 13:17

Yeah, but there ARE people who put chemicals in other people's bodies-for profit, or control, or murder- imagine your grandma being stoned by someone. And these people would be doing legitimate things-according to your logic.

scott thesocialist

15th May 2003, 16:16

free the weed 'god gaves us all the seed baring plants on earth to use' i'm not in to religion but hey man come on whats wrong with the weed? people use harder drugs for different reasons to party stay awake get high a good trip,some people have no choice where born addicts, peer pressure and don't no one tell me junkies deserve what they get cause you don't know them or why the do drugs is and addiction the same as booze, cigs,gambling
free the weed and join the L.C.C

mentalbunny

15th May 2003, 16:45

Following the first point of scott the socialist in his last post, cannabis is basically a naturally occuring plant. Ok, so through breeding the strength of weed has increased about 10 times in the last 40 years but even so it's pretty natural.

I definitely think we need more research, and could people with facts and figures (i.e. Som and Che y Marijuana) include their sources in their post, then it's a bit more reliable. Sorry, I'm fussy about sources, otherwise it could be any old made up shit.

Urban Rubble

15th May 2003, 18:13

Lost Soul, you said we haven't proved the pros over the cons. I''m going to break from the Marijuana discussion and tell you why hemp should be legalized.

Hemp is one of (if not the most) strongest natural fibers in the world.

Hemp cloth is stronger, longer lasting, more resistant to mildew, and cheaper to produce than cloth made of cotton

Hemp can be used to make virtually anything that is currently made of cotton, timber, or petroleum

Until 1883, more than 75% of the world's paper was made with hemp fiber

In 1941 the Ford motor company produced an experimental automobile with a plastic body composed of 70% cellulose fibers from hemp. The car body could absorb blows 10 times as great as steel without denting. The car was designed to run on hemp fuel. Because of the ban on both hemp and alcohol the car was never mass produced.

Industrial hemp can replace cotton. Cotton is typically grown with large amounts of chemicals that are harmful to people, wildlife and the entire environment. Close to 50% of all the world's pesticides are sprayed on cotton. Hemp grows well in a wide variety of climates and soils. It requires far less fertilizer and pesticides than most commercial crops.

All parts of the hemp plant are useful

Hemp can be used to produce everything from fuel to soap

Industrial hemp can yield 3-8 dry tons of fiber per acre. This is four times what an average forest can yield. It can replace wood fiber and help save our forests. Trees take approximately 20 years to mature - hemp takes 4 months

Paper made from hemp lasts for centuries, compared to 25-80 years for paper made from wood pulp

I could go on and on, but I won't, I think that is sufficient reson to legalize hemp. The thing is, there isn't ONE single con to growing hemp, unless you consider business men losing money a con. Keep in mind, to get high off of hemp you'd need a doobie the size of a telelphone pole.

Rastafari

15th May 2003, 18:28

My great-grandfather made his living off of hemp rope for the Navy. The government used to charge farmers if they weren't growing it.

75% of both Washington's and Jefferson's money was made off of..._____.

Betsy Ross wove the original US flag out of ____Fiber

The Declaration of Independance was drafted on ____Paper.

The answer to these questions, as well as to many of the world's problems, is HEMP

Som

15th May 2003, 21:13

I definitely think we need more research, and could people with facts and figures (i.e. Som and Che y Marijuana)

Have heard the 1 million figure in lots of places, but doing a quick search brought up a few things.

thats ones just non-violent offenders, but keep in mind a lot of the violent offenders are in there as a result of drugs, like gang related crime.
http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/one_million/onemi...illionexec.html (http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/one_million/onemillionexec.html)

Us department of justice bits from:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dcf/correct.htm

"Prisoners sentenced for drug offenses constitute the largest group of Federal inmates (61%) in 1999, up from 53% in 1990. On September 30, 1999, Federal prisons held 68,360 sentenced drug offenders, compared to 30,470 at yearend 1990."

Puts state prisons at about 22%

Also says that many of the other violent criminals, 14% i think, said that they did it to earn money for drugs. This doesn't include gang related crimes, which are essentially propped up by drugs.

I'm not going to bother adding up numbers, but its too much.

you still haven't proven the cons of it over power the pro's.

Just because hemp can make clothes..or weed isn't as addictive as achocol, is no reason for its legalization.

Then you havn't been paying attention or are just ignoring it.
Just read any of the other posts.
All the supposed negatives of having it legal are amplified by having it illegal.

When alcohol was made illegal, crime rose immensely and people still drank, it was definetly enough that they had to give up and relegalize it. Other drugs are no different, prohibition doesn't work.

Here's your logic:
Internet is addictive, but it is not banned so neither should weed.

Well. Drinking Gasoline is more dangerous then drinking beer. Maybe they should ban Gasoline too?

They shouldn't. Thats an argument against having it illegal.

I understand some points of how weed can be used for other products..but tell me, can weed be used to build schools? feed the poor? educate people?

Others have gone over how massively useful hemp is, and of course, if you legalize it, you produce an legitimate industry. You can tax industry.

Yes, cookies profits can too, that doesn't make drug profits any less, instead of having legitimate industry which you can tax, you have a massive and violent gang industry which holds the money itself in the hands of criminals. Not giving gang members a way to make lots of money isnt 'retarded'

Now, explain to me how cookies can build schools, feed the poor, and educate people? how about tv? Wheres the vast social usefullness of television? or most importantly relevant, alcohol.
Or maybe its just something that people enjoy doing. Thats all you need. Theres plenty of things people do that aren't usefull or even safe. THats no argument to ban them.

I am just personally against things that make people not think clearly..even if its for a short period of time.(yea yea..i know acholcol does it too..).

So basically, everyone has to do it your way?

But of course, you ignore that theyre going to do it anyway.

Someone said here that drugs should be legalized because it's people's choice, it's their bodies they chose to intoxicate. Well, sounds like pushing people to suicide- "it is their choice!" Or euthanasia. Or prostitution, for that matter!

Pushing? whos pushing? No ones forcing you to take drugs here, its not like we want to put it in the water supply.

But while we're at it, i think prostitution and euthanasia should be legal too.

Guys, I know many of you are just kids, and your reasoning reflects your adolescence periode, but would you really like your children to live in the world where all kinds of drugs will be easily accessible?

Too late.

(Edited by Som at 9:16 pm on May 15, 2003)

Sabocat

15th May 2003, 21:37

The U$ Declaration of Independence if I'm not mistaken is written on hemp.

My dad was going through chemo therapy for cancer. My precious government will not allow use of marijuana to alleviate the effects of the chemo. My dad had to use it at risk of arrest and imprisonment. It took all the symptoms of the chemo away, giving him a much higher quality of life. So much for the compassionate lawmakers eh?

Alcohol is far more detrimental to health and is responsible for most domestic violence and highway deaths due to a substance. Go to any battered womens shelter here in the U$ and ask them what the occurance of abuse due to alcohol was.

What marijuana lacks is the ridiculously strong/powerful lobby in congress that cigarettes and liquor companies enjoy.

I'm sick of the pious/righteous discussion on legalization of it. I've been to Amsterdam and I personally didn't see a society ruined by marijuana.

mentalbunny

15th May 2003, 22:21

Disgustipated, that's a great post!

Som, thanks for the figures.

Anonymous

15th May 2003, 22:35

If you aren't for the legalization of every drug..then you aren't a communist....its great how someone with the name "chairman mao" is against it...haha...mao a communist??...not even close...

People can get drugs now extremely easily, and they always will be able to...whether it is legal or not...but making it illegal simply makes it dangerous and actually will "force" children to do them, because they are "bad" and illegal...tell kids repeatedly not to do something, and they end up doing it....

I smoke pot, quite a bit...and i do great in school, actually i do better now than i ever have...probably a coincidence though...but it hasn't made me less intelligent, and in fact....it has allowed to me live...marijuana is a release just like a dream is...just to get away from the harsh reality of this world for a little bit...

If the government tells you what you can and can't put into your body, then the government must be destroyed....we live on this planet not to be controlled, but to work together...

if i do coke and am able to be a productive citizen in a communist society, then why should i be punished????

people aren't stupid...most people don't do drugs anyway...and i believe that less will if it was legal...just look at Amsterdam and then look at America...the war on drugs in the U$ is pointless and causes more problems than it solves...legalization is a must in a communist society

Soul Rebel

16th May 2003, 01:49

Disgustipated- my grandpa has had the same problem with chemo- loss of appetitie and dizzyness. Ive been trying to make him "special brownies or cookies" to ease it, but i cant take them out of my house cuz there are police everywhere. It also helps people with HIV/AIDS- they have so many diseases and infections to deal with, more than 30 pills a day, etc. and marijuana is the only thing that really helps ease the pain for them. And youre right- lawmakers have no compassion- they just dont care, even when those who are suffering keep telling them it hurts.

Where i live there is currently a session underway as to whether marijuana should be legalized for its medical benefits- hopefully it will pass because it will help so many people, like my loving grandfather who keeps losing weight from chemo.

lostsoul

16th May 2003, 06:04

the argument for legalisation is different then medical drugs. You can get steriods legally from your doctor, but its illegal to sell it on the streets.

In most places weed is like that, and continues to be like that.

Also i find it odd, other then for medical purposes i couldn't see any benfits of actually using it. the fact that "Until 1883, more than 75% of the world's paper was made with hemp fiber " isn't really in context since we're discussing users.

i will give a better reply in a few days..i'm pretty tried..but i'll leave with this question: Do you notice that many business people, or rich people don't use drugs as extremely as poorer? Of course some rich guys crackhead kids might start, but i doubt many entrupuners do it(this is a generalization i know..and it a point of view..but from my obersavations its pretty correct in most situation). I honestly believe one of the reasons people in poverty stay low is partly because of drugs in their communties.

On the point of amsterdamn.. they also have extremely high prostition, and from what i'm told orginized crime is very big there also.

take care

synthesis

16th May 2003, 06:19

I honestly believe one of the reasons people in poverty stay low is partly because of drugs in their communties.

Legalization would eliminate this problem because it would drive down the prices and make them consistently affordable, dismantle drug-based crime such as the cartels, and lessen the number of young men imprisoned for drug-related offenses.

Urban Rubble

16th May 2003, 06:39

LostSoul, your points are begining to deteriorate. I'm not even sure what drug you are talking about since you lump them all together. I agree, hard drugs like crack heroin and PCP should never be used, but weed DOES have positive effects.

Apart from the billions the world would save from growing hemp, marijuana (a different plant) can be used for many things.

1. Recreation, just like alchohol only more safe and less of a problem.

2. It cures nausea. I'm not sure if you've ever smoked but if you have you'll know nausea is an impossibility when high.

3. It keeps me sane. O.K, that's going a little far but it DOES calm me down, make me more at ease, makes me more creative and generally just makes you more happy.

All while being less harmful than alchohol.

Tell me this, why SHOULD it be illegal.

Dhul Fiqar

16th May 2003, 07:22

Quote: from lostsoul on 2:04 pm on May 16, 2003
the argument for legalisation is different then medical drugs. You can get steriods legally from your doctor, but its illegal to sell it on the streets.

In most places weed is like that, and continues to be like that.

Eh, NO! That's one of the biggest things that the legalization movements has pointed out, it's Schedule 1 almost everywhere, while Heroin is Schedule 2. Meaning that you can be prescribed Heroin, but not Marijuana.

A couple of States in the U.S., Canada, and maybe five European countries have made it semi-legal in a VERY limited trial run. And they only did it a few years ago, and they only did it after forty years of campaigning by legalization activists... People like us here in this thread ;)

So it's not like it's available to most patients, even where it's austensibly legal, and the only reason anyone has access is because of the pro-marijuana movement.

--- G.

Sabocat

16th May 2003, 11:08

Quote: from lostsoul on 11:04 am on May 16, 2003
the argument for legalisation is different then medical drugs. You can get steriods legally from your doctor, but its illegal to sell it on the streets.

In most places weed is like that, and continues to be like that.

Also i find it odd, other then for medical purposes i couldn't see any benfits of actually using it. the fact that "Until 1883, more than 75% of the world's paper was made with hemp fiber " isn't really in context since we're discussing users.

i will give a better reply in a few days..i'm pretty tried..but i'll leave with this question: Do you notice that many business people, or rich people don't use drugs as extremely as poorer? Of course some rich guys crackhead kids might start, but i doubt many entrupuners do it(this is a generalization i know..and it a point of view..but from my obersavations its pretty correct in most situation). I honestly believe one of the reasons people in poverty stay low is partly because of drugs in their communties.

On the point of amsterdamn.. they also have extremely high prostition, and from what i'm told orginized crime is very big there also.

take care

Prostitution is also legal in Amsterdam. So one certainly isn't causing the other.

The government has tried making a sanitized version of marijuana for patients on chemo in the form of a pill. The pill however doesn't work to the degree (or at all) of actually smoking the marijuana for some reason.

As for your reasoning that people in lower income brackets tend to partake of drugs in greater numbers, I would suggest that if you look at the statistics, you will find that alcohol is also more abused. Drive through low income neighborhoods and check out the billboards sometime. The poorer the section, the more advertisements you'll see for liquor, malt liquor, cigarettes etc. It's a simple fact of life that those suffering poor will try to find some relief from their life situations. An escape if you will. Currently, the big recipients of that are the big alcohol and cigarette companies. That's the only reason that marijuana hasn't been legalized. Don't kid yourself. Those companies don't want to lose market share.

mentalbunny

16th May 2003, 17:46

The Communist Threat, don't bring that "if you're not for legalisation, you're not a communist" stuff here, a lot of us aren't communists, so what? It's irrelevant and annoying.

I just want cannabis to be legal enough for people do to decent research and allow people to use it for medical reasons. Legalisation of drugs is not my main issue so I don't have much to say about it really.

The Communist Threat

16th May 2003, 21:32

well, i'd say the majority of this forum is communist, and some communist are against legalization...so, if you're not one...then good for you...but maybe you should find a neutral forum to post at, since "che" was not what you would call....a conservative prick...like those who are against legalization.

when the government controls what you can and can't put into you body, it is time for that government to be overthrown....control is a dangerous thing...

mentalbunny

16th May 2003, 21:51

The Communist Threat, I don't think you quite understand that you can be left-wing without being communism. I'm glad this has come up so we can sort it out. There is more than one kind of leftists, there are more kinds of leftists than there are colours in the rainbow, even more than that! There's every shade of red, both authoritarian and libertarian, don't restrict your terms to "communist", "neutral" and "conservative". Most of the board is leftist, I wouldn't say communist. And I've been here for 10 months so I think I'd know!

Harmless Games

16th May 2003, 21:56

About the THC (agent in weed that gets you high) Pills well, my friend was going through chemo and he got a prescription for pills, these pills were given to him because he would throw up all of his food when he tried to eat, well the problem was that the pills had to be taken withh a little food, or at least some water. The result: he would throw up the water and pill, so he traded the pills with me for smokable weed. Why is it ok in pill form? What is so bad about it? I enjoyed the THC pills in trade and would be fine with those, but i guess thats not the point. The goverment will do anythign to get around the cannabis plant, but why? For one the alcaholic and tabacco companys are heavy set against it, they know when people realize that it is less harmful, (and more fun!) they will be screwed. So they constantly lobby against it, and give money to partys that are against it, (bush recieved over a million dollars from philip morris: the owner of marlboro)

mentalbunny

16th May 2003, 22:53

I thought it was something else (can't remember the name) that did the medicinal stuff.

Dirty Commie

16th May 2003, 23:00

HG, I never thoyght about that. The alcohol and tobacco companies can't let a home growable alternative be legalized.

It would drive them out of business, you could buy seeds and grow it the rest of your life and never support tobacco + alcohol companies ever again.

The Communist Threat

16th May 2003, 23:10

hmm...no, i know you can be a leftist without being a communist...but you clearly can't be a communist and not a leftist...haha....this is more of a communist forum than anything else. so thats why i said it the way i did...if not a communist, at least an anti-capitalist....

but you aren't a leftist if you think pot should be illegal...unless you are like the fucks on the Hill, who are republicans and thats all....

Som

17th May 2003, 04:02

On the point of amsterdamn.. they also have extremely high prostition, and from what i'm told orginized crime is very big there also.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/DutchPolicyA...Statistics.html (http://www.ukcia.org/research/DutchPolicyAndCrimeStatistics.html)

Some statistics on crime and drug use in the netherlands that debunk any point you were trying to make with that.

Also i find it odd, other then for medical purposes i couldn't see any benfits of actually using it. the fact that "Until 1883, more than 75% of the world's paper was made with hemp fiber " isn't really in context since we're discussing users.

It is in context, its the plant as a whole thats illegal, not just the use.

I honestly believe one of the reasons people in poverty stay low is partly because of drugs in their communties.

Yes, it is drugs in their communities, but not the drugs themselves, again its the prohibition of drugs.
Not only are they easier to get because of prohibition, they are being peddled to them on their street corners, and its funding huge amounts of crime and gangs, why would they get 'real' work when they can sell drugs and make a thousand times more?

Oh sleep can't save you now from weak arguments.

but you aren't a leftist if you think pot should be illegal...unless you are like the fucks on the Hill, who are republicans and thats all....

oh don't fall into that, just because someones a leftist, doesn't mean they can't have crap beliefs with it, look at the stalinbots.

Dhul Fiqar

17th May 2003, 07:25

Dirty Commie: exactly, they are the main two lobbies keeping it illegal. It was even reported in the late eighties that Phillip Morris had a secret program to assess the viability of growing marijuana as a cigarette type crop in the event of legalization.

The report concluded that the cost efficiency was so much lower, the amount needed to be consumed so much less, and the ease of making your own weed so apparent, that they would never make a decent amount of money again if there were true legalization.

If I can find a html copy somwhere I'll link to it later.

--- G.

lostsoul

17th May 2003, 09:35

This topic thread has kind of soften me up to this point and opened my eyes to many points which previously were unknown to me.

I guess it comes down to how much you trust the people, some trust them alot(and therfore will give them totally freedom to do anything..which is why many support legalizing drugs..but on a side note, i suspect many since many people here use it, thats their main reason..to justify their own actions and make it legal), or the other half, think people should be protected from themselfs(therfore don't trust them enough to give them access to substances that could potientially be abused.

After researching and discussing this topic for the past few days, i no longer against legalistation, but i am still not for it(maybe restrititive use..like medical..or if it can be used to make products more effiecent or cheap). There still a chance that addictions grow and produtivity falls(althought from my reseach and his forum..i do believe its rare) which basicaly prevents me from being for it. A society with less restrictions had the pontenal to be great, or the same pontenal to break down...i guess its a risk that people are willing to take.

I think many of the capitialists/oldfashion people hate it because i think they see it as a gateway to more freedom for the people's freedoms. Yet the socialists who dislike it, are the ones who don't want it to harm any individuals or harm the society itselfs(The socialists people i spoke to, fear it simply because they don't want societies like the "red light" district to appear anywhere, because it causes more harm then good).

Right now, maybe a legalise for only certain circumstances..like medical..or products(but the form for the products is not really smokeable..i think). I stil don't think wide-spread legalastation will be good(maybe if its done in phases over a long period of time..maybe).

Anyways sorry for the long post :-)

Take care

Dhul Fiqar

17th May 2003, 10:52

More proof of your intelligence, lostsoul, the ability to accept good arguments is unfortunately rare, and thus I commend you on it :)

I think a big part of the debate is the Foucaultian concept of "discourse", that is to say there is an accepted way of communicating and producing knowledge about a particular subject.

That may sound a little complicated, but the basic premise is that once a debate has been framed within certain paramiters by the majority of society, it becomes very difficult for individuals to transgress those boundaries, even in the face of facts.

Thus we have many people who accept the fact that Israel was created on other people's land because of some old book they don't believe in, but they still look at Palestinians as terrorists aggressors because that is the way knowledge is communicated and created about Palestine in the West. I'm not comparing this to the legalization debate, just showing how discourse works to make even intelligent people resist rational arguments in favour of applying some general "feeling" of the situation.

The feeling most people have for the drug situation is that it's a bunch of dirty people up to no good and eventually it will kill you. Even those who support legalization have a hard time breaking from that discourse, or stereotype if you will even though that's a more limiting concept.

In any case, I'll start a discourse thread sometime to go more into that, but I suspect this particular legalization discussion has somewhat run it's course for now, at least I don't feel like taking much more part since I've simply done this debate too often and read too much on it to have any interest in repeating myself or others any further.

Still, glad we did it ;)

--- G.

mentalbunny

17th May 2003, 19:13

Wow, this debate actually did something! And lostsoul you are a true dude, you can open your eyes and look at new facts instead of sticking blindly to what you believed, you're a true leftist!

Pete

17th May 2003, 19:26

Marijuana. First made illegal in El Paso Texas as a way to discriminate against Mexicans who where working for rich Americans, about 120 years ago I believe.

The movie "Grass" is quite informative, and hilarious at the same time, for anyone who wants to look into the real reasons why marijuana is illegal...

GCusack

17th May 2003, 21:36

For legalisation, although i still wudnt use it! Smokings not good wen u play alot of sport, but other wise i probably wud!

WUOrevolt

18th May 2003, 01:18

marihuana should be 100% legalized. Most of the people who use it are teenagers or rastas. So by it being illegal the police are just targeting two groups of people. Cops should stop waisting their time running after pot smokers and go catch real criminals.

Guest1

18th May 2003, 02:12

My respect for you lostsoul is pretty high right now. Even if you don't agree with the pro-legalizers completely, it takes alot of maturity to look at the situation with an open mind like that.

FatFreeMilk

18th May 2003, 02:18

Drugs are bad.

Pete

18th May 2003, 02:26

FatFreeMilk: Why?

Harmless Games

18th May 2003, 03:52

Whats the longest post subject ever? I hope this one beats it. Yay for weed.

Urban Rubble

18th May 2003, 05:18

I will also jump on the congratulating Lost Soul bandwagon, why not, everyone else did =)

Just kidding. But seriously, all I have to say is this, why should it be illegal ? I don't know anyone who has ever ruined their life from weed. At the very least it's less dangerous than alchohol, and we know alchohol hasn't ruined society.

Pete

18th May 2003, 07:26

Harmless: Comrade Junichi's Thread had close to 2000 replies.

Dhul Fiqar

18th May 2003, 08:30

And let's hope we never see another monster like that again... ;)

lostsoul

18th May 2003, 16:21

Quote: from FatFreeMilk on 2:18 am on May 18, 2003
Drugs are bad.

i agree, and essinetly i think i was correct in my thoughts before, i don't change them. I just think i failed to look at the whole picture, only at its negatitives.

Like from an addiction point of view, its very bad(my only guildline before), but in my opinon it gives socities are sense of freedom. Which most likely will encourage more patrotism and bring closeness.

Another way i think it can strenghten the community, is because of something a friend of mine said to me a while ago(i forgot what we were talking about..but it had something to do with religion). he said "an angel can only do good, and the devils's demaons can only do bad. Nothing else. As humans we have a choice whether to do bad or good, but since we have a choice, if we choose a good route, it means we're even higher then angels, since they have no choice." Basicaly, i think weed is not extremely harmful if it does not become an addiction, and by giving people a choice, they should, in my theory, become more unified, have more courage and willpower(these two, in my opinion, are results of not doing drugs when their everywhere, or quiting).

I just think if you look at the big picture(not only the direct results..but the indirect results of the legalisation. Currently and in the future), i think it could have many benfits. (but it stil has the pontinal to completely backfire..just like any policy a country implements).

Take care

Dhul Fiqar

18th May 2003, 16:52

Well put :)

I think addiction is a key issue here, a lot of people equate illegal substances with addiction. Being an addict I'd like to make a slightly personal post about this, as I feel very strongly that addiction has nothing to do with specific intoxicants. The following is just my oppinion...

I would be the last person to make little of the negative effects of addiction, because it haunts my life pretty much every waking moment. Just a couple of months ago I had a drinking binge that must have lasted two weeks, when I stopped I had a pretty nasty physical and mental reaction, but that was part of my choice to go ahead and drink almost constantly for that time period.

But I am a polyaddict, not just a marijuana addict, and I was drinking like a fish before I ever tried marijuana, so I kind of take issue with the whole "just ban this and that and no one will have to suffer from addiction".

Basically I think blaming a chemical is pretty short-sighted, and a good way to fool yourself into thinking you didn't actually willingly fuck up your life, screw your friends over and generally do all the shitty things that many of us have done. No, no, it was just the drugs! They attacked me out of the blue and made me an addict and ruined my life!

I know myself well enough to know that it wasn't any one drug that's responsible for my addiction. It would take the absolute elimination of all forms of intoxication and instant gratification to stop my compulsive behaviour. I don't have access to weed right now, so I drink. If I couldn't drink I would probably just extract a little codeine from a pack of Tylenol or something. If Tylenol was banned I might even huff nitrous. If nitrous was banned I'd go masturbate furiously. If I was prevented from masturbation I'd eat chocolate and smoke cigarettes, etc. etc. etc.

Everyone gets pleasure from something, and everyone gets it in the same exact neurochemical way, the release and delayed re-uptake of of dopamine and serotonin basically (although it's actually a bit more complicated than that, that's still the basic situation).

Cigarettes, chocolate, codeine, winning a competition, orgasm, graduation, alcohol, getting a promotion, heroin, prozac, falling in love, marijuana, they all affect the basic brain chemistry to make us happy.

I'm not addicted to any drug except naturally occurring neurochemicals, taking certain drugs is just the most efficient way of releasing large amounts of it. And there in lies the problem, cutting out the middleman, that is the brain's natural reaction to events, is not conducive to a normal life. When you start relying on chemicals and not experiences for all your serotonin/dopamine needs, you become withdrawn from society and such isolation is known to lead to depression.

Of course, happiness is a fairly subjective emotion, you can't tell someone else he isn't happy, and the same way I believe there is no such thing as "fake" happyness, it's all just brainchemistry. However, the intense temporary nature of the way most recreational drugs raise the levels of these chemicals in the brain mean they usually cause what is called "down-regulation" in medical terminology.

Basically it means the brain notices you are currently the happiest motherfucker alive, and this can't be right because a human being doesn't function properly when overcome by way too much dopamine (you basically become numb, totally content to do nothing) or way too much serotonin (giggling, euphoria, running around licking people and telling them you love them).

Thus the brain decides it is producing WAY too much of these chemicals and starts to actually DISASSEMBLE ITSELF! It literally kills off parts of itself, the parts responsible for producing the "happy" chemicals. This is done because the brain assumes the raised levels are permanent when they are not, and it assumes it's actually fixing the balance to make you function properly.

If you stay high on anything for long enough, you will seriously degrade your brain's ability to naturally produce these neurochemicals, depression is almost a foregone conclusion. The brain has no way of realizing you're pumping in drugs that stimulate the release of neurochemicals independantly of it's own control mechanisms, it just assumes that it fucked up on it's own and starts cleaning up the mess. Long-term addiction thus leaving you with a brain no longer capable of producing the required amounts on it's own.

With some drugs, this effect seems to wear off, with others it's permanent. No one truly understands the whole re-uptake process, but it can be affected by using Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors like Prozac, meaning the brain doesn't need to produce as much serotonin any more because the rate in which it disappears is greatly slowed down.

But these drugs are new and science still has lots of unanswered questions about the brain and human emotion.

So, basically, I guess my point is that addiction sucks, but usually has nothing to do with any specific substance. I hope this was at least informative for both of you that read this far ;)

--- G.

lostsoul

18th May 2003, 18:20

i agree with you 100% Dhul Fiqar, if one pleasure giving substance is illegal then people will find something to replace it. The more things that are illegal the more deperate they may get(like children who don't have access to anything, that end up sniffing paint or permant markers..just to get "high"). But perhapes, if these substances are avaiable, then the people may get bored of it. (my thoughts on this are based on cigerretes, smoking is legal for people over 19, yet when i was in highschool me and everyone used to smoke like crazy..once we got older we all cut down. Same with me and weed, i used to smoke up alot, but after doing it so much i just got bored of it, and focused my enegries else where).

The remainder of your article on how drugs effect the brains ability to remain normal. Your basically discussing the negatitives of any addiction, but i am reminded of estacy pills, a very simlair thing happened to me. I used to drop e's and go clubbin, and when i tried to quit, i swear clubs were so boring. But there are so many people i know who when they were younger were not exposed to it and as soon as they meet a friend or gained access to some type of drugs they go crazy and get hooked.(those are the people who i was most worried about if drugs become legal).

But one good thing about this, is when these people end up over coming their obstaticals(just like you will), they will feel like theirs nothing in the world they can't do. It makes them extremely mentally strong(hmm you already seem strong..maybe if you get stronger the world will be in danger!) :-)

Anyways Take care.

Dhul Fiqar

18th May 2003, 20:12

Yeah, basically my biggest gripe with prohibition has been to watch people cause themselves physical harm because pharmaceutical quality drugs are not available to them, but only street crap cut with god knows what.

I watched people sterilize their spoon, open a fresh new disposable needle that no one else would use, take great care to use only distilled water to cook up. Then they'd take a big lump of fucking 80% dirt and 20% drugs (coke or speed usually), dump it in the spoon, suck it in their clean needle and shoot that crap into their veins.

It boggles the mind that such a thing is even survivable for more than a couple of times...
I just know that even if they had to pick crumbs of drugs out of dogshit, they would shoot it up. So basically providing clean gear is the least that can be done to preserve their lives and maybe even give them a shot at reforming at some point.
In any case, I'm all about harm reduction these days, having seen a lot of harm done by the two main culprits in the drug world, in order of anecdotal experience of casualty rates:

#1: Ignorance: Most drug users do not have access to or do not bother to look for information on what they are putting in their bodies.

#2: Blanket Prohibition: A lot of drugs people use are actually 90% adulterants, and many common adulterants are far more toxic than any psychoactive drug.

Anyway, I appreciate your kind words lostsoul, and I must say I respect your oppinion a great deal. I don't know about how 'strong' I can claim to be in any absolute sense, but so far I seem to have held up OK to the punishment I've put my mind and body through.

I've stopped taking uninformed decisions however, and have become as regular a poster on www.bluelight.nu as I am here. It's a site about harm reduction, if any of you are considering taking any drug you don't have information on, please consult this site or www.erowid.org because knowing what you are doing can save your life.

They provide information on anything related to informed drug usage, from dosage levels and administration methods to health risks and side effects. They even have a guide to making safer injections and how to test Ecstacy pills before you take them to make sure they don't contain life threatening chems like PMA. I've actually had a near-death experience by taking bad E, which contained PMA, so I definitely think it's worth checking it.
I can only hope that going sober in the future (which I fully expect to be my only option at some point) will make me a more valuable member for whatever (armed) struggle I end up taking part in ;)

--- G.

Urban Rubble

19th May 2003, 00:42

Good post(s) Dhul.

Basically this is what I believe (and basically what you said) if someone is weak enough to get addicted then that's their fault, not the drug. I am about as addicted to herb as you can be, I love the stuff, it makes me happy, but I don't for one second blame the weed, I blame myself for being weak.

Dhul Fiqar

19th May 2003, 05:15

Well, I don't know about "weak", that's a pretty loaded term. Everyone has some weaknesses, and some extremely strong individuals in history have been habitual drinkers and even opium users...

It has been speculated that those people most easily addicted have brainchemistry more succeptible to down-regulation, or have an abnormal re-uptake process. Basically, some people need to boost their pleasure levels with drugs to just reach the same baseline as those annoying "high on life" types get from just taking a nice walk in the morning.
In any case, I'd say it's more of a defect or slight disability than a "weakness", which is a fairly derogatory term. Still, in the end one always needs to face up one's own decisions.

--- G.

Urban Rubble

19th May 2003, 20:37

By weak I really meant weakness. Ya, it's a derogatory term, but every human being has weakness's, mine is liking the green stuff a little too much.

Harmless Games

21st May 2003, 03:30

Weakness? I like eating do i have a weekness for food? I enjoy sleeping more than usual, do i have a weekness for unconciousness? I enjoy candy and eat alot of it, does that mean i need to stop, just because i eat it alot? I wouldnt call smoking marijuana a weakness. Its a simple pleasure. Everyone needs some in their lives. So whats tje big deal?

Urban Rubble

21st May 2003, 04:15

Well, I wouldn't really call smoking herb a weakness either but I can see how one would.

Dhul Fiqar

21st May 2003, 07:58

Man, I wish I had some nice skunk right now! :(

Urban Rubble

21st May 2003, 20:06

I just got like an ounce for free. My uncle grows huge amounts out in Eastern washington, I got a free ounce of some good Jamaican and I got a rock hard ball of finger hash the size of a big marble !! All free !!

Moskitto

21st May 2003, 21:34

I've heard that first time you take heroin it's the most amazing feeling in the world. however it gradually becomes more crap and soon you become physically addicted.

I think i'll steer clear of all of it though, I'm pretty paranoid about everything to do with that, drug-testing, HIV, injecting something pretty damn toxic, overdosing, becoming involved in gang wars and sleezy mafia underworlds, becoming addicted, I'm paranoid.

Harmless Games

21st May 2003, 23:51

Uhhh, were talking about marijuana, i woudnt touch crack or cocain either, (Is there a difference?) Well, people dont understand what a marijuana high is, you dont experience hallucinations, or completely lose it (alcohol) its just, well you gotta try it. Anyhow i have never gotten any hash, is it a better high? I hear you smoke less since its basicly pure THC, well? Also how much does it cost? For really good bud what do you guys pay? I live in minnesota and lately it has been expensive, like 50 bucks an 8th, how about you all?

Urban Rubble

22nd May 2003, 03:16

I live in Seattle and our eighths are always $40. I never buy eighths though, waste of money, the more you buy the cheaper it is. I usually get ounces for like 200-220.

As for the heroin thing, I've known a few junkies (and read alot about Sid Vicious and Cobain) and they say the first time it sucks, but the second time is the one that gets you. After that the high stays the same, it just takes more every time to get you high.

scott thesocialist

22nd May 2003, 13:01

man NEVER touch brown shit like herion that stuff wil kill you an others around you. the samewith crack that stuff is more addictive that herion.stick to weed and i've got really high of some god shit and i was tripping see tracers with one of my mates, i was like man did you just see that he was like yeah fucking crazy stuff. acid is fucked up aswell but worth a go. its all to hard to explain you have to have done it to understand.

Urban Rubble

22nd May 2003, 21:20

I fully agree, stay away from the hard stuff. Some drugs are o.k for light use or "expeirementing" like LSD, Mushrooms, or Peyote. They aren't really addictive.

Moskitto

22nd May 2003, 23:10

I went downstairs to shut down last night and one of the insence sticks had a very strange aroma, it smelled like tobacco but not the smell of the smoke, the smell of pipe tobacco before it's burned (an old friend of mine used to smoke one), The aroma was a rather more pleasant than tobacco smoke.

black sheep.

22nd May 2003, 23:36

All drugs should be legalized for adults. But, only because we live in a capitalist society. You cannot fight drugs in a capitalist society with a high drug demand.
You save money and prison cells by making it legal in the USA. However, that does not mean abusing drugs is right. Under socialism a nation can fight drugs and prostitution and win. Under capitalism it is an impossibility unless there is a great moral change among the population. It might be possible to end the drug trade after a third world communist takeover. With capitalism and neo-colonialism eliminated there will be no high profits in growing and exporting drugs. It will be harder to bribe corrupt cops in Colombia.

HankMorgan

23rd May 2003, 07:22

Put me down for legalizing all recreational drugs for adult use. I'll take responsibility for my actions.

Dhul Fiqar

23rd May 2003, 10:11

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 11:16 am on May 22, 2003

As for the heroin thing, I've known a few junkies (and read alot about Sid Vicious and Cobain) and they say the first time it sucks, but the second time is the one that gets you. After that the high stays the same, it just takes more every time to get you high.

OK, heroin 101 ;)

This is pretty accurate, I got VERY sick the first time I did heroin, was completely incapacitated for the entire evening. It was relatively pleasant for extended periods, but when it hits you for the first time... well, let's just say most people vomit unctrollably and then collapse for the evening ;)

The euphoria doesn't change much in subsatnce untill you get up to really high dosage levels (I'm NOT speaking from personal experience about that btw, just knew some people that were addicts). At that point you're taking more and more just to stave off the sickness that comes if you don't always have it in your system, the high almost takes a backseat to fear of the pain.

It's one of the most miserable things you can do to your body and your life.

It's definitely best to stick to weed and maybe psychedelics if you have an open mind and aren't easily freaked out.

--- G.

Urban Rubble

23rd May 2003, 20:16

Hey Dhul, did you shoot it or snort it ? I'm just curious.

I never fuck with hard drugs because I'll probably like them too much and get hooked. I know myself very well, I like to be "all fuckered up", so I will never do heroin, PCP, crack, none of that bullshit.

Dhul Fiqar

24th May 2003, 05:34

Snorted it, not particularly proud of it, but it happened. I sort of hesitate to mention it 'cause people get all weird about this particular drug, but it was just a couple of times.

If there's one thing that scares the living shit out of me that's PCP, just too many crazy stories. Oh, and Datura, that is pretty much a ticket to the emergency room, if you're lucky.

As for crack, most people don't realize it's the exact same drug as cocaine, just in freebase rock form as opposed to hcl powder form. Of course they're both really really bad for you :biggrin:

--- G.

Soul Rebel

24th May 2003, 06:01

I'll tell ya from personal experience- PCP is some crazy shit. Never shot up though- wanted to, but decided not too- I love myself too much to want to do that to myself :) If anything stay to the light, natural stuff like weed and shrooms, but if ya want mind altering LSD aint bad.

P.S.- I'm not encouraging you to go out and do these things, its the last thing i would do. Its just my opinion :)

(Edited by SenoraChe at 6:04 am on May 24, 2003)

Zombie

24th May 2003, 06:59

I, for one, never did any drug. Apart from smoking cigs, but I hardly qualify that as a real drug..

But that doesn't mean I'm not for trying marijuana, I just hope I will some day before I die ;)

How exactly do you smoke it, do you inhale or not?
What are you supposed to feel that's so different from when you're dead drunk?
Is the first time a 'killer'? (meaning is it that nauseating?)

I might seem stupid and all, but who really cares..;)

.A.

(Edited by Zombie at 2:00 am on May 24, 2003)

apathy maybe

26th May 2003, 00:52

Here is an idea all addictive drugs should be brought under government control. The price should be low enough to undercut black marketers. The profits (if any should go to education and health. with every (one use) there comes a pamphlet explaining all the bad thing that will happen to you if you use this particular drug.

As to marijuana it was only criminalised in the US as hemp is better the cotton for making clothes and the cotton farmers of the 1930's didn't like that. It also makes better quality paper then wood chips.

El Barbudo

26th May 2003, 00:56

it also does a better feeling then tobacco...

Urban Rubble

26th May 2003, 02:02

Zombie, yes, you inhale pot smoke, the longer you hold it in the more it does. It's not at all like being drunk, you're much more aware, you still have coordination, bascailly you're still in your right mind. I have never gotten sick from smoking weed, if you are feeling queasy from the flu or being hungover or chemo, weed will take that right away.

Aleksander Nordby

26th May 2003, 11:11

Down with pot!!!!!!!

El Che

26th May 2003, 16:26

I don`t do things like weed or pills any more because it fucks with ur mind to the point of changing ur personality. I have no experience with hard drugs, was always to chicken to go near them. Overall I`d say my high of choice is alcohol. Just stay away from motorised vehicles and self propelled modes of transportation.

Purple

26th May 2003, 20:41

As long as it doesn't becomes a "normal" thing to do, I'm for it... But it should have an age limit on 21 or somethin', and it should be "thrown out" from the usual social events...

rAW DEaL bILL

3rd July 2003, 04:25

in amsterdam are drugs legal for all ages?

anti machine

3rd July 2003, 06:47

adding to what urban said:

Zombie, you're used to smoking cigs, and you probably puff and inhale. With weed, it's straight inhalation all the way. You'll find it hits your lungs quite differently than tobacco, so you'll probably cough and, like me, almost get a hernia (if you're doing it right).

The first time isn't nauseating, i don't know where such a rumor would come from. Actually, you'll want to smoke alot your first time if you want to feel anything. Usually the first time doesn't do anything for most people.

As for marijuana v. alcohol, the sensation is ENTIRELY different. It calms you down completely, sometimes to the point of absolute apathy and not wanting to move. Philisophical insight will be felt stronger than you've ever experienced before. The high itself is very existential, and reality is perceived quite differently. You may experience some epiphany that, at the time, seems very grandiose but, upon sober reflection, is actually quite trivial. You'll feel giddy and laugh for minutes at a time at somthing that you would not ordinarily consider humerous. Time seems to slow down and speed up again. Minutes will feel like hours, hours will feel like seconds. It's not exactly euphoric, but you'll find yourself with a good ole' feeling inside and a huge smile on your face.

The old saying "everyone smoke a bowl" will make sense to you: You LOVE everyone and everything, truly and sincerely. You'll be at your emotional peak, and experience a deep sympathy for something that will bring you near tears.

As for the whole "paranoid" thing, I have yet to experience it in a negative fashion. It occurs to me as exciting rather than odious, and you will be well aware, and even fabricate, the slightest threat of something awful happening to you. Just put an optimistic, adventurous spin on it rather than anticipating some impending doom.

Smoke up, Zombie! Get your favorite music and food on hand. It'll sound and taste better than it ever has before.

Eastside Revolt

3rd July 2003, 06:51

Quote: from El Che on 4:26 pm on May 26, 2003
I don`t do things like weed or pills any more because it fucks with ur mind to the point of changing ur personality. I have no experience with hard drugs, was always to chicken to go near them. Overall I`d say my high of choice is alcohol. Just stay away from motorised vehicles and self propelled modes of transportation.

And what? liqour doesn't fuck up your mind?

I hate when people place weed on the same level as things like perscription drugs.

Dhul Fiqar

3rd July 2003, 06:55

Quote: from rAW DEaL bILL on 12:25 pm on July 3, 2003
in amsterdam are drugs legal for all ages?

No, cannabis is in fact not legal to sell to anyone in Holland, but it is tolerated as long as the buyer is over 18, same goes for alcohol. Other drugs are completely illegal.

--- G.

rAW DEaL bILL

4th July 2003, 20:49

fuck! my dream of running away to amsterdam has been broken. wait.... i hope fake IDs are easy to come by! lol

Dhul Fiqar

4th July 2003, 20:58

It's very easy to buy weed, no matter your age. One time I was in a fairly shady coffeeshop, and this kid came in, he looked about 13 but he might have been as much as 15, still he looked VERY young, his voice was even more young.

After he left I asked the guy at the bar what they had been talking about, and he said: "Bwah, he wanted a special deal on half a pound of weed, I offered him a good one and he's gonna come back if he doesn't get a better deal. No way he's gonna find a better deal..."

I was like: "Oooookkkk....."

BTW, coffeeshops can only sell five grams at a time, so he broke quite a lot of laws that day ;)

--- G.

canikickit

4th July 2003, 22:27

Zombie, you're used to smoking cigs, and you probably puff and inhale. With weed, it's straight inhalation all the way

Only lunatics from the US do this, I just smoke joints like cigarettes, only I enjoy them a lot more. I don't particularily concentrate on holding it in, and I definitely don't pass it after one drag.

When I was in Amsterdam I bought some weed for two sexy sixteen year old German girls. :)

Felicia

4th July 2003, 23:15

Quote: from canikickit on 6:27 pm on July 4, 2003

When I was in Amsterdam I bought some weed for two sexy sixteen year old German girls. :)
shame on you!

we've decriminalized marijuana here........ I've never tried it so I don't see the big deal eh.

rAW DEaL bILL

5th July 2003, 03:36

wheres "here"?

Felicia

5th July 2003, 03:54

Quote: from rAW DEaL bILL on 3:36 am on July 5, 2003
wheres "here"?
canada, or maybe it's just ontario.... but either way :)

rAW DEaL bILL

5th July 2003, 04:56

cooooool! next time i visit my dads place in crown point im gonna hafta run away cross the border :-D

Vinny Rafarino

5th July 2003, 06:40

Well Felicia don't ever do it!! According to the blokes on the conservativeX forums you will instantly become strung out on scag and will start selling you body on the street!

I'm serious, listening to them rant was like watching "reefer madness" They really got bent when I told them that smoking weed leads to two things;

1)A good time
2)Excessive Twinkie consumpion.

I then went on to add that they should support smoking weed because the massive increase in food consumption could give their sputtering GDP the necessary boost it needs to keep from going under.

I only lasted 5 days there...I think Felicia lasted less than me however. She's one Baaaaaad bird man.

RED RAGE

5th July 2003, 19:06

Weed should be legalized for people of about 16 or over I reckon. If anything, normal cigerettes should be banned cause there alot more addictive than weed is. Trust, I know from much experience... :D

Dhul Fiqar

5th July 2003, 19:29

I think cigarettes should be banned for everyone not willing to keep and maintain a ferrett. If you're willing to keep a ferret around the house just to be able to smoke, you are the kind of hard core committed smoker that would just grow his own plants anyway.

Oh, and if the climate is unfriendly to ferrets some kind of large beaver or possibly capybara might be a feasable replacement.

--- G.

rAW DEaL bILL

5th July 2003, 20:10

dhul, that post about smokers and small rodents confused me. im now totaly lost.

Dhul Fiqar

5th July 2003, 20:13

Then come with me, let us dance like marmite in the forrest and all will be revealed!!

--- G.

rAW DEaL bILL

5th July 2003, 20:47

im begining to think u may have had one to many hash cakes lately dhul. lol.

Felicia

5th July 2003, 22:05

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 2:40 am on July 5, 2003
Well Felicia don't ever do it!! According to the blokes on the conservativeX forums you will instantly become strung out on scag and will start selling you body on the street!

I'm serious, listening to them rant was like watching "reefer madness" They really got bent when I told them that smoking weed leads to two things;

1)A good time
2)Excessive Twinkie consumpion.

I then went on to add that they should support smoking weed because the massive increase in food consumption could give their sputtering GDP the necessary boost it needs to keep from going under.

I only lasted 5 days there...I think Felicia lasted less than me however. She's one Baaaaaad bird man.

Bah, I probably wont. I was at conservativeX, they think that I came from Joons board (pete gave me the url) so they automatically banned me. I joined one night and the next night after work, I was banned, a bunch of poo that was. :biggrin:

dhul, can I dance in the forest too? I'll bring you some canadian brownies :cheesy: