War on Drugs Cant Be Won, According to Global Leaders

^

Was the guy crazy because he was on meth or was he on meth because he was crazy? Like matty said I think its more about not putting people in prison for simple position or making people crimes more severe if committed on a regulated drug (ie armed robbery vs. robbery).

So my Grammy and others with arthritis or nerve pain shouldn’t have all treatment possibilities afforded to them?

And people that receive relief from chiropractors or acupuncturist should be dismissed and put on prescriptions drugs or forced into surgery or some other form of therapy?

You probably think hackie sacks are overrated too, don’t you brah?

Do you support making cigarettes illegal because you cant/couldnt control yourself from smoking or because others need to be controlled from marginally harming themselves overtime?

I just think your reasons sound selfish. Why shouldn’t I be allowed to treat my body the way I want to treat it?

1. Why are drugs on the black-market inherently expensive? Even buying prescription drugs costs a pretty penny.

I believe prescription drugs are more costly then legally purchased prescription drugs b/c they have limited production, high demand and incur black market costs for eluding regulation. IMO, these are not factors relevant to a continuing black market for illegal drugs as there is already a large unregulated industry producing such drugs (which would probably not survive in a heavily regulated market arena), demand for black market drugs would decrease as the demand for legal drugs increased, and the cost to elude regulation is already built into the current price of illegal drugs. Do you believe, if pot were legalized, that it's black market costs would go up? I strongly doubt it. Moonshine is cheaper than a shot of Jack. Why pay more and risk criminal penalties when I can probably get a better product with fewer legal and/or health risks from a regulated vendor?

2. Would you rather buy alcohol and cigarettes from your neighbor downstairs or some guy on a corner or state liquor store and grocery stores?

Depends on the neighbor - I got this one guy up the street who has some kick a** stuff. But I agree, quality control is a key benefit in regulated drugs.

3. Black-market drug producers have costs beyond the cost of the drugs themselves. How much less could these cost be compared to Phillip Morris and Pfizer?

Yes & No. The actual production cost of most drugs is minimal compared to the selling price. Drug companies, however, routinely include costs for R&D and development which is extensive. IMO, the cost to a Pfizer of getting currently illegal drugs approved for public consumption would be probably be pretty high. I would imagine, because of the inherent risks presented by such drugs, that it would be higher than the average (maybe not, but still it is an expensive proposition, a study in 2003 put a drug's To Market Cost at over $802 Million: http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/econ/dimasi2003.pdf). And that's not including final marketing costs, etc. to Pfizer. I suppose, that b/c drug companies inflate their price to cover past R&D and To Market Approval costs, they could start selling the drugs at loss-leader situation to drive out the black markets by taking advantage of the benefits of mass production and initially charging cost of production only.

Not having been an illegal drug seller, not sure what costs they would have beyond the cost of manufacture and a .45 caliber.

4. Will making drugs legal increase consumption? How would legalization compare to current state of affairs?

Legitimate question but also begs the question - legalization of what? Coke? Meth? Pot only? I think, as to pot, most countries are seeing that consumption is not increased. How would it compare to the current state of affairs? Just not sure - I imagine that it would immediately (and drastically) lower the amount on enforcement. Likewise, lot less people with criminal records walking around. For the long term indirect public health costs, I am just not sure it ends up a plus or minus. As I said, the immediate governmental costs would be different (regulatory agencies v. law enforcement) and, likewise, I think the long term public health costs would be different than we face by criminalizing drugs. Not sure how, but narcotics are still generally toxins whether legal or illegal.

Ultimately, I think, long term, the overall costs for legalizing pot would be less but not as drastically so as some would believe.

5. Are soft drugs really a gateway to hard drugs?

Don't know. I am sure there is legitimate research to demonstrate both sides of the coin on that issue. My general understanding and belief is that, generally, they are not but may be so for some people.

6. What can we learn from are certain EU countries like the Netherlands and Spain and their drug policies?

6. Probably a whole hell of a lot. Again, the economics of scale (small, homogenous countries v. US) may make a difference. Maybe not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did.

7. Have you seen "Reefer Madness?"

7. Yes, I have seen Reefer Madness both sober and stoned (many many many years ago). Can't access the clip at work but it is an eff'ing hilarious movie. I used the reference to illustrate that, while I am not suggesting mass destruction will automatically ensue from legalizing certain drugs, there certain drugs that are truly dangerous to both the user and the public if legalized for unsurpervised use.

Really, as to pot, I think legalization and regulation are the way to go. As to the harder drugs, not sure. Lots of variables out there, and I am unconvinced that, as to the more powerful narcotics, regulation ultimately relieves the indirect long term public health costs any better than law enforcement currently does.

I just think your reasons sound selfish. Why shouldn’t I be allowed to treat my body the way I want to treat it?

'cause my tax dollars will likely be paying for your cancer treatments while your stoned ass hasn't worked a day in 20 years. :FIREdevil

'cause my tax dollars will likely be paying for your cancer treatments while your stoned ass hasn't worked a day in 20 years. :FIREdevil


Why do folks always point out it is their tax money when it is going to something wasteful but never say their tax money is being used for something good?

George Carlin use to say: "Your stuff is stuff other peoples stuff is sh*t."

Example:

"Got move move my stuff today."
"Got help a buddy move his sh*t today."

Kind of the same train of thought with tax dollars.

^

[QUOTE]Was the guy crazy because he was on meth or was he on meth because he was crazy? Like matty said I think its more about not putting people in prison for simple position or making people crimes more severe if committed on a regulated drug (ie armed robbery vs. robbery).

Hard drugs like meth and coke have been proven to literally destroy the brain to the point where parts of the brain responsible for basic decisions (like not punching someone because they didn't get your order right at McDonalds) are eroded. Maybe going after the users that have done nothing besides use is the wrong COA however the people that push these drugs need to be sent to jail.

So my Grammy and others with arthritis or nerve pain shouldn’t have all treatment possibilities afforded to them?


Not saying that. However what the legalize pot movement will try to get people to believe is an effective treatment for all forms of pain and should serve as a replacement for narcotics. To me thats a big jump and an overstatement thats main purpose is to get people to join a cause under false pretenses.

And people that receive relief from chiropractors or acupuncturist should be dismissed and put on prescriptions drugs or forced into surgery or some other form of therapy?

Maybe I'm biased against chiropractors and acupuncturist but thats because I've heard stories about promises of cures for everything from arthritis to cancer and people being charged more then they would have to pay for legitimate medical procedures backed by science and peer reviewed research. Obviously not every chiropractor and accupuncturist promises to cure cancer. However Chiropractic has been proven to be nothing more then a dangerous form of massage by legitimate medical journals. Accupuncture's benefits have only proven to be therapeutic/placebo and unnecessarily risky.

It shouldn't be illegal to perform chiropractic or acupuncture however more people should be informed of the risk, and it most certainly should be illegal for both types of practitioners to claim to treat diseases for which there is no medical evidence that they can provide treatment.

You probably think hackie sacks are overrated too, don’t you brah?


Hackie sacks only marginally improve hand-eye coordination. People that use them should be put to death.

Do you support making cigarettes illegal because you cant/couldnt control yourself from smoking or because others need to be controlled from marginally harming themselves overtime?


Part of it is experience. I ended up very sick in part because of Cigarettes, which is obviously a big part my fault. However the fact of the matter is while pot has some medical benefits, cigarettes have virtually zero. And even though it makes money from sin taxes and the like it also force others to pay inflated health care cost. Still it's a pointless drug that even as a legal substance causes more harm then good.

Then again at this point the only real way to fight against cigarettes is to have it further labeled as a social stigma, more then it already is. Making them illegal would be an ineffective deterrent.

I just think your reasons sound selfish.


I never said my reasons weren't selfish. And though I didn't clearly state them as such I did infer with my "not in any rush to legalize pot" statement. Granted part of my reasons fall under the "for the good of society" column. However I won't deny that part of my reasons are in fact selfish.

Why shouldn’t I be allowed to treat my body the way I want to treat it?

You should. However I, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't be allowed to overstate, or even outright lie, to get you to join my cause or undertake a certain form of treatment. In many cases thats what I see from the legalize pot movement, and while we're at it many alternative medicine practitioners (of course the topic of this thread is the war on drugs so I'll digress on said topic until an appropriate thread is created).

Then again simply saying "I want to get high while not destroying my liver" might not be as politically effective as "hey look, a treatment for cancer and glaucoma that big pharma doesn't want you to know about."

Canadian Science shows the inherent dangers (yes I think this is an awesome video!)

sHzdsFiBbFc

Why do folks always point out it is their tax money when it is going to something wasteful but never say their tax money is being used for something good?

First, I was joking. Sorry, once again, forgot to put on the sarcasm font.

Second, my tax dollars go to many, many good things. Too numerous to name. So, b/c the vast majority is well spent [ just saying that to piss off firstdown and CRed ;) ], I and others should just ignore what they believe to be wasteful spending of public funds? If I consider it a misuse of public funds to subsidize the self-destructive habits that have no public health value, am I not entitled to voice such an opininon? And when I do, why do I have to add a disclaimer about all the good things my tax dollars go to?

Just as mlpertert's "reasons sound selfish" to you, yours (if you weren't joking) smacked a little of unjustified entitlement to me. You can treat your body any way you want to - just don't then expect the rest of us to bear the costs for you idiocy.

[quote=mlmpetert;805456]^



Hard drugs like meth and coke have been proven to literally destroy the brain to the point where parts of the brain responsible for basic decisions (like not punching someone because they didn't get your order right at McDonalds) are eroded. Maybe going after the users that have done nothing besides use is the wrong COA however the people that push these drugs need to be sent to jail.



Not saying that. However what the legalize pot movement will try to get people to believe is an effective treatment for all forms of pain and should serve as a replacement for narcotics. To me thats a big jump and an overstatement thats main purpose is to get people to join a cause under false pretenses.



Maybe I'm biased against chiropractors and acupuncturist but thats because I've heard stories about promises of cures for everything from arthritis to cancer and people being charged more then they would have to pay for legitimate medical procedures backed by science and peer reviewed research. Obviously not every chiropractor and accupuncturist promises to cure cancer. However Chiropractic has been proven to be nothing more then a dangerous form of massage by legitimate medical journals. Accupuncture's benefits have only proven to be therapeutic/placebo and unnecessarily risky.

It shouldn't be illegal to perform chiropractic or acupuncture however more people should be informed of the risk, and it most certainly should be illegal for both types of practitioners to claim to treat diseases for which there is no medical evidence that they can provide treatment.



Hackie sacks only marginally improve hand-eye coordination. People that use them should be put to death.



Part of it is experience. I ended up very sick in part because of Cigarettes, which is obviously a big part my fault. However the fact of the matter is while pot has some medical benefits, cigarettes have virtually zero. And even though it makes money from sin taxes and the like it also force others to pay inflated health care cost. Still it's a pointless drug that even as a legal substance causes more harm then good.

Then again at this point the only real way to fight against cigarettes is to have it further labeled as a social stigma, more then it already is. Making them illegal would be an ineffective deterrent.



I never said my reasons weren't selfish. And though I didn't clearly state them as such I did infer with my "not in any rush to legalize pot" statement. Granted part of my reasons fall under the "for the good of society" column. However I won't deny that part of my reasons are in fact selfish.



You should. However I, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't be allowed to overstate, or even outright lie, to get you to join my cause or undertake a certain form of treatment. In many cases thats what I see from the legalize pot movement, and while we're at it many alternative medicine practitioners (of course the topic of this thread is the war on drugs so I'll digress on said topic until an appropriate thread is created).

Then again simply saying "I want to get high while not destroying my liver" might not be as politically effective as "hey look, a treatment for cancer and glaucoma that big pharma doesn't want you to know about."

Nice post.

About as stupid as the "War on Terrorism" and about as affective too.

I love gov't spending, and GMScud is an awesome mod. (one of these statements is not true;))