Canada may legalize pot! sweet.... [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

Gamblor

03-06-2005, 11:55 PM

Four RCMP officers were killed this weekend in a small operation in the tiny town of Mayerthorpe, Alberta when they were checking out a small grow operation (20 plants) and stolen car parts ring.

In a country relatively devoid of violence against the police, it has sent shockwaves throughout the media, and it's been all over the news and TV all weekend. It's a crying [censored] shame that a little [censored] plant put 4 officers into mortal danger.

4 RCMP officers killed on Alberta Farm (http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/03/03/rcmpalert050303.html)

Zygote

03-07-2005, 01:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It's a crying [censored] shame that a little [censored] plant put 4 officers into mortal danger

[/ QUOTE ]

i fail to see how the mortal danger was caused by the plant?

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 03:45 AM

The existence of the plants psychotropic properties causes the federal government of Canada to make possession of the plant illegal. The fact that possession of the plant is illegal creates a black market for the plant. Over time, a network of dangerous criminals forms around the black market.

In a black market situation, people become dangerous because they can no longer appeal to the authorities for business disputes. You can't exactly go to the police when a dealer shorts you by a couple of pounds of marijuana. Those who work in the black market (especially at this scale) must be willing to defend their own interests at all costs, or they or their business will not survive long.

The Canadian Mounties, who are simply attempting to enforce the law, make the fateful decision to arrest one of these dangerous criminals becuase he is growing the illegal plant. The villian fights back against the Mounties. Perhaps he has killed before and has no respect for human life. Perhaps he doesn't want to spend the next twenty years in prison. At any rate, he chooses to go out in a blaze of glory, or infamy that is.

So in the end, the villian is the reason the police died. However, remove the black market, then there is no villian. Remove the law against possession of the plant, then there is no black market. Remove the plant, and there is no law. So the plant is the cause. Well...

Remove the world, and there is no plant. Remove God, and there is no world.

So its all God's fault. The buck stops at the prime mover.

It all depends on where you draw the line. Causality is a funny thing, but consider this. Which of all the causes I listed is the easiest to remove? Certainly not God. Don't want to get rid of the world. Exterminating the plant is an option, but it would be very difficult and we would lose valuable hemp in the process. History has proven that demand nearly always provides a supply, so ridding the world of the criminals and the black market is an extremely difficult proposal.

The simplest solution is getting rid of the law. The Canadians are taking the path of least resistance. They are becoming like water, which is like the way.

The plant was not the sole cause of this tragic incident. It was only one of many causes. However, remove but a single one of these causes, and the chain will be broken. The weakest link in the chain is the law. Removing the law is a wise decision, in my opinion.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 04:42 AM

i recently posted this in OOT:

I personally believe that the continued illegal classification of most drugs ('cept for alcohol, tabbacco, and some rare ones) artificially inflates the price for those drugs, making it profitable for the criminal element to involve themselves with their distribution and production.

Thus, drugs like crack, heroin, X, meth, etc(and even ganja to some degree), are erronously associated with violence and crime. If they were fully legalized, then those negitive connotations would disappear, and we'd be left to deal with the negitive direct effects alone.

For exmple, if a city or state keeps such hard drugs illegal, esp theit distribution and production, but NOT their consumption, then it becomes much easier for that society to deal with the negitive effects of those drugs. Vancouver B.C. is a perfect example; Since they decriminalized the use and possesion of heroin, but incresed the penalties for distribution and production, along with providing 'maintence doses' and clean needles to already addicted users, they have seen a signifigant drop in the number of new HIV infections and overdose deaths.

Decriminalzation and preventive education (not the U.S's current 'drugs are the devil' approach, mind you; real, accurate education) are, IMOP the only plausable long term solution to the problems posed by highly addictive and unhealthy drugs.

Marajuana, on the other hand, should be LEGALIZED, flat out. there is no convincing argument for it's continued illegal, schedule one status, where pot is treated the same way as heroin in the eyes of the law. I applaud cities like seattle, which has recently passed an initiave requiring the authorities to treat Ganja as their lowest possible priority. States like Nevada and Alaska, which have recently decriminalized pot use and the possesion of small quantities, are also on the right track, IMO.

I defy anyone to provide a good argument proving that marajuana is in any way more harmful to society and the state than alcohol. I believe that the default condition of any substance, idea, or object should be legality, and that, lacking a good, objectivly quantifiable reason, those substances, ideas and things should be legal.

wacki

03-07-2005, 05:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
For exmple, if a city or state keeps such hard drugs illegal, esp theit distribution and production, but NOT their consumption, then it becomes much easier for that society to deal with the negitive effects of those drugs. Vancouver B.C. is a perfect example; Since they decriminalized the use and possesion of heroin, but incresed the penalties for distribution and production, along with providing 'maintence doses' and clean needles to already addicted users, they have seen a signifigant drop in the number of new HIV infections and overdose deaths.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not a valid arguement. Overdose deaths are strongly related to quality control and its variation. Some guy used to 10x stepped on junk accidently ends up with mobster primo. Guys heart explodes.....

Legalizing the demand and criminalizing the supply increases demand and decreases supply making the price skyrocket. High price = high profit = black market explosion.

Criminalizing the use and (kindof) legalizing the distribution drops the price to the point that it's not profitable due to oversupply and lack of demand. The dealers get slapped on the wrist while the users get years. Then the black market crashes and nobody can find it. Yes I know this doesn't make a lot of sense to a lot of people but it works in the orient. Michael Levine has many books/papers on this.

zaxx19

03-07-2005, 07:13 AM

I lived in Montreal for 3 yrs and really couldnt say I felt as if Marijuana was really illegal. There are probably 50 delivery services operating there...several head shops where yu can buy pot...people readily smoke it outside and in certain bars and clubs..basically you only need a modicum of discretion to safely be an avid pot smoker in Canada anyway.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 08:51 AM

...the government causes the black market.

they start your chain, therefore, they are responsible and the plant is just a natural by-product of the chain.

Drug dealers are drug dealers, and ones that carry the guns and stuff, generally deal with marijuana AND many other drugs. Marijuana is only a part of their inventory because it is in an illegal category. They'll deal with ANYTHING illegal. The government, brilliantly hands them a multi-billion dollar, uncontrolled product's business and profits on a silver platter. I heavily agree with your assessment that the law should be removed because that definitely would've prevented the mounty situation.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 09:03 AM

they aren't really making it legal for the sake of satisfying people's constitutional right to smoke pot. The move to make marijuana illegal is an attempt to hurt the black market community by overtaking the multibillion dollar marijuana industry and investing it into the economy. Also, if it becomes legal, tourism will increase. Another benefit of legalization is that the governemtn would sponsor more awareness programs, which really help (most people's ideas on drugs are based soley on rumors). The pot would also become controlled and we would no longer be flooded with cases of "tainted weed".

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 09:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
(most people's ideas on drugs are based soley on rumors)

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, I think more people smoke (have smoked) pot than you realize.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 10:26 AM

so? firstly, a certain percent of those peopel only experienced tainted weed. secondly, just because they've treid it, doesn't mean they know much about the drug, other than what its like to get high once.

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 10:53 AM

The legalization of marijuana would also undermine its tendency to influence users to try other illicit substances. Because marijuana use is far more prevalent than other forms of illegal drug use, nonusers have a much better chance of coming into contact with those using the drug, therby becoming tempted to try it themselves. Those who do try the drug realize that the government hype against it is mostly propaganda, and the obvious question comes to mind. If most everything I've been told about marijuana is untrue, then have parents, teachers, and government agencies been lying to me about other drugs?

After maybe a year of smoking marijuana and noticing no ill effects, the casual pot smoker, having broken the law hundreds of times to get stoned already, begins to branch out. His mistrust of authority has led him to question everything they say. He no longer cares about breaking the law regarding drugs, and desires to experience what effects other drugs have firsthand. The criminalization of marijuana has broken the trust between him and the authorities regarding drug use; the result is an eager mind ready to ingest most anything.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 10:56 AM

I think its silly and somewhat shortsighted to state most people's ideas on drugs are based in rumor.

wacki

03-07-2005, 10:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think its silly and somewhat shortsighted to state most people's ideas on drugs are based in rumor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, and this is why: www.erowid.org/ (http://www.erowid.org/)

chabibi

03-07-2005, 11:34 AM

Marijuana cultivation is big business. Marijuana production is one of canadas largest industries. It is BC’s second largest industry in terms of revenue, second only to softwood lumber. In Ontario it is the second largest agricultural crop in term of revenue, next to beef. We already export more weed to the US than we did beef before the Canadian beef ban. the full legalization of weed will have a huge affect in terms of value added to GDP as long as the US doesn’t slow border crossings to a crawl. The only down side is I doubt ill be able to grab an once for a 150 anymore /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Maybe ill grow my own
/images/graemlins/grin.gif

jaxmike

03-07-2005, 01:51 PM

good thing they have all that gun control in canada. it sure works. oh, and i do have a heart, i dont want to take anything away from the sacrafice made by the mounties. i honor their lives and hope the best for their families. i just wanted to point out the absurdity of thinking that if you have tight controls on guns the criminals wont have them.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 01:57 PM

then why don't you compare US gun-related police homicides to Canada's...

hmmm... crazy result, eh?

Dead

03-07-2005, 01:58 PM

I'm joining this thread a little late, but I just wanted to say, Go Canada! I wish the U.S. would decriminalize pot as well, and it's not because I want to smoke it.

I haven't used the stuff in 2 and a half years.

It's because I want to make our streets safer.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 01:59 PM

okay let me rephrase, because this i can state as a fact:

Most people i've met in my life hold by rumor-based drug info.

jaxmike

03-07-2005, 02:00 PM

since all i will be called is a racist i will let you have that, however, i believe that your assertion is not entirely accurate.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 02:02 PM

for your info, canada is looking beyond decriminalization. They are looking to fully legalize and federally tax marijuana.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 02:04 PM

I can give you that one, and I think its ridiculous that people are so miseducated about drugs.

I blame D.A.R.E. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Is there anything that has failed more than the DARE program?

Zygote

03-07-2005, 02:07 PM

good post.

Also, marijuana being illegal is a large part of why it is often considered a gateway drug. It is a gateway to the illegal community because it is illegal. Marijuana can introduce people to guns and other things, not only harder drugs. Because marijuana is much more innocent, innocent people are trying to use it, and have no choice but to be introduce themselves into an illegal community. This is where they are influenced into harder drugs and more illegal activity. If marijuana were legal, all these negative manifestations would obviously not occur.

CORed

03-07-2005, 02:08 PM

This is the correct way to handle it, IMO. I would not stop with marijuana. IMO, in a free society, what you put into your body is your business. I believe that the drug laws cause a lot more harm than they prevent. The corollary to that is that if you do drugs, you are responsible for your behavior. "It was the drugs (or booze), your honor", should not be an excuse for any criminal behavior. Law enforcement should be concentrating on violent crimes and property crimes, not enforcing "nanny state" or "morality" laws against drugs, prostitution, sodomy, etc.

Dead

03-07-2005, 02:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
for your info, canada is looking beyond decriminalization. They are looking to fully legalize and federally tax marijuana.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still support it. I want to legalize all drugs.

But how would they tax it?

What's to stop me from just growing it in my backyard?

Zygote

03-07-2005, 02:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Marijuana cultivation is big business. Marijuana production is one of canadas largest industries. It is BC’s second largest industry in terms of revenue, second only to softwood lumber. In Ontario it is the second largest agricultural crop in term of revenue, next to beef. We already export more weed to the US than we did beef before the Canadian beef ban. the full legalization of weed will have a huge affect in terms of value added to GDP as long as the US doesn’t slow border crossings to a crawl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good points.

If it were legal, I wonder what effects would come from the U.S.'s shortsupply of marijuana.

CORed

03-07-2005, 02:26 PM

I'm more radical. I would legalize everything. Decriminalization is a step in the right direction, but it still leaves sale and distribution in the hands of the criminal element. I would handle the more dangerous drugs sort of like tobacco and alcohol. Require warning labels, up to and including, 'this stuff may well kill you", have severe penalties for driving or operating heavy machinery where appropriate, but allow sales. Sales to minors would, of course be prohibited, and sellers and distributors would be licensed and regulated. Employers would till be allowed to test where safety is critical, and make non-use of drugs that might compromise safety a condition of employment. I really don't think you would see much, if any increase in drug abuse. Most people already know that heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine are addictive, and that cocaine and meth can be extremely destructive to their health. Those who aren't concerned with the natural consequences of drug abuse aren't deterred by the legal consequnces, either.

I think a good case can be made that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. It never ceases to amaze me that it is still illegal because of a ridiculous propaganda campaign in the 1930's.

CORed

03-07-2005, 02:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What's to stop me from just growing it in my backyard?

[/ QUOTE ]

Laziness. A lot of people will find it more convenient to buy it at the store than to grow it themselves. It's entirely possible to brew your own beer, or make your own wine, too, but most people don't bother. Of course, it's entirely possible that they will make personal cultivation illegal to protect their revenue source.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 02:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What's to stop me from just growing it in my backyard?

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to, it will be cheaper to buy, just like in Amsterdam...

When I was there I was shocked how inexpensive it was to do drugs. I thought it would be an arm and a leg, but it was cheaper than a beer.

Dead

03-07-2005, 02:39 PM

Like how cheap are we talking?

I heard( /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) that it's around $35 for an eighth of weed here in upstate NY. I'm sure it's a hell of a lot cheaper in the Netherlands, because the price here is inflated due to the illegal demand.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 02:49 PM

Because I am incredibly dumb when it comes to drugs prices, i **think** that is was 5 euros for a gram (or something like that/images/graemlins/confused.gif) Maybe a european can help me out here...

It was cheap enough that it was something like $7 (us dollars) for 4 joints... hmmm, memory kinda hazy...

Dead

03-07-2005, 02:52 PM

Ok so an eighth is 3.5 grams.

And you say a gram is about 5 euros. So that's 17.5 euros for an eighth?

So after converting from Euro to dollars, that's about $23.50.

Not as cheap as I expected. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 03:03 PM

When compared to a night out drinking (>>$40 often) that shits a bargain! /images/graemlins/cool.gif

Dead

03-07-2005, 03:05 PM

Yeah but it's only 12 bucks cheaper than here. /images/graemlins/frown.gif I disagree that it wouldn't be cheaper to grow my own. I'm now sure that it would be. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Cya

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 03:23 PM

Do not forget to factor in the quality of the drugs you could get in Amsterdam versus what you could get in New York (although I've never smoked any New York weed) or versus what you could successfully cultivate.

thatpfunk

03-07-2005, 03:34 PM

amsterdam > california medicinal > california >>>>> new jersey (only east coast experience)

i mildly hallucinated in amsterdam for gods sake.

Zygote

03-07-2005, 03:35 PM

growing pot is more difficult then you think.Do you see smokers growing and producing hteir own tabocco? No, because it is a full time job that requires skill, time and equipment. This is especially true if you wnat a quality product.

Also, there still may be laws that will stop you from doing this.

whiskeytown

03-07-2005, 03:48 PM

I was just reading an article where they said the number of people treated for marijuana professionally has tripled since 1992...

but of course, most of these were court ordered and mandated treatments - do this or go to jail.

I read about a guy who's friend got busted for possession, she had to go to this treatment, and if she didn't go on and on about how pot "ruined" her life and made her a helpless addict, she could fail the program and go to jail, so she made crap up for 4 weeks, got out, and went right back to smoking.

There is no good reason for pot to be criminalized and alcohol not to be - we need consistancy in US laws, but of course, marijuana doesn't have a lobby behind it yet.

RB

CORed

03-07-2005, 05:02 PM

It would be great if this happnens, but I expect the U.S. to put a lot of pressure on Canada not to legalize. They could easily gum up the border with extensive inspections. Of course, Canadians generally don't like to be bullied by the U.S., so this could backfire. If Canada legalizes, I expect a lot of smuggling into the U.S. The canadian border is wide open, and a lot of it is in wilderness. You might have canoes and pack trains loaded with pot bought legally in Canada coming into the U.S. I'm sure a lot of Americans who live near the border will buy personal use quantities and smuggle it back in, too. The U.S. will be faced with either launching a massive interdiction effort, or throwing in the towel and legalizing it here. I love it.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 06:48 PM

It wasn't an argument. this has been implemented effectivly in vancouver B.C. The government is providing heroin and needles to addicts, as well as a secure place to inject. It has drasticly reduced the spread of HIV and overdose deaths.

The program has nothing to do with legalizing demand, only already addicted users qualify for the program.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 06:53 PM

First off, MARAJUANA IS NOT A 'GATEWAY DRUG'! this has been proven many times and is not a subject of contention. the idea was started as an anti-drug propaganda.

your argument, if true, would also apply to things like traffic violations. If a person goes five miles per over the limit for many years without getting caught, then are they then influenced to try street racing? c'mon.

[ QUOTE ]
His mistrust of authority has led him to question everything they say.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a good thing, and isn't confined to pot smokers.

[ QUOTE ]
The criminalization of marijuana has broken the trust between him and the authorities regarding drug use; the result is an eager mind ready to ingest most anything.

[/ QUOTE ]
of course! i always knew that because one law is unjust, then all simaler laws must be! I'm buying some crank right now.

You're not giving people enough credit, man.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 06:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The pot would also become controlled and we would no longer be flooded with cases of "tainted weed".

[/ QUOTE ]

'tainted weed? what the heck is that? I have seen (an estimate) thousands of different baggies of pot, and never once have i encountered the myhtical 'tainted' or 'laced' pot. (unless we were doing the lacing ourselves). It's a myth. doesn't exisc, except in very very rare instances.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:00 PM

many people who think they know a lot about drugs still hold many misconceptions about the effects, etc of drugs. those misconceptions are usually, IMO, based on rumors (including childhood misconceptions that have never been corrected by experience) and mis(dis)information being advertized as 'education'.

Almost everyone i know who has not had direct, personal experiences with drugs, bases their entire opinion and knowlage of drugs on such rumors and misinformation.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:06 PM

DARE, GREAT (gang resistance education and training), and other gov anti-drug programs' so called 'education' is really nothing more than rumor and propaganda designed to psychologicaly manipulate the opinions of youth. IMO, DARE has CAUSED a great deal more drug use than it has stopped.

We need far more honest education, that includes honesty about why people do drugs like Ganja (they like them), what the addictive effects are (they are habit forming like anything that feels good but not physically addictive), and what the real health risks are (comparable to smoking ciggerettes, but very few smokers hit up 20 Js a day, and not one person in the history of the planet has died from a overdose of THC).

that's a good start.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:08 PM

The law should be removed because it's WRONG, which should be the first reason to legalize pot.

Lacking a GOOD reason to make ANYTHING illegal, it's default status should be legality. there is no good reason for ganja to be made/remain illegal, imo, and many good reasons to leagalize it.

chabibi

03-07-2005, 07:16 PM

these mounties were shot with a high powered hunting rifle that are incredbly easy to aquire here canada. even for a convicted sex offender like the the shgooter in this case. the strict gun cuntrol laws are directed at hundguns and other weapons that have limited hunting use

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:18 PM

I would legalize many drugs, but there are some, doe to their highly addictive and incapacitating nature, that i believe should remain illegal. Crack, Heroin, Methamphetimine, Painkillers, X, LSD etc.

Crack, meth and Heroin because, legal or not, they create such an addiction as to render the addict irrational and incapable of making right/wrong descisions- they are inextricably connected to crime and the spread of desiese, and must continue to be illegal. I would, however, decriminalize their use and posession, and use tax revenue from less destructive drugs to provide a real level of care to addicts.

LSD, X, meth and crack because they cause irreversable negitive health effects and brain damage.

Heroin and painkillers because their incapacitating nature would create a drain on society that their taxation would be unable to pay for.

Anything that grows from the ground, no matter how harmful, should remain legal and open to anyone's use. this includes Ganja, Shrooms, Peyote, Cocoa, Salvia, etc...

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:21 PM

IMO, all it will take to start the shift in the US towards legalization is a couple of american timber companies looking at the insane profits that milling hemp for paper, clothing, even fuel, will start making canadian comapnies. The lobby will flip for legalization of at least hemp so fast all of our heads will spin.

chabibi

03-07-2005, 07:33 PM

Your speeding analogy is terrible. I think what zygote was saying is that marijuana is a gateway to crime in general threw association. For example if I didn’t smoke so much weed I would know fewer drug dealers personally and would not be able to find harder drugs such as coke or ex so easily. Right now if I want harder drugs I can just grab off the same dealer that sells me my weed

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 07:50 PM

I'm not giving anyone credit. I was speaking from my own personal experience. I've abused a myriad of different drugs in my time (never tried crank though); most of the experiences were actually pleasant. Would I have tried all these drugs without having smoked pot first? I don't know if I can honestly answer that question. The LSD really busted the door open for me more than anything. I think once you've put enough of that crap in you, you truly are ready to try anything. My circle of friends may have never gotten close to that drug had it not been for the pot we smoked beforehand. It really is tough to say.

I think what motivated me more than anything was curiosity. My curiosity was well-tempered by fear, owed to all the Just Say No propaganda. Until I discovered marijuana, I was far too timid to try anything of this nature. The first time I saw a bag of weed, I was so naive. "Is that really weed?" I couldn't take my eyes off it. I wanted to smell it, hold it, but never would I dare smoke it. Eventually, by watching those who were high and seeing enough people come down without scratching their eyeballs out and blending them into a nice sorbet, I figured "What the heck. A little pot won't hurt me." So I smoked it... You know some people say you don't get high the first time you smoke... That was me. I had to smoke four joints the first time I finally got high; it was the third try. I felt like scratching my eyes out and blending them into a nice sorbet. Eventually I came back into the real world and, being unscathed, was ready for more.

The LSD was different. Never seen it, seen anybody on it, didn't know what to expect. Had a guide, tried it once. He had to physically put the dose on my tounge and order me to swallow. I'm glad he did.

Those were two defining moments that opened the doors to a new world within my mind, waiting to be explored; and explore it I did. Maybe acid was more the gateway drug. I doubt I would've got near it without the experience of pot first, however.

I can understand laws behind street racing and I understand speed limits as well (the limit has to be set somewhere). I've always felt proud obeying laws that I understand. Drug laws I never understood. Didn't understand why drugs made people crazy. Didn't understand how they could ruin lives. I've always felt proud breaking laws I don't understand. It's just the rebel in me. At any rate, I had to know; I had to understand. I thought using the drugs would help me understand, but now I find myself more confused than when I started.

In the end I guess the government doesn't trust that people will use their drugs responsibly. I think they are stupid.

Now that I think about it, I think you are right, bholdr. Pot isn't a gateway drug. Life is a gateway drug. We're all just looking for the next high.

You guys will forget all this if I ever run for president. Right?

bholdr

03-07-2005, 07:56 PM

yeah, i was reaching a little bit with the speeding analogy.

However, i still believe that the whole 'gateway' drug idea is 10% fact, 90 percent propaganda.

I personally did a whole bunch of other things before i tries marajuana, and i think if i had to qualify one as the 'gateway drug' it would have to be alcohol, due to its inhibition lowering effects.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 08:00 PM

please forgive the (in retrospect) hasty and unapplicable speeding metaphor. apples and oarnges, i was in a hurry.

I think your point about 'life' bwing the gateway is excellent. it gets to the real core of the issue- pot doen not (by itself) make one want to try other drugs, it's one's natural curiosity.

IMO, alcohol was my 'gateway drug' (if i had to choose one) due to its inhibition lowering effect.

[ QUOTE ]
I think what motivated me more than anything was curiosity. My curiosity was well-tempered by fear, owed to all the Just Say No propaganda. Until I discovered marijuana, I was far too timid to try anything of this nature. The first time I saw a bag of weed, I was so naive. "Is that really weed?" I couldn't take my eyes off it. I wanted to smell it, hold it, but never would I dare smoke it. Eventually, by watching those who were high and seeing enough people come down without scratching their eyeballs out and blending them into a nice sorbet, I figured "What the heck. A little pot won't hurt me." So I smoked it... You know some people say you don't get high the first time you smoke... That was me. I had to smoke four joints the first time I finally got high; it was the third try. I felt like scratching my eyes out and blending them into a nice sorbet. Eventually I came back into the real world and, being unscathed, was ready for more.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorbet. LOL! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 08:13 PM

Not speaking from personal experience on this one bholdr, but I agree with most of what you say. Crack, heroin, meth, should remain illegal with decriminalization. I've seen/heard about too many people messing their lives up due to these three drugs.

Some of the weaker painkillers i could see being legal. Although this could be dangerous due to overdose potential. I think it would be nice to be able to pop a hydrocodone once a month on a weekend, take a hot bath, and sleep like a baby. Strong painkillers like demerol or dilaudid should not be available.

X I have no problem with. I honestly don't see what all the hoopla is about. I agree with Hunter S. Thompson... its mild, it doesn't do much. Now mix that stuff with some mescaline and a bit of cocaine and you have a party. This is what most of the good X is, at least, in my experience. I say legalize it. When people start taking pure MDMA and realize that it usually makes you pass out in an hour they'll probably stop using it. Or start mxing it with other stuff. Oh well.

Hooray for the natural drugs. Including cocaine, since it is just a cocoa extract. Stuff is pretty benign too. Again, I don't see what all the hoopla is about.

Then you get to my personal favorite. The one drug that I hold so many mixed emotions for, hold so many contradictory opinions about. I must say though, bholdr, if you are going to keep peyote legal, you may as well throw LSD in with it. Peyote's far more dangerous in my opinion. Bear in mind, that only one person has been documented of dying from an LSD overdose (not accidental death while on LSD). The guy shot up several hundred milligrams I think. Whoah! The potential for abuse is very low, as well. It is far too rough on the body, and the constant abuser will eventually burn out. This inevitably happens, although you are right, they never seem quite the same.

So my list of totally legal drugs would be, from most speculative to least speculative: peyote, LSD, weak painkillers, cocaine, MDMA, the rest of natures pharmacy, and finally... MARIJUANA!

Voltorb

03-07-2005, 08:24 PM

Is it true that DuPont had a hand way back when in pushing for the current classification of marijuana, including hemp, as nothing but a dangerous drug. Apparently the products derived from hemp and hemp seed oil could have been disastrously competitive with their products. Just a rumor I heard.

I think that timber companies having to ignore hemp as an excellent and far more renewable source of fiber for paper is a crime against trees everywhere. Pot is supposedly much easier on the land and grows much faster than any tree. Using this plant could free up land for real deciduous forest, not row after perfect row of pine trees that looks so out of place in the south, or anywhere for that matter.

Gamblor

03-07-2005, 09:14 PM

Now, I'm all for the legalization of pot frankly, because I like smoking it and I don't like paying 200% markup to defer black market costs (economic costs, not $ costs).

But I also can't deny that smoking a joint or 5 and doing so on a daily basis certainly can create social costs. Before it is legalized, I firmly believe the government should be setting up huge infrastructure for programs similar to alcohol abuse; R.I.D.E (drunk driving checkpoints), community service for violators, pot-abuse centres and hotlines.

Just follow the trail of Pizza Pizza boxes.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 09:38 PM

I aggree that marajuana is a drug that can be abused, and some people should not smoke it and require help if they aquire a habit that they are unable or unwilling to conntrol. AND, that's one of the great things about legalization, A: it removes the stigma that prevents some drug users from seeking help, B: the taxation (even at t moderate level) would more than pay for the social costs (unkilk, for example, heroin or crack, which is one of the reasons those drugs should stay illegal, IMO), and C: Legalization of marajuana would make it easier to keep it out f the hands of minors, since distributers would be liscensed and monitored.

also, the price would drop. ye-ha! 40$ for 1/8th of an ounce is stupid- but i could go to jail if i were to try to grow my own to avoid that cost. if it gets legalized in the us i won't be paying a penny. (except for fertilizer, etc)

bholdr

03-07-2005, 09:48 PM

I think cocaine is a tricky one, due to it's highly addictive properties. But, i too, don't see what 'all the hoopla's' about- it's WAY milder than meth, X, etc. i suppose part of the problem is the ease with which it can be turned into crack, which is a REAL BIG deal, super addictive, totally incapacitating (in terms of being able to do anythng productive), and totlly withouit any redeeming medical or social value (even LSD, X and Methamphetimine have legitimate medical uses).

I wouldn't mind seeing pure MDMA being legalized (it is absolutely fantastic with mescaline, isn't it?), and it's legalization would probably cut down on the black market, speedy-X that everybody does at parties and isn't even really the same drug.

If peyote didn't occur naturally, i would like to see it kept illegal. there are far more powerful natural hallunicigens that i would also like to see banned, too, such as magic shrooms (the little red fukers with the white spots- make you trip for like a week), but, then again, they grow from the ground, and i have a real hard time banning a natural substance for personal use. decrim only, maybe.

I do have to say LSD is a fun one (when i was 19 it was, anyway!), but i kow too many people that have permanant psycological damage for all the good times people have on it to justify making it legal. All IMO.

bholdr

03-07-2005, 09:57 PM

yes, dupont and the whole artificial fiber industry had a hand in it, as well as the cotton and timber industries.

William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper magnate and owner of huge tracts of timbered land, had a huge hand in it's classification as having no medical or social benifits.

how many people have died for his greed? I have a freind (now deceased) who insisted that smoking MJ after Chemo allowed her to eat and keep up her strength, she said once that 'pot has added two years to my life."

it is a FUKING TRAVESTY that she had to become a criminal in order to survive, to increse the profits of the timber and cotton industries and the profiteers that make their money off of the lies that perpetuate the drug war.

I have another friend that was killed by colon cancer and chemo. he refused to try pot because it was illegal. and so on and so forth. dirty god damn bastards. i'm gonna go smoke a joint before i get any more riled up.

Zygote

03-08-2005, 01:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It's a myth. doesn't exisc, except in very very rare instances.

[/ QUOTE ]

this makes no sense?

Firstly, there are huge problems with PCP being mixed into marijuana. Crack can be used. Windex is quite common. Several kids in my area were hospitilized and i think one died from tainted weed. Just because you haven't experienced it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

bholdr

03-08-2005, 02:14 AM

strange. every weed dealer i ever knew charged extra for laced pot, and it NEVER just came around accidentially. Who the heck puts 20$ worth of powder into weed and then doesn't charge for it or tel their customers about it? as far as not having experienced it, i have traveled over large portions of this country, and NEVER have i heard or read a credible story about people getting laced weed that didn't know what they were getting into, but i have heard a lot of tall tales on the subject.

sounds bizzare to me, but i'll take your word for it.

this is the kind of story that lends creedence to the anti-drug propagandists and their stupid positions, but is ultimately an argument for legalization.

In my experience, and i'm not accusing the kids in your area of this, anyone who claims to be the victim of 'tainted' or 'laced' weed has been screwing around with other drugs and using the 'tainted' story as a cover to make themselves look like the victims. there was a big scandal involving such dumb kids in my hometown.

Yet another argument for HONEST drug education, IMO.

Zygote

03-08-2005, 02:25 AM

They put the crack in to get them addicted. They spray windex so they think the weed is very good. PCP applies to both. There definitely are incentives. Weed is mixed with tons of chemicals all the time, heard of hyrdoponics? Say we cut down on those supplies and instead taint the drug so it is far more effective than weed would ever be, thereby, providing a bettr product, hence, more frequent sales.

Don't get me wrong, its no more dangerous than someone slipping date rape in a drink. Its probably even less frequent. But, should people stop drinking because something could happen? Absolutely not.

bholdr

03-08-2005, 02:43 AM

Hydroponics, strictly speaking, refers to the process of cultivating marajuana without using soil, not the addition of other drugs/chemicles, aside from some exotic fertilizers.

slipping date rape drugs into (girls, i hope) drinks is so f'ed up i don't even wanna talk about it. except for this kind of funny story:

This big huge rasta guy i know (he was about 6'5" 330 lbs) used to take all his hippy chicks out on the town and get wasted with them. He was a 'jolly' kind of guy, lots of female freinds, but no good with the ladies- yopu know the type- they were always getting drunk far before he did (due to the witght difference) and he was always finishing their drinks for them.

youo can geuss where this is going...

somebody slipped them some ruphies, several doses worth appearently, and he ended up drinking them and passinf out as a result. He woke up in his bed the next morning, with three of them (which is how many it took to lug his fat ass home) hoping that he'd been date-raped, but no dice.

he told that story all the time. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

adios

03-08-2005, 02:55 AM

So you've had quite a bit of experience in taking drugs I take it.

bholdr

03-08-2005, 05:13 AM

yes and no.

I have had very varied experience, though i never went nuts with any one substance. I've also been good freinds with a few people with far more experience than myself, and have been present for a great deal of drug use. (even went to the burning man once- good god!)

my experiences have ranged from uncomfortable and disturbing to fantastic and enlightening, and experimentation used to be something i took very seriously. Nowadays i only drink and smoke a little ganja here and there, i found what i was looking for and am satisfied with my experiences, and would encourage any intelligent and responsible (not anyone that has a history of addiction or irresponsible risk taking, of course) to experiment as well, if that intrests them.

I believe that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with any drug or mind-altering experience. In fact, i think thayt to some degree, EVERYTHING we put in our bodies is a drug. food, vitamins, prescription drugs, recreational drugs, illegal drugs, etc. Furthermore, varying one's experience through travel, trying new activities, etc, also leads to the same kind of growth that one may experience through responsible use of drugs. To categorically reject one potential avenue towards personal growth (drugs) without a good reason for doing so is being unfair o one's self. It isn't for everybody, but i think my experience has made me a less inhibited and wiser person. Particularly benifical drugs, IMO, have been marajuana and MDMA. Cocaine, methamphetimine, painkillers (i had a prescription) and barbituates were somewhere between useless and negitive. LSD, mushrooms, and other hallucinigens were a lot of fun, but not too helpful.

The dangers of drugs are, of course, considerable, health risks, potential damage to one's mental capacities and mental health, and so on. but a responsible user may mitigate those dangers by using in a safe and controlled manner.

If you're intrested at all, even as an observer, i encourage you to read 'the doors of perception' by aldous huxley, who is a far more articulate spokesman for experimentation than I.

I am aware that this post will make me appear to be some kind of drug-crazed substance abuser, but that really couldn't be farther from the truth. I look at drugs and my experiences with them the same way as i look at many of the other risky things I've done. skydiving, surfing, cliffdiving (THAT was a fun learning experience), as far as sports go, and deliberatly associating with people of vastly different backgrounds and worldveiws than myself, volunteering in rehab clinics, shelters, attending republican cacus meetings, attending green party meetings, protesting, listening to conservative talk, playing poker... I'm almost arguably obsessed with seeking out new experiences, which was a bigger motivation for using drugs than the high ever was.