[peace*out]

To not get "off topic" in the other thread...

...Drugs can actually be very beneficial. Lemme know if you want to discuss it haha.

For starters: I know they can relive you from pain, but i'm not trying to talk about advil. I'm talking meth, crack, you - the stuff.

I have a friend who use to do drugs, and even he says not to.

hmmmmm...so anyways, here's a new topic that may be widely argued...

[peace*out]

randomly: ive been seeing how far back sxephil's videos on youtube go, and im on this one right now.

from 4:25 - 5:00, he talks about why he thinks marijuana should be legal.

there are his reasons. just saying.

and by the way: if your watching it for this topic, just watch that. sometimes in his videos he can get very...stupid. stupid as in offensive stupid.

but there yah go.

[unreality]

sxephil is a dumb@ss, albeit sometimes he can be pretty funny. I didn't watch the video but I can guess what the reasons are, I've seen them a thousand times. Like anything, there are pros and cons.

But 100% REGARDLESS of your personal opinion, habit or aversion to something like marijuana, there is no doubt that it is wrongly illegal, or at the least the supposed severity of punishment (which thankfully isn't reality) is too great. The government's responsibility isn't to monitor the personal health choices of its citizens - if you think that's what it has in mind, you're misguided. Smoking cigarettes should be illegal, alcohol should be illegal, McDonald's should be even more illegal than those things. At the very least you have to be consistent - either the government should make our health choices for us and force us to use organic toothpaste, shop at Whole Foods, never smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and other health decisions, giving you no responsibility or freedom. Or, my position, those are YOUR choices.

The ironic thing is that most stoners I know do those things (in the area of organic toothpaste and shopping at Whole Foods, not drinking or smoking cigs very much, etc) and are probably more healthy than your average Joe who scoffs at marijuana use while eating McDonalds on the toilet and drinking himself to death every weekend.

[OmegaScales]

My thoughts, in simple terms:

Too much = bad

None to not-enough-to-hurt-you = whatever

Government = Idiots-who-try-to-stop-people-from-doing-drugs-by-outlawing-them-but-only-cause-more-people-to-get-hooked-on-them-because-people-want-things-that-they-aren't-allowed-to-have

[Izzy]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/27/obama-drug-legalization-debate_n_815074.html

Skim the article and watch the video at the bottom. Obama has come a long way since this time last year. While he's still against legalization, he concedes it's a legitimate topic. It might not come before the end of his term, but *definitely* at some point over the next twenty years.

*waits for our liberals to become less conservative*

[Quag]

Well I’m bored so ill chime in.

Ok start with legality of drugs. I have only 1 problem with it. How do we test people for them easily? Why test you ask. Well same reason we test people for alcohol. Driving cars! There are also planes/doctors/air traffic controllers and a host of other professions/situations where it should absolutely be 100% illegal to be under the influence of drugs. For alcohol we have quick non invasive breathalyser tests. If we could have something similar for drugs I would be soo much happier about it.

I don’t understand why McDonalds should be illegal? Alcohol and cigarettes can harm others. I.e. second hand smoke/drinking and driving. If you binge out at Mcdo’s everyday you only harm yourself, your problem no one else’s. The govt. has recognized the dangers of drinking and driving and it is illegal (as well as a host of other things you cannot do while intoxicated). They have begun to accept the dangers of second hand smoke and are limiting the places where people can smoke. Again this is consistent. It is illegal to drive while impaired by drugs. The only problem is we don’t have a method of testing for them in someone’s system aside from blood tests. This is the only reason I can think of to continue to keep them illegal. I know I know it isn’t a strong argument but lacking anything else it is the only reason I can see to keep drugs illegal. Ok cynical me will also say that there is so much money involved in the war on drugs that the vested interests wish to keep it going for their own personal profit.

Ok about the drinking of mead instead of water bit, actually not true. Alcohol was around before there was large scale civilizations that create the non sanitary conditions you speak of. The water in general was very safe to drink as long as it came from running water and wasn’t stagnant. I strongly suggest you read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. Doesn’t specifically speak to this topic but lays out a great logical argument for why the world geopolitically speaking is as it is today. (Love the bit about the Chatham Islands, but ya gotta have a black sense of humour)

[peace*out]

Well I’m bored so ill chime in.

Ok start with legality of drugs. I have only 1 problem with it. How do we test people for them easily? Why test you ask. Well same reason we test people for alcohol. Driving cars! There are also planes/doctors/air traffic controllers and a host of other professions/situations where it should absolutely be 100% illegal to be under the influence of drugs. For alcohol we have quick non invasive breathalyser tests. If we could have something similar for drugs I would be soo much happier about it.

I don’t understand why McDonalds should be illegal? Alcohol and cigarettes can harm others. I.e. second hand smoke/drinking and driving. If you binge out at Mcdo’s everyday you only harm yourself, your problem no one else’s. The govt. has recognized the dangers of drinking and driving and it is illegal (as well as a host of other things you cannot do while intoxicated). They have begun to accept the dangers of second hand smoke and are limiting the places where people can smoke. Again this is consistent. It is illegal to drive while impaired by drugs. The only problem is we don’t have a method of testing for them in someone’s system aside from blood tests. This is the only reason I can think of to continue to keep them illegal. I know I know it isn’t a strong argument but lacking anything else it is the only reason I can see to keep drugs illegal. Ok cynical me will also say that there is so much money involved in the war on drugs that the vested interests wish to keep it going for their own personal profit.

Ok about the drinking of mead instead of water bit, actually not true. Alcohol was around before there was large scale civilizations that create the non sanitary conditions you speak of. The water in general was very safe to drink as long as it came from running water and wasn’t stagnant. I strongly suggest you read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. Doesn’t specifically speak to this topic but lays out a great logical argument for why the world geopolitically speaking is as it is today. (Love the bit about the Chatham Islands, but ya gotta have a black sense of humour)

REPLYING TO QUAG:

I do agree on the fact that if there was a breathalizer for drugs it would be better. however, breathalizers dont always help. in middle school, there was a girl in my grade whos dad had to breath into a breathalizer if he wanted to go anywhere. she did it for him. mickeyds illegality thing is because a big argument is "ohhh, its bad for you." thats why they're saying that. because one of the huge arguments is public health, they argue with fast food chains, which i think if a good argument. public safety is another thing.

MY THOUGHTS:

I think that private use is okay, while public use should only be in specified places, limited like cigarettes. the thing aobut cigarettes is the fact that they give you a place, compeletely open to air and smoke travels. i went to a park where there was a small gazebo thing beside a path. i was walking, only about two feet away from someone smoking, and the smoke was still affecting me. sorry that this is offtopic, but i think that should also be something to consider. It could help, as long as drug transactions were made in private places.

IM sure there are MANY flaws in ^^ above, so tell me what ather ideas. i do think that public safety is a thing to worry about, but privatly, it could be ok

[unreality]

Despite the idealistic scenario of what should & should not be, I think the best step in the right direction is to start decriminalizing, but not legalizing. Decriminalization is just a shift in legal and public attitude - starting with the legal, most importantly. So it's not legal as in Pot Corporation can start selling brownies en masse, but at least decriminalized in the sense that if little Johnny is caught by the police, his future isn't ruined or restricted. It would save a lot of law enforcement money and energy spent going after petty "criminals" whose only crime is toking up or similar. People that get sent to jail as innocent people come out hardened by our sh*tty prison system which throws 18-year old soft-drug dealers in with murderers.

Legalizing is a pretty extreme step and I think would be too much rapid change, for our country at least. But decriminalization doesn't make it legal, just makes there be little or no penalty. Maybe a civic fine. Marijuana already is decriminalized in quite a few places, ie Ann Arbor. And California.

[Quag]

I am against decriminalizing. It is legal or it isn’t. Problem with decriminalizing is it leads to an increase in use. No biggie you say? Well problem is the supply chain stays illegal. more customers means more profits means more gang activity means more violence etc. Make it legal and kill the criminal element by cutting off their monopoly. Don’t hand them a smorgasbord. Or keep it illegal and prosecute all to reduce it as much as possible the middle always leads to a worse situation than you have now.

Vancouver is a great example of how people can go to the other side and make it even worse. they claim crime has gone down in areas with safe injection sites but fact is they are using police stats. police stats due show a decrease but that is because they have been told not to arrest anyone within several blocks of a safe injection site. according to police on the ground it is way worse. but since they are not allowed to do anything the stats make it look better.

FYI i am 100% against safe injection sites. under any circumstances ya wanna go pump yourself with heroin i could care less. you want me to pay for you to have a safe place to kill yourself (an oxymoron in itself) than no way!

yes throwing people in jail for 5g with hardened criminals is dumb but giving them a 25$ fine is also dumb. keep thinking find a better way.

The breathalyzers i was thinking more of police spot checks but yeah no system is 100% but ATM there is NO system at all. That’s what bothers me. Private vs public use. problem with that is if you do the drugs privately than leave your home you are still affected by the drugs. Some last longer than others and well unless it is regulated ie big govt bureaucracy you will have no way to judge how long before the effects wear off.

[unreality]

I agree that legalization is better than decriminalization and that's the only solution for the gang problem, but nevertheless like I said, it will take steps to move toward legalization. A stepping stone along the way is decriminalization

[Quag]

Unreality, perhaps politically speaking you are right. I am still convinced that decriminalization will be worse than the actual situation. It should be legal or illegal. I dont like the inbetween grey area that decriminalization represents.

On a lighter note did you see the catapult they tried to use to launch drugs over the border from mexico to the States? Pretty funny if you ask me.

[unreality]

Unreality, perhaps politically speaking you are right. I am still convinced that decriminalization will be worse than the actual situation. It should be legal or illegal. I dont like the inbetween grey area that decriminalization represents.

On a lighter note did you see the catapult they tried to use to launch drugs over the border from mexico to the States? Pretty funny if you ask me.

No but imagine being on the receiving end of that by accident

[Guest]

Lisbon was the first city to legalize all drugs. They've realized instead of spending money on putting druggies into jail and feeding them, have lots of help with rehab. I've yet to decide whether to legalize EVERY drug, but weed should be... here are my reasons.

1. Weed is not such a bad drug. I don't intend to take it, but it has the same effects to the brain as lots of Alcohol does. Unlike tobacco, weed is not harmful to the body (except perhaps to the lungs when smoking). I think it's the fear of having something "possess your body" with you having no control. People have just gotten used to small quantities of Alcohol (which is healthy that way)not affecting them that much, but have gotten to drunk, not that far off of stoned. I'll admit, I am one to carry that fear, but I realize this.

2. By legalizing weed, not only will the government profit from this, but the user will too. The government can raise costs to weed, but will also purify the weed and make sure it's not mixed with something worse. Expensive, but legal.

3. I believe there will actually be less weed dealers. This doesn't seem logical, but to me it is. Cannabis makers will give their weed to the government (that's where the highest bidders will be) and this will behold the highest price. If someone illegally sells weed, he would not profit from it... unless he spikes it. Hopefully, we will raise awareness to be aware of spiked weed.

Ok... maybe the 3rd one wasn't that good, but I support weed. I won't be smoking it. I hope people will use it carefully, but it seems like it's going to be used more carefully than now.

[peace*out]

ok - are you ready for the best thing ever?

In case you cant read the picture, for freshmen debates, im debating that marajuana should be legalized...anddddd its not against the honor code to use information from this site, as long as i find sources. I just felt like the coincidence is too awesome not to be shared. (other people are doing things like whether the govt. should ban the sale of candy and soda in schools, and whether the us is justified in its use of torture to combat terrorism). But i get the drugs.

*does evil laugh*

soo...anyone want to help me get a good grade?

sorry for the backwardsness

[unreality]

PM me, I'll unload some arguments & sources on you. There are a lot of substances I would legalize _before_ marijuana (i.e. LSD i think can be _very_ helpful to society), but nevertheless marijuana is still less of a societal danger than alcohol or cigarettes. In an idea world we would make them all illegal but people are too curious for that to be a feasible reality so we have to accept the actual reality and take steps in harm reduction (like Switzerland et al).

[Guest]

PM me, I'll unload some arguments & sources on you. There are a lot of substances I would legalize _before_ marijuana (i.e. LSD i think can be _very_ helpful to society), but nevertheless marijuana is still less of a societal danger than alcohol or cigarettes. In an idea world we would make them all illegal but people are too curious for that to be a feasible reality so we have to accept the actual reality and take steps in harm reduction (like Switzerland et al).

I haven't read any of this thread except for this post, but I'm going to comment anyways. "In an idea[l] world we would make them all illegal..."!??? I think you know how I would reword this statement to make it more descriptive of what it really means. What does it mean to make something illegal? It means that if someone does it you are going to use violent force against them to either steal their money, kidnap them and lock them up in a cell, or shoot them if they manage to resist you doing these two things to them. Do you disagree that that is what it really means to make something illegal in our society? Because I think that is really a more accurate picture of what it means. So many people say that things should be illegal when they mean that they don't think people should do them, but are you really willing to go that far to use violence against people who do these things anyways?

So if we had an ideal world (i.e. very few people smoked marijuana) you would support making marijuana illegal and using violence against the few people who did smoke marijuana by either stealing their money against their will, locking them up in jail against their will, or shooting them should they defend themselves with force of their own? Is that correct?

[Guest]

I haven't read any of this thread except for this post, but I'm going to comment anyways. "In an idea[l] world we would make them all illegal..."!??? I think you know how I would reword this statement to make it more descriptive of what it really means. What does it mean to make something illegal? It means that if someone does it you are going to use violent force against them to either steal their money, kidnap them and lock them up in a cell, or shoot them if they manage to resist you doing these two things to them. Do you disagree that that is what it really means to make something illegal in our society? Because I think that is really a more accurate picture of what it means. So many people say that things should be illegal when they mean that they don't think people should do them, but are you really willing to go that far to use violence against people who do these things anyways?

So if we had an ideal world (i.e. very few people smoked marijuana) you would support making marijuana illegal and using violence against the few people who did smoke marijuana by either stealing their money against their will, locking them up in jail against their will, or shooting them should they defend themselves with force of their own? Is that correct?

Actually, reading the rest of the thread provides the necessary context for this post. He made two typos:

"In an idea[l] world we would make them all [legal]..."

That's what he meant to say. What you have doesn't make sense even in the context of the rest of the post. Unreality is a strong supporter of drug legalization, so I'm pretty sure it was just a typo.

[peace*out]

However, regular amphetamine, is just lamping (f**king) amazing. This, under the brand name Adderall, is actually prescribe to kids under five to help deal with their ADHD. But when someone who doesn't have ADHD takes it, you just get completely wired. You'll literally be able to stay up for hours and crash for an exam, or write an essay, or whatever. There's also ways to split it up. Like, if you have to write an essay, snort 5 mg, and for two hours it's like you and that essay are the only things that exist. Or, if you need to learn a few hours' worth of material in a night, take like 30 mg oral, and you're good. The best I've ever heard it described is caffeine on caffeine. It's an *incredible* study aid. Someone who isn't me (from here on out will be referred to as SWIM) hasn't used it enough to experience any negative side effects. It's really just brilliant. Not physically addicting, though you'll probably enjoy it so much that you'll want to do it again periodically.

Yes im kinda restarting the discussion i guess, but im going back through the thread and i saw this. In november, i was diagnosed with ADD, and I take A pill of focalin in the mornings (i dont know how much) and a pill of ritalin (i dont know how to spell them - sorry!) in the afternoon (5mg). On it, i can focus, but its not like Izzy described above. im curious: does anyone else have ADD/ADHD and/or taken this drug? Or does anyone have an opinion of it? It was really easy to get diagnosed, scary almost. I took a quiz, said i had a hard time doing my homework, and then prescribed me with it. im curious if anyone has an opinion on it. Ive also heard it called "legal speed."

[Aaryan]

I have ADHD and I take Ritalin. Lucky for me it was detected early.

[Aaryan]

I don't know much about any medications my doctor just prescribed it so that's what I take. Never heard of "legal "speed" though

[peace*out]

I don't know much about any medications my doctor just prescribed it so that's what I take. Never heard of "legal "speed" though

"legal speed" isnt a separate drug. Ive heard ADHD meds called that though.

(Topic From 4:00 - 5:45)

The Link he was talking about: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/224848.php

For the record, I do disagree with Phil. Some people abuse the available-ness of it, but there are people who DO have it.

[Aaryan]

Like me. And the availableness of what? Ritadel and stuff?

[Guest]

I have ADHD and I take Ritalin. Lucky for me it was detected early.

I too have ADHD and took ritalin for 2 months. It made me really depressed, so I stopped taking it. That's legal though, and it helps so many people. Nobody is talking about banning Ritalin.

[Aaryan]

Depression? That's serious! It never happened to me!

Heh heh I find it funny that there are so many of us hyperactives on BrainDen...

[Guest]

Depression? That's serious! It never happened to me!

Heh heh I find it funny that there are so many of us hyperactives on BrainDen...

Everyone reacts to it differently... A funny thing about drugs is I felt terrible before taking Ritalin, but I felt so great after I quit it, even though I was back in square one instead of square -4 (It was a "complex" place ). I do have a really hard time concentrating in class, so I learn everything by myself... and while I can I learn it at a higher level.

[peace*out]

Yeah. I dont have any of the side effects (other than nto being able to sleep if i take it too late) but I feel...less weird. which sounds good, but it feels like im less zany and weird and...me...when im on them. im just emotionless. does anyone feel the same?