Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-29-2009, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Sacramento, Ca
2,039 posts, read 3,279,886 times
Reputation: 1661

Advertisements

Furthermore, you own study states:

Quote:
Crystal meth is classified as a Schedule II drug, with Schedule I drugs being the most highly addictive and dangerous and Schedule V being the least likely to be abused.
by that statement, marijuana is more addictive and dangerous than meth, pot being schedule 1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-29-2009, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Heartland Florida
9,324 posts, read 26,749,371 times
Reputation: 5038
Drug prohibition is stupid, and a waste of time, resources and lives. More people die from the crime, police brutality and tainted drugs than ever did before drug prohibition. Making drugs illegal only was done as a gateway to a police state. They could care less about health or the well being of addicts. I am against prohibition or legalization. Go back to the way it was in 1900 and things will be far better than now. Children are not of the age of consent and are already banned from alcohol, cigarrettes and the like. Yet more try pot than you would think. The parents are the best defense against drugs but having a corrupt and incompetent government sets a bad example for kids. "Legal" phamaceuticals are shoved down kid's throats today for various made-up disorders, so why would they not do coke or pot or whatever? Government is always the problem and prohibition is in place to give organized crime the income they crave. Prohibition supports drug abuse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 11:49 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,663,385 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by roosevelt View Post
I think when you are talking about hard drugs, kids or anyone else do not move on, they are hooked the first time they try.
That's not the case at all. My friends and I all dabbled in HS, the majority of us left it at that, dabbling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 11:51 AM
 
132 posts, read 159,394 times
Reputation: 69
We should legalize illegal children for their affordable Mexican weed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:32 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
These statistics show that meth is no joke. Ninety-nine percent of first time users are hooked after their first try and the life expectancy of a person who uses meth regularly is as little as five years. A 1999 study of the methamphetamine problem reports, methamphetamine abusers were characterized as low socio economic status, less educated, relatively young white males. Today the majority of methamphetamine abusers still tend to fit that profile.
Methamphetamine Information (http://www.drugaddictionhelpline.com/methamphetamine.html - broken link)

Quote:
1: the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>2: compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal ; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
addiction - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/d...ta/fig08_4.pdf
MTF Data Tables and Figures
http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/p...erview2008.pdf
MTF Press Releases

Lot's of studies. I said in many cases not every case. People with addictive personalities that see the drug as a problem solver are probably the most susceptible to immediate addiction. To act like these drugs are not addictive is just plan intellectually dishonest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:33 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
That's not the case at all. My friends and I all dabbled in HS, the majority of us left it at that, dabbling.
Good for you. You're one person with a group of friends in one city in one county in one state. Please try not to use your example as the be all end all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:35 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by tallrick View Post
Drug prohibition is stupid, and a waste of time, resources and lives. More people die from the crime, police brutality and tainted drugs than ever did before drug prohibition. Making drugs illegal only was done as a gateway to a police state. They could care less about health or the well being of addicts. I am against prohibition or legalization. Go back to the way it was in 1900 and things will be far better than now. Children are not of the age of consent and are already banned from alcohol, cigarrettes and the like. Yet more try pot than you would think. The parents are the best defense against drugs but having a corrupt and incompetent government sets a bad example for kids. "Legal" phamaceuticals are shoved down kid's throats today for various made-up disorders, so why would they not do coke or pot or whatever? Government is always the problem and prohibition is in place to give organized crime the income they crave. Prohibition supports drug abuse.
As do many that die from alcohol. All drugs inhibit, in some way, the brains ability to rationalize or react quickly. Cocaine may speed up reaction time but rationale disappears...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,449 posts, read 14,466,505 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend View Post
A common argument I hear against legalization of marijuana is that it will get more kids doing it. Of course we don't want kids using marijuana, just like we don't want them using alcohol. But would legalization make marijuana easier for kids to get? Which is easier for kids to get, marijuana or alcohol? Yup, marijuana, because DRUG DEALERS DON'T CARD!
Prescription drugs are probably the highest abused drugs right now and much more dangerous than weed. Seems like everybody I know is popping something in their mouth more than they should.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:36 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,663,385 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Good for you. You're one person with a group of friends in one city in one county in one state. Please try not to use your example as the be all end all.
I have personal experience. And no, it's not one city, one county, one state. The whole fearmongering, "TRY IT ONCE AND YOU'RE HOOKED FOR LIFE!" is ridiculous. If you have an addictive personality, you're going to find something to be addicted to. Not everyone has that personality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2009, 12:39 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecvMatt View Post
Furthermore, you own study states:

by that statement, marijuana is more addictive and dangerous than meth, pot being schedule 1

Quote:
(c) Factors determinative of control or removal from schedules In making any finding under subsection (a) of this section or under subsection (b) of section 812 (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/csa/812.htm - broken link) of this title, the Attorney [/SIZE]General shall consider the following factors with respect to each drug or other substance proposed to be controlled or removed from the schedules:
(1) Its actual or relative potential for abuse.
(2) Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known.
(3) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance.
(4) Its history and current pattern of abuse.
(5) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse.
(6) What, if any, risk there is to the public health.
(7) Its psychic or physiological dependence liability.

(8) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this subchapter.
DEA, Title 21, Section 811 (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/csa/811.htm#c - broken link)

I agree pot should be revisited as to what schedule it's rated at...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:19 AM.

© 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