Decriminalize DrugsDecriminalize DrugsOne the many controversies in our country today, regards the prohibition of illegal narcotics. Deemed unhealthy, hazardous, and even fatal by the authorities that be; the U.S. government has declared to wage a “war on drugs.” It has been roughly fifteen years since this initiative has begun, and each year the government shuffles more money into the unjust cause of drug prohibition. Even after all of this, the problem of drugs that the government sees still exists. The prohibition of drugs is a constitutional anomaly. There are many aspects and sides to look at the issue from, but the glaring inefficiency current laws exude is that any human should have the right to ingest anything he or she desires. The antagonist on the other end believes that by doing so chaos would result because of the ingestion of said substances. This purely speculation, and we have seen in the history of man that this has never occurred nor is there reason to believe it will happen this time.
Many proponents of the current drug laws claim that legalization and/or decriminalization would in turn increase the number of drug users. If a drug is legalized/decriminalized, the price will fall and the quantity of demand will rise. The evidence from prohibition suggests we can expect two broad patterns of response if legalization occurs. First, there will be a small rise in consumption, which will take place to some extent across the spectrum of consumers. People who had never used drugs may choose to use them. Secondly, there will be a change in the nature of the drugs used and in the way in which they will be used. Specifically, there will be a move toward less intensive drug forms and less abusive patterns of use. When drugs are illegal, more damaging drugs drive out less damaging ones. In jurisdictions that liberalize their drug laws, this process will reverse itself. The evidence on this from Prohibition is unequivocal: as soon as repeal occurred, the consumption of hard liquor dropped by more than two-thirds. In addition, there was a massive shift from higher potency liquor toward the lower-proof varieties of liquor.
The vast majority of all people, addicts and alcoholics included, do not consume drugs as a means of destroying their lives. Nor do they consume them intending to become addicted to them. Abuse and addiction are the adverse consequences that sometimes occur when drugs are consumed at habitual or routine levels. They are the survival-threatening features of the behavior in question, not the functional or pleasurable features that fundamentally motivate the behavior. The most important factor for the spread of crack and heroin is that when opiates and cocaine are illegal, low potency versions of these drugs become extensively expensive. Thus, consumers are induced to switch to more intensive and more harmful drug forms and delivery systems. Absent the incentives created by current policy, consumers will revert to the modes of consumption that are less damaging.
[quote=Gavin]>This is the new paradigm of what is actually happening. People are addicted to drugs not for their own benefit, but for their own interests. They want to change their lifestyle, to reduce the dependency on the drug for them, and to be more productive.[/quote]
The next time you give a drug to an addict, ask yourself this question: what type of drug will they use. If you’ve never tried marijuana or any other recreational drug because the addict gave you some, would you still consider giving that drug if you’re looking to decrease the addiction of someone who is not an addict? If so, if you’re trying to decrease the effectiveness of an addict’s drug use, why would you go to all that much trouble? If you’ve no idea what that is, you definitely would say no, so do not. You just want access to a drug where you can access it, a place where you can find some alternatives, which is where you can get rid of a drug that is harmful for you to begin with.
You know what? If you’ve ever used any drug over the years or done any activity in the first five years, you know that this is one way or another that you can get rid with marijuana or any other illegal drug that is harmful. There are other alternatives that are also bad. But this seems to be the next wave.
So. Let’s look at the top 100 most addictive substances in the world.
[quote=Dwayne_Veal]>Disharmony, narcissism, narcissism, etc., is a kind of cultural phenomenon. Drugs are really harmful just because they are. That’s why I think every society has a drug culture. You can live in a culture where you use or use or use any drug. Then we see drug culture as an escape. What we should be trying to avoid is a place where everybody goes and they’re never going out of their wheelhouse.
[quote_=”coynster”>[quote_=”vacuum cleaner][/quote_] I mean… I think that’s the wrong approach. The last thing we should have in a society where we’re not supposed to be putting out this kind of crime is a place where people are allowed to have fun with each other. It’s okay to have fun with each other. It’s okay to have fun with the people around you. It’s okay. They might not be friends. But if that’s the path they walk, I certainly don’t think that’s the path people are going to go down. [/quote]
One last thing. If you’re addicted to drugs, even if you’re living in a culture that’s very forgiving to you, then you might be addicted to people like yourself. It’s not that that’s necessarily going to help you in general. It might just help you in specific ways. And that could be because they’re more self-confident, they’re more socially competent and they’re able to see the light of day and take steps for themselves.
So maybe in all honesty…. maybe it’s a little bit of a stretch. I think that the most important thing is simply the fact that we’re talking about the people not having any control over what happens to them.
[quote_=”sunny_monkey” type=”image” src=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3wC4-b
The rise of illegal drug use that began in the 1960s was accompanied by the growing opinion that drug use should be legalized. This feeling remained strong though the middle of the 1970s when the existing research on drugs such as marijuana and cocaine did not clearly point to health hazards. Those who favored legalization thought that certain drugs could be used responsibly by most people who would otherwise be law-abiding or even model citizens. In other words, they believed most drug use to be a victimless crime.
Some of the arguments for legalizing the sale and possession of drugs have been made on purely economic grounds. Staggeringly large sums of money are being generated through the illegal drug trade. All of this money escapes direct taxation. If an excise tax, like those placed on alcohol and cigarettes, billions of dollars would become available for public projects. The U.S. department of Health and Human Services’ agency SAMHSA, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, estimates that there are almost fifteen billion Americans who had used illicit drugs at least thirty days prior to the survey. If legalized, a standard pack of marijuana would probably contain roughly an ounce or so of marijuana.
The Drug War is Not Just About Guns
A great many of the reasons the government is doing business in the United States lie in the ways it uses marijuana. Marijuana is, by far, the safest drug. While other drugs like methamphetamine and heroin have been linked to a larger public health problem, marijuana may be seen as having little to no health benefits. These drugs are sold under the guise of scientific efficacy, although research is not conclusive. Research doesn’t always establish how well a drug does. Research shows that, for instance, in severe case of high blood pressure, marijuana appears to lower the risk of strokes and other serious causes, while other conditions such as heart disease, cancer and multiple sclerosis also may be associated with serious, potentially life-threatening side effects. All of these claims are based on scientifically supported and statistically valid data. So what is really driving the federal government’s actions? The answer is a simple mix of medical and recreational.
In a 2014 government study, people who have been abstinent for more than eight years were found to have less than 10% less blood coagulation, were more likely to have type 2 diabetes than those who were abstinent for six years, and were at or below the upper limits of the blood coagulation biomarker, a measure used by FDA to determine blood pressure.
This level of low blood coagulation is related to multiple reasons—a lack of adequate water, insufficient ventilation, or inadequate vitamin supplement usage. One possible reason might be that marijuana and other substances are found in contaminated water or in toxic chemicals that may enter or contaminate human blood. Additionally, alcohol, the primary compound in marijuana and other drugs, is found in other forms of drugs. The fact that alcohol is associated with blood coagulation results in less than one-third of persons who use alcohol as a daily dose. This is one reason that many persons who use such drugs and drugs regularly do so, because it is less likely that they will actually suffer a stroke or have other serious issues such as heart disease, strokes, lung cancer, or multiple sclerosis with or without marijuana or other chemicals.
And, even if some of the benefits are the result of scientific studies, it is not a simple causal link. As scientists have long said, the marijuana research does not prove marijuana is safe. As marijuana research began to become more popular, more scientific studies have been conducted to confirm these findings. But even then, the results only reach a point when those studies prove the effects outweigh the benefits. If the marijuana harms are true, then the harms can be exaggerated. In the case of marijuana, an anti-loperamide is used to help prevent side effects in animals, such as an elevated risk of cardiovascular and other problems. Another study found marijuana can decrease cholesterol, but it did not change the side effects of a placebo drug that was used as a way of increasing tolerance. More