Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-10-2012, 05:45 PM
 
Location: it depends
6,369 posts, read 6,407,529 times
Reputation: 6388

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
And how much of a failure it can be. If MJ and/or other drug legalization follows the "excellent example" of Alcohol (and there's no reason to think it won't) then I'd think the figures below would probably double at a minimum.
All I'm saying is be careful what you wish for as you may just get it.

From the NIH:
In spite of underage drinking laws and prevention programs, available information from national surveys indicates that rates of underage alcohol consumption over the past decade remain at unacceptably high levels
The 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimates there are 10.1 million underage drinkers in the United States. According to the 2008 Monitoring the Future Study (Welcome to the MTF Website), 39% of current 8th graders, 58% of 10th graders, 72% of 12th graders, and 85% of college students have tried alcohol.
And some of the more depressing stats:
Death – 5,000 people under age 21 die each year from alcohol-related car crashes, homicides, suicides, alcohol poisoning, and other injuries such as falls, burns, and drowning.
Serious injuries – More than 190,000 people under age 21 visited an emergency room for alcohol-related injuries in 2008 alone.
Yes, and prohibition of alcohol did not do a damn thing for the health and safety of the citizenry.

The OP suffers from the same flaw: pot has been illegal, and a loved one failed his personal battle against it with very severe effects. What does that have to do with decriminalizing or legalizing the stuff?

Abuse of any kind of drug including alcohol is a personal battle, fought one by one, not a societal battle.

 
Old 12-10-2012, 05:56 PM
 
642 posts, read 1,113,529 times
Reputation: 508
Cannabis (aka 'marijuana') is not harmless. I don't doubt that it was a contributing factor to the OP's brother's issues. Stress, alcohol and other mental conditions/predispositions most likely played significant roles as well.

Decriminalizing or legalizing cannabis doesn't (or shouldn't) mean that it's harmless and okay for anyone to do at anytime. It just means that the current approach (prohibition) does little to reduce either the supply or demand.

What prohibition does, however, is contribute to the US having the highest rate and number of people in prison, and gives many entrepreneurs the opportunity to make money outside the legal system. Not to mention all the violence that comes with the underground market. More and more people are realizing that the cost of this so-called 'war on drugs' is far greater than any of the intended benefits.

To those who oppose legalization: If it were legal tomorrow would you go buy a bag of pot and smoke it? Do you think it's the responsibility of the government to outlaw anything that may be harmful to your physical or mental health?

And who knows...maybe if the product the OP's brother was smoking was regulated rather than being black-market stuff, it could've been safer or reduced the chances of this happening.
 
Old 12-10-2012, 07:25 PM
 
8,402 posts, read 24,222,859 times
Reputation: 6822
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
And how much of a failure it can be. If MJ and/or other drug legalization follows the "excellent example" of Alcohol (and there's no reason to think it won't) then I'd think the figures below would probably double at a minimum.
All I'm saying is be careful what you wish for as you may just get it.

From the NIH:
In spite of underage drinking laws and prevention programs, available information from national surveys indicates that rates of underage alcohol consumption over the past decade remain at unacceptably high levels
The 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimates there are 10.1 million underage drinkers in the United States. According to the 2008 Monitoring the Future Study (Welcome to the MTF Website), 39% of current 8th graders, 58% of 10th graders, 72% of 12th graders, and 85% of college students have tried alcohol.
And some of the more depressing stats:
Death – 5,000 people under age 21 die each year from alcohol-related car crashes, homicides, suicides, alcohol poisoning, and other injuries such as falls, burns, and drowning.
Serious injuries – More than 190,000 people under age 21 visited an emergency room for alcohol-related injuries in 2008 alone.
Under prohibition or current laws it is/was illegal for people under 21 to drink, right? So which is the better situation? Obviously being illegal doesn't stop many under 21 from drinking, just as pot is illegally smoked by many people today. We need to accept the circumstances and not just wish it was different.
 
Old 12-10-2012, 07:38 PM
 
Location: The Triad
34,088 posts, read 82,945,062 times
Reputation: 43661
Quote:
Originally Posted by silibran View Post
I wonder the same thing. But OP specifically says the pot triggered the psychosis.
Iow... a well intentioned but at best unsupportable and anecdotal statement.
At this point in the thread just about everyone has moved on from such a basis for any view.
 
Old 12-11-2012, 02:17 AM
 
7,801 posts, read 6,372,547 times
Reputation: 2988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annuvin View Post
Because the logic you stated above applies directly to the subject of gun control.
I would be happy to apply and test the logic to that subject in a thread on that subject. This however is not a thread about Gun Control at all and so I will not derail this thread with that discussion. Suffice to say however that just because one piece of logic from a person suggests an argument that is pro gun control that does not mean they have not got OTHER arguments that are anti.
 
Old 12-11-2012, 08:44 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
Iow... a well intentioned but at best unsupportable and anecdotal statement.
At this point in the thread just about everyone has moved on from such a basis for any view.
Not for nothing, you have to admit that drugs affect different people in different ways so it is possible maybe not probable (from some's perspective but possible. Now if it were a "common" occurrence I would say there'd be an argument for heavy restriction/ban but that doesn't seem to be the case at this time.

Maybe 5-10-20 years down the road common side affects or any real dangerous ones will come to light like they have with other meds like Phen-Fen and many others.
Hopefully this will not turn out like tobacco, again, that was once hailed for it's supposed health benefits and safety.
As for the age restrictions on Alcohol, it wasn't until very recently (last 5-10 years) that it came to the forefront and penalties/enforcement heightened. No more "wink and a nod,boys will be boys" attitudes. 0 tolerance for any level of booze in under 21 people, loss of license even if not driving etc. While this hasn't stopped it all it surely reduced the amount of kids willing to pay the price if they got caught especially if one of their close friends got busted.
 
Old 12-11-2012, 09:27 AM
 
Location: The Triad
34,088 posts, read 82,945,062 times
Reputation: 43661
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Not for nothing, you have to admit that drugs affect different people in different ways
so it is possible maybe not probable...
More anecdotes?

Quote:
Maybe 5-10-20 years down the road common side affects or...
Perhaps. But it's not like MJ is some new discovery.
MJ has been used therapeutically and recreationally for millennia.

I think we're all pretty well aware of the rather modest risks involved...
how those risks compare to other risks that are tolerated in society...
and what reasonable measures are appropriate to mitigate the several classes of risk.
 
Old 12-11-2012, 12:44 PM
 
Location: Ayrsley
4,713 posts, read 9,701,364 times
Reputation: 3824
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
From the NIH:
In spite of underage drinking laws and prevention programs, available information from national surveys indicates that rates of underage alcohol consumption over the past decade remain at unacceptably high levels
The 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimates there are 10.1 million underage drinkers in the United States. According to the 2008 Monitoring the Future Study (Welcome to the MTF Website), 39% of current 8th graders, 58% of 10th graders, 72% of 12th graders, and 85% of college students have tried alcohol.
And maybe a lot of this has to do with the fact that here in the States, the concern is with something as silly and arbitrary as a minimum drinking age. It is a bit of a fallacy to think that, just because someone is under 21, drinking alcohol is bad, but it somehow magically becomes much less bad once they turn 21. OMG - 85% of college students have "tried alcohol"! My wife grew up in Germany - she and her friends were drinking (legally) in bars when they were 16. Her and her friends did not all become alcoholics as a result of that.

Maybe instead of establishing a minimum drinking age, and telling kids it is bad to drink if they are under 21, maybe more should be done to actually teach people how to drink responsibly when they are younger.
 
Old 12-12-2012, 05:39 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tober138 View Post
And maybe a lot of this has to do with the fact that here in the States, the concern is with something as silly and arbitrary as a minimum drinking age. It is a bit of a fallacy to think that, just because someone is under 21, drinking alcohol is bad, but it somehow magically becomes much less bad once they turn 21. OMG - 85% of college students have "tried alcohol"! My wife grew up in Germany - she and her friends were drinking (legally) in bars when they were 16. Her and her friends did not all become alcoholics as a result of that.

Maybe instead of establishing a minimum drinking age, and telling kids it is bad to drink if they are under 21, maybe more should be done to actually teach people how to drink responsibly when they are younger.
Wouldn't this also apply to almost everything else as well? Like oh,I don't know, driving,gun ownership,sex,financial transactions etc?
Why should any age restrictions apply?
 
Old 12-12-2012, 07:38 AM
 
Location: The Triad
34,088 posts, read 82,945,062 times
Reputation: 43661
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Wouldn't this also apply to almost everything else as well?
Like oh,I don't know, driving,gun ownership,sex,financial transactions etc?
Why should any (arbitrary) age restrictions apply (with anything) ?
Of course it shouldn't; but it's easier to believe in arbitrary dates on calendars...
than to do the far tougher parenting work of preparing kids to be adults.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top