Recreational Drug Use Legalization

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by monster

regarding penalties for the rest? instead of prison, why not an automatic ticket to the frontline. That would certainly bloody well deter me!

It would never work. I don't want some bloody ass drug head with well trained troops in a highly dynamic combat environment that will not follow orders. And you just pass the problem of these people to the Military. The addiction is to strong.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I divided them based on addiction (besides alcohol) and death rates.

Death rates alone do not tell the story.

I would consider acid a soft drug because it is non-addicting and you can not overdose on it.

That would be an incorrect assumption.

There are obviously pretty big health risks that come with it but with proper education it can be a lot safer so people know how to avoid and take care of bad trips and avoid taking a hit a week or anything insane like that.

Your assumption is that drug users seekers are rational people who can control their urges and desires. Another false assumption.

Does anyone know of any studies of LSD that goes more in depth than Merc's article, specifically the frying of the brain as Cloud mentioned?

There are whole textbooks written on the subject. The effects of LSD drug abuse are highly documented.

For MDMA (ecstasy), I believe most of the negative effects come from impurities, which would be avoided if legalized, and besides that, the three leading causes of death with ecstasy are Hyponatremia (drinking too much water), Hyperthermia (body overheating), and overdose, all which are preventable (keep in mind this is coming from someone that has never taken it). And for addiction, I haven't seen any hard proof that it is addicting because of the real lack of pure ecstasy. This is obviously a drug that would need to be taken with extreme caution and it really is hard to tell without any definite studies.

The studies are very well documented as are the deaths and effects of long term use of MDMA. This is not a new thing here guys. You talk like this is some new fangled thing that people are just playing with on the side. And granted there may be people like that. IMHO the the health risks well out weigh any minor benifit of getting you jollies for a night of bliss.

For shrooms, it is very similar to lsd.

Correct, same negative effects.

I would still say alochol makes people do much stupider things than either shrooms or lsd.

Less stupid? An individual is certainly in much less control under the influence of shrooms or LSD, alcohol is at least something that you can graduate.

Monster, people convicted of drug charges have a choice to go the frontline to avoid jailtime so I guess they are already exploring the option.

Completely and utterly incorrect. That option went out in the 70's.

[monster]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

It would never work. I don't want some bloody ass drug head with well trained troops in a highly dynamic combat environment that will not follow orders. And you just pass the problem of these people to the Military. The addiction is to strong.

Cannon fodder, sweetie. Clearing landmines the easy way. They don't need to follow orders, just drop 'em off and leave 'em to it!

[Cloud]

Does anyone know of any studies of LSD that goes more in depth than Merc's article, specifically the frying of the brain as Cloud mentioned?

I'm sure there are plenty, since LSD is probably the most heavily documented drug of all.

But I'm not basing that statement on studies--I'm basing it on personal knowledge from contact with people who have overdone this particular drug.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

That would be an incorrect assumption.

??

"LSD is not considered an addictive drug since it does not produce compulsive drug-seeking behavior as do cocaine, amphetamine, heroin, alcohol, and nicotine."
http://www.drug-addiction.com/what_is_lsd.htm

"I must emphasize that there is no danger of death or injury from overdose of LSD, which must have about the highest therapeutic index of any drug known (the ratio of fatal dose to effective dose is unknown since no human being has ever died from an overdose of LSD, but must be very high, as individuals have mistakenly ingested hundreds of doses at a sitting; this is a way of saying that the drug is not at all toxic)."
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_dose.shtml

Your assumption is that drug users seekers are rational people who can control their urges and desires. Another false assumption.

When did I ever make an absolute statement? There are rational and irrational drug users, what makes this issue any different than alcohol?

Less stupid? An individual is certainly in much less control under the influence of shrooms or LSD, alcohol is at least something that you can graduate.

From the many friends that I've known that has taken acid and shrooms, no one has done anything really stupid, though none of them took large doses and most of them are in fairly good control when under the influence of other drugs as well.

[Aliantha]

Researchers might say LSD is not addictive, but I disagree. You may not have 'withdrawal symptoms' when you decide to stop taking it, but it is definitely a drug that's hard to refuse once you've had a 'good trip'. What I mean of course is that it's a drug that's habit forming even if it's not addictive. Similar to marijuana for example although I think LSD is more harmful because for one thing, it's a chemical and you really never know what you're going to get. For another, some people make some very very very bad decisions when they're on a trip.

[classicman]

I almost killed myself twice while shrooming. Once chasing a frisbee off a cliff at the Sleeping Giant Mountain and another time doing something VERY STUPID at a concert. It involved lots of electricity and my body as a conductor. The fatality rate is not just from the drug itself, but also what one's perception of while "intoxicated."

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Researchers might say LSD is not addictive, but I disagree. You may not have 'withdrawal symptoms' when you decide to stop taking it, but it is definitely a drug that's hard to refuse once you've had a 'good trip'.

So it's as addictive as bacon?

[Aliantha]

Well you know, once you have one rasher, it's hard to stop.

[Griff]

mmmmm...

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

So it's as addictive as bacon?

Much worse. Although I do have a mild bacon addition, only if very crispy.

[Shawnee123]

When I'm very crispy, I'll eat just about anything.

[Undertoad]

Nice editorial piece on this

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,...719872,00.html

The drug war has ravaged law enforcement too. In cities where police agencies commit the most resources to arresting their way out of their drug problems, the arrest rates for violent crime — murder, rape, aggravated assault — have declined. In Baltimore, where we set The Wire, drug arrests have skyrocketed over the past three decades, yet in that same span, arrest rates for murder have gone from 80% and 90% to half that. Lost in an unwinnable drug war, a new generation of law officers is no longer capable of investigating crime properly, having learned only to make court pay by grabbing cheap, meaningless drug arrests off the nearest corner.

What the drugs themselves have not destroyed, the warfare against them has. And what once began, perhaps, as a battle against dangerous substances long ago transformed itself into a venal war on our underclass. Since declaring war on drugs nearly 40 years ago, we've been demonizing our most desperate citizens, isolating and incarcerating them and otherwise denying them a role in the American collective. All to no purpose. The prison population doubles and doubles again; the drugs remain.

[TheMercenary]

"What the drugs themselves have not destroyed, the warfare against them has. And what once began, perhaps, as a battle against dangerous substances long ago transformed itself into a venal war on our underclass. Since declaring war on drugs nearly 40 years ago, we've been demonizing our most desperate citizens, isolating and incarcerating them and otherwise denying them a role in the American collective. All to no purpose. "

The author sounds like he is looking for sympathy for poor choices people make of their own free will. I have little of it. At least in this opening sentance he admits that drug use destroys the life of the user and that the substances are dangerous. Statements like, "a venal war on our underclass" and "demonizing our most desperate citizens" only try to garner sympathy for losers who choose to throw their lives away, steal, lie, cheat, in some cases injur and murder others, and kill themselves slowly through drug use. Poor fellas.

[xoxoxoBruce]

only try to garner sympathy for losers who choose to throw their lives away, steal, lie, cheat, in some cases injur and murder others, and kill themselves slowly through drug use. Poor fellas.

The point is, the war on drugs has not changed this one iota. It's still happening despite the distraction of the police away from what they should be doing.