American Drug War Doc.

[Lex_Luthor]

Pfizer, Merck....etc

Do you call yourself a patient or a junkie? The only difference is who takes your money.

It seems to me that pharma products are far more dangerous. Afterall, they pump ADD kids up with 'legal' meth.

[Ronin13]

Didn't read page 3, but here we go:
FACT: To buy alcohol you need to be 21 (sure there are ways around this but the law states...), drug dealers don't card!
FACT: 65% of high school seniors (age 17-19) surveyed in 2008 said they drink because it's illegal- rebel factor.
FACT: 90% of pharmaceutics are chemical based. 90% of MMJ sold in the state of CA is unaltered by chemicals other than fertilizer and plant food.
FACT: DEA Lies aside, doctors have discovered that MDMA (key ingredient in ecstasy) has some psychological benefits for therapeutic treatments.
FACT: Since 2004 the US Government has spent over $20 BILLION/yr combating drugs. The average drug cartel income is estimated in the $600 BILLION/yr range (by some estimates one former DEA supervisor stated cartels, as long as there is demand in the US, have "Unlimited funding.")
FACT: The very definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.
I'm not saying legalize all illegal drugs, decriminalize- it's a different thing. Also, in Holland the government has pure and controlled heroin to help patients going through withdraw from addiction. They offer programs that are 150% more effective than what we have here. How about instead of $20-30B a year on the drug war, we spend no even 1/4 of that to help with education and rehab. Tolerate the less harmful drug use, and maybe nip the problem in the bud. Illegal or not, people are still going to use, it's common sense, why not let people have the freedom to choose, but before they do give them education that's not funded by pfizer and the other big pharma companies (I'm talking about DARE, since it seemed to work so well for me: in my life I've tried MDMA, Coke, weed, and even abused prescrip drugs, and I graduated DARE).

[akumadiavolo]

For legalization, it has been theorized that you will have a large increase of users and abusers, those unintentionally addicted, and mostly the younger generations. They will then require assistance in getting off it and depending upon the type of drug, the assistance may be counseling or hospitalization. Since most drug abusers do not have assets or funds, the money to pay for the care would be similar in nature to those who utilize emergency rooms without insurance; cash funded, don't pay the hospital bill or medicaid.

Well if you look at what happened in Portugal in 2001 when they decriminalized all drugs usage rates only rose 1-3% for most drugs and for other drugs the usage rates actually fell. There has not been a rise in other crimes associated with the decriminalization and they estimate they are saving hundreds of millions per year in not fighting the problem. Also one side effect was now that the drugs are open and safer the rates of HIV and other diseases associated with drug use have seen a sharp decline as well.

That said there is probably a large cultural difference also. Their rates after decriminalization are still mostly lower than here in the US where the drugs are still illegal. And the american "attitude" is not the same same in portugal so you can't say for certain that there would be a similar outcome here.

[Delfuego]

Let us not forget that Alcohol destroys more lives than all the other drugs combined. Yet is perfectly legal and is forcibly advertised to us and children alike.

No solutions here, just a few observations. In think some type of decriminalization should be considered. Additionally, rescheduling of narcotics; in no way should Pot be considered the same type (level) of drug as Heroin.

[Ronin13]

Let us not forget that Alcohol destroys more lives than all the other drugs combined. Yet is perfectly legal and is forcibly advertised to us and children alike.

No solutions here, just a few observations. In think some type of decriminalization should be considered. Additionally, rescheduling of narcotics; in no way should Pot be considered the same type (level) of drug as Heroin.

Along that same line- they also are sending people the wrong message when they have pot (schedule I) and cocaine (schedule II)... wait, coke is less dangerous that marijuana?

[akumadiavolo]

Let us not forget that Alcohol destroys more lives than all the other drugs combined. Yet is perfectly legal and is forcibly advertised to us and children alike.

No solutions here, just a few observations. In think some type of decriminalization should be considered. Additionally, rescheduling of narcotics; in no way should Pot be considered the same type (level) of drug as Heroin.

Actually nicotine(cigarettes) could be considered to kill more people than alcohol, and it is vastly more addictive and deadly(50mg of nicotine will kill you). I did some volunteer work at a rehab facility, you would be amazed how many people have an easier time kicking a cocaine or heroine habit than the do quitting smoking. If anything is illegal it should be nicotine. Nicotine isn't usually directly responsible for the death, but it serve no purpose other than it's strong addictive properties.

[Hoosier]

I saw some references to the Netherlands, however I think Portugal is a far more interesting case-study. Portugal made a rather dramatic about face in it's policy just over ten years ago. The results are in:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10080

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_po...l#Observations

H.

[Ak47Ar15Glock26]

a good movie to watch if you have netflix is The Union. The Business Behind Getting High.

[onedeadpirate]

The only issue I have about the personal freedom argument is, I just know from extensive experience that people who live that lifestyle, live for drugs, don't usually have money as they don't usually have a steady, legitimate job. Because of that lack of income to buy their favorite party treat, they tend to violate other's personal freedoms, their personal property, in some cases, their lives to steal your property, your identity, your checking or credit cards in order to fund their habits. That is my major concern/issue with the whole argument of legalization.

I understand your concern but are those things not already illegal? I am sure there are plenty of users that do not steal or whatever other crime to obtain their drugs. Theft, child negligence, etc are already illegal are are done by many who do not use illegal drugs. Just because you choose to get high, drunk, whatever doesn't make it an excuse for your actions.

[OneGuy67]

I understand your concern but are those things not already illegal? I am sure there are plenty of users that do not steal or whatever other crime to obtain their drugs. Theft, child negligence, etc are already illegal are are done by many who do not use illegal drugs. Just because you choose to get high, drunk, whatever doesn't make it an excuse for your actions.

I'm not discussing the pheripheral issues as being illegal. I'm discussing the pheripheral issues as being an offset to the original issue of drug use. I'm saying that drug use causes a lot of these pheripheral issues and without the drug use/abuse, a lot of the pheripheral issues wouldn't happen.