• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Drug War Policy for Democrats

Virus said:
Your objection was a fallacy. Don't have to.
Click to expand...

Fine, don't nuke Australia, go back to peanuts. Or is that an extreme too?

Banning something because it "kills people" would result in a list that encompasses everything in existence, either directly or indirectly. Would you like me to start listing, or would you like to come up with an argument that isn't stupidly all-encompassing?

ETA: If you would like a moderately short list, may I suggest reading Final Exits?
 
Last edited:
To be consistent the Drug Wariors must put their just-as-dangerous or more so alco-drug down and be calling for a War on Alcohol. But they don't. Because they couldn't care less. It's all a fraud and this (85,000 alcohol deaths a year) proves it.

This is the obvious inconsistency that can never be gotten around and even kids in high school can see it. And this is why the propaganda is no longer working. We need a national debate truthfully analyzing what adult intoxication (including cigarettes) means to free people with individual liberties. The fear mongering propaganda days are over.

What we need are respectable, main stream people analyzing the situation who are not just out to get high, or have any bias, so that naysayer people will feel assured they are getting honest answers from people who have lived the Drug War. Such people are the Police and DEA Officers of a group called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition LEAP.CC

The following is from their website ...

"Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) is an international organization of criminal justice professionals who bear personal witness to the wasteful futility and harms of our current drug policies. Their experience on the front lines of the “war on drugs” has led them to call for a repeal of prohibition and its replacement with a tight system of legalized regulation, which will effectively cripple the violent cartels and street dealers who control the current illegal market. We believe that drug prohibition is the true cause of much of the social and personal damage that has historically been attributed to drug use. It is prohibition that makes these drugs so valuable – while giving criminals a monopoly over their supply. Driven by the huge profits from this monopoly, criminal gangs bribe and kill each other, law enforcers, and children. Their trade is unregulated and they are, therefore, beyond our control.

History has shown that drug prohibition reduces neither use nor abuse. After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes. After a drug dealer is arrested, however, neither the supply nor the demand for drugs is seriously changed. The arrest merely creates a job opening for an endless stream of drug entrepreneurs who will take huge risks for the sake of the enormous profits created by prohibition. Prohibition costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars every year, yet 40 years and some 40 million arrests later, drugs are cheaper, more potent and far more widely used than at the beginning of this futile crusade.

We believe that by eliminating prohibition of all drugs for adults and establishing appropriate regulation and standards for distribution and use, law enforcement could focus more on crimes of violence, such as rape, aggravated assault, child abuse and murder, making our communities much safer. We believe that sending parents to prison for non-violent personal drug use destroys families. We believe that in a regulated and controlled environment, drugs will be safer for adult use and less accessible to our children. And we believe that by placing drug abuse in the hands of medical professionals instead of the criminal justice system, we will reduce rates of addiction and overdose deaths."
 
Last edited:
IDB87 said:
I'd be in favor of making alcohol illegal. Great way to make money.
Click to expand...
Yes, that worked so well... We have Prohibition to thank for organized crime.

Having been in law enforcement for many years, I continue to be appalled by the "war on drugs".
We are spending many billions of dollars, incarcerating ungodly numbers of people who then become a permanent underclass, unable to find decent jobs for the most part.

In addition, despite years of interdiction, arrest, prosecution, entanglement in foreign countries to suppress production...
"Drugs are generally available in high states of purity and at low prices everywhere in the country." (GAO investigation. Twice.)

A panel of physicians on NPR's Science Friday early last year said flatly... "Marijuana is the most benign intoxicant."
 
Virus said:
Peanuts don't give you brain damage.
Click to expand...
Sure they can. You have an allergic reaction and your airway constricts, choking off the flow of oxygen. Lack of oxygen to the brain can cause brain damage, no?

Regardless, now you have shifted the goalposts from things that could kill you to things that could brain damage! Admittedly a smaller list, but still a stupid argument.

I'm not. You are.
Click to expand...
Stop being dense. I'm not going to continually restate my objection just to have you twist it and handwave it away.
 
Virus said:
A senior coroner in Britain says hundreds.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-hundreds-of-deaths-a-year-coroner-warns.html

More immediate concern is the risk of brain damage.
Click to expand...

No. This does not support your position that [weed] kills its users. If I drink too much alcohol, I will die from alcohol poisoning. Is there such a thing as "cannabis poisoning" ?

Also,

"Cannabis is as dangerous as any other drug and people must understand that it kills," said Mr Turner.
Click to expand...

No. Laughingdogs.jpeg
 
IDB87 said:
Is there such a thing as "cannabis poisoning"
Click to expand...
Technically? Sure, just like there's water poisoning. Feasibility is another thing entirely.

No. Laughingdogs.jpeg
Click to expand...
Careful. Weed is a hallucinogenic, so driving while high is probably not the best idea. That by itself is still not a good reason against weed, as there are plenty of other legal things that can make driving hazardous (e.g. prescription medication, alcohol, or sleep deprivation).
 
excaza said:
A senior coroner using cherrypicked, anecdotal data in a sound byte from 2003 with no further research. Which again does not make any case for pot being more dangerous than other legal substances, like alcohol.
Click to expand...

CDC does not find ANY deaths due to Cannabis consumption in this study of Florida 2003-2009;

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6026a1.htm

Nobody has ever succeeded in consuming a fatal dose that I am aware of, the British tried to kill dogs with it in the 19th century to find the lethal dose and could not manage to do more than put them into a stupor for days.

In summary, enormous doses of Delta 9 THC, All THC and concentrated marihuana extract ingested by mouth were unable to produce death or organ pathology in large mammals but did produce fatalities in smaller rodents due to profound central nervous system depression.

The non-fatal consumption of 3000 mg/kg A THC by the dog and monkey would be comparable to a 154-pound human eating approximately 46 pounds (21 kilograms) of 1%-marihuana or 10 pounds of 5% hashish at one time. In addition, 92 mg/kg THC intravenously produced no fatalities in monkeys. These doses would be comparable to a 154-pound human smoking at one time almost three pounds (1.28 kg) of 1%-marihuana or 250,000 times the usual smoked dose and over a million times the minimal effective dose assuming 50% destruction of the THC by smoking.

Thus, evidence from animal studies and human case reports appears to indicate that the ratio of lethal dose to effective dose is quite large. This ratio is much more favorable than that of many other common psychoactive agents including alcohol and barbiturates (Phillips et al. 1971, Brill et al. 1970).
Click to expand...
 
excaza said:
A senior coroner using cherrypicked, anecdotal data in a sound byte from 2003 with no further research. Which again does not make any case for pot being more dangerous than other legal substances, like alcohol.
Click to expand...

Especially when said anecdotal data includes stuff like that described in the following paragraph in the article:

Cannabis also contributed to the death of Dragan Radoslavjevic, 42, from Paignton, Devon. He died earlier this year after using a power tool to drill a hole in his head. An inquest in Torquay heard that he suffered from depression and relied on drugs such as cannabis and heroin.
Click to expand...

He was a heroin addict who suffered from depression and ended up committing suicide. But obviously it was the Devil Weed that really was at fault and can be blamed for his death!

Sheesh...Reefer Madness made more of a convincing case against marijuana than this nonsense.
 
Last edited:
excaza said:
Technically? Sure, just like there's water poisoning. Feasibility is another thing entirely.
Click to expand...

I think you'd pass out long before you fell ill.

Careful. Weed is a hallucinogenic, so driving while high is probably not the best idea. That by itself is still not a good reason against weed, as there are plenty of other legal things that can make driving hazardous (e.g. prescription medication, alcohol, or sleep deprivation).
Click to expand...

I'm aware of the hallucinogenic properties of the drug.

But then:

Weed may make you a better driver
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom