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.
Would you also be in favor of legalising all now illegal drugs? I think to really be consistant,you should want all illegal drugs to be legalised in that case. I think to legalise marijuana,you eventually have to legalise all now illegal drugs.
The drug I can think off the top of my head that I would not legalize would be PCP. Considering it's ability to cause rare, but extremely violent psychotic episodes, I think that is something that should be best left restricted.
The war on drugs,looking at it honestly,has been a complete failure.
This statement means people believe what they hear. Not for one second do I believe the "war on drugs" is a complete failure. Rather a ruse so all the "efforts" look as though the majority of our government actually care about it's people. These "wars" bring revenue in some form or another.
Marijuana is made by god. It was not manipulated by man, to be a drug.
Ignorance of a earth grown plant, has made it illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
Hardly off base. The pro-drug side always compares hard drugs with alcohol, cigarettes, chocolate and coffee. The pro-drug side will compare people who have a glass of wine in the evening, a cup of coffee in the morning with hard core drug addicts injecting any sort of drug into their veins.
If it's someone's right to smoke pot all day then how is it not their right to use meth, heroine, lsd, date rape drugs and whatever else?
Such a ridiculous comparison. You cannot logically put marijuana in the same dish with narcotics and opiates. Oil and water. Your mixing of HIGHLY addictive drugs with an HERB that isn't addictive at all is ludicrous.
There are many articles and statistics to debunk the actual overall findings that this so-called "war" is doing any good. It's nothing but a revenue smoke screen for those in places of power.
I say legalize it all. Many unnecessary deaths would end. Regulated drugs would mean consistence in potency, which would reduce potential overdosing. Trafficking would become simple importation of goods. There would be more profit than spending on a war that doesn't really exist in the first place.
Last edited by shroombeanie; 04-24-2010 at 12:11 PM..
We really need to end this worthless, meaningless War on Marijuana. It's a waste of money, time, and human life. And it could solve much cross-border violence, as well as prevent many illegal immigrants from sneaking into the United States to smuggle it in. Just legalize it, and stick it into the same regulatory system as tobacco and alcohol.
Lets say California passes the new law later this year to completely legalize marijuana. Can companies still drug test for marijuana even though they could have smoked on their day off but not while on the job? If it's legal to use like tobacco or alcohol then it should be ok to use right? Companies can't discriminate against a substance while saying it's ok to partake in another, no?
Marijuana stays in the system up to 30 days depending on use unlike alcohol which is only in the system for 8hrs.
Is there a test that can detect thc in the saliva for a certain amount of time?
I don't see the failure. Crime rates in the USA, especially homicides are down considerably from what they once were. But look at Mexico where all drugs are legal to use - and things are really going to hell there.
All drugs are not legal in Mexico. Only recently a small amount of cannabis for personal use was made legal, but the Mexican police reaction was typical, they are still going to arrest you if you are found in possession (much like the recent decriminalization in Philadelphia, where the police had the same reaction). Except for this minor change in Mexican law, all other drugs, and cannabis in quantity, are still illegal. The reason there is so much violence in Mexico is because the President of Mexico declared a war on drugs when he was elected. CHeck the facts, that's when there was a big uptick in violence. By putting the drug leaders in prison (or in the morgue) he has created very well paying job openings. So now the underlings are fighting both the government and each other for the very profitable drug trade. It is prohibition that is causing the violence, not permissive laws. Just the opposite of what you believe, but then your beliefs are not based on any facts, so that shouldn't bother you.
Crack Cocaine and powder cocaine are the same thing folks. So one is not medicinal and the other "bad". Also, the DR. who originally did the research and created the term "crack baby" has refuted his own research and now says there is no such thing. However, the anti-drug forces just can't let that image die. After all, what is more guarrenteed to inflame the ignorant than a picture of a poor little baby, addicted to cocaine, as the result of a "bad" mother's use. Once you show that picture, the audience is willing to believe whatever else you say. A little factual research would go a long way to providing a rational, rather than an emotional, discussion of this topic.
I think all drugs should be regulated, controlled, and taxed. The more addictive or physically damaging should be more strongly regulated, but not denied, to those who want them. Addiction should be treated as a medical problem, not a law enforcement problem. Some of the income from taxation should definately go to education programs for minors and rehabs for the 10 to 15% of adults who will get addicted, just like we now do for tobacco, alcohol and gambling. I believe that this approach would have a better chance of keeping drugs out of the hands of children than what we are doing now, which clearly hasn't worked. For marijuanna users I think we need to establish what level of THC constitutes being "under the influence" like states have already done for alcohol. Right now, any amount in your blood is considered being "under the influence". The oral swab test can show recent use, so it should be used to establish potential DUI drivers, but until legal limit THC levels are established, simply testing drivers would be, as now, not only unfair, but also more persecution of people that are not, in any way impaired. This legal level of impairment should also apply to employment. I firmly believe that employment reviews and continued employment should be based on performance, not lifestyle, credit scores, or background checks, but I know I'm in the minority in holding that view. I'd much rather have an airline require a short performance test right before a flight than simply, as they do now, have a no drug or alcohol policy, and random testing.
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.
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.
Do some research before you write
