I think a lot of those substances are illegal because they have the potential to cause a lot of harm to the user and other people as well (think car crashes and violence, they would also be general burden on the health system).
You may argue alcohol is bad, I'm not going to argue with you there but it doesn't cause much harm in moderation. Where as, as far as im aware some of these other drugs, one of these pills has the potential to knock you off or at least do something very nasty.
I'm not in favor of criminalising alcohol and its too late for that anyway but i think other drugs should remain illegal.(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_%28mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence%29.svg/380px-Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_%28mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence%29.svg.png)
Something interesting to add to this topic:
It is not sustainable to hold a mixed position of "humanitarian towards drug users" but "harsh on drug sellers". Why?
The economics of supply and demand.
"Harsh on drug sellers" equates to stamping out the competition. It drives up prices for drugs, and hence provides a greater incentive to sell drugs. It is an uphill battle.
If you are against drugs, you need to penalise users and buyers as well.
Or, just let people harm themselves, because it is their own body (and they also expose themselves to heaps of risks that equate to "expected harm" by doing things like 'driving' or 'crossing the road').
Why can't we just criminalise harm, instead of the drug? (The deontological libertarian POV)
What I meant was, why don't we just punish people who end up doing harm to others, not just because doing drug X has a 90% chance of causing harm to others.
Good example is alcohol. Many can enjoy a few drinks and cause no harm to others. The ones that do cause harm should be charged though.
What I meant was, why don't we just punish people who end up doing harm to others, not just because doing drug X has a 90% chance of causing harm to others.
Good example is alcohol. Many can enjoy a few drinks and cause no harm to others. The ones that do cause harm should be charged though.
Absolutely.
Our society is paranoid about things that "might cause harm to others". I think it's this attitude that ultimately restricts our personal freedoms, because it seems we do not even trust ourselves to be responsible.
People should have the freedom to take whatever substances they like, but only when they know the risks and possible consequences. If an innocent bystander is hurt by someone on drugs then the offender would be just as guilty as if he/she were not on drugs, since it was the offender's choice to be in a mentally-altered state.
What is important is that we have the freedom to make the choice. Without the ability to choose, we cannot say we are free.
I don't know really where i stand on the whole political spectrum, i just agree with what i think is right for that correct issue instead of subscribing to a certain ideology and being constrained by it.
If i had to have a label it'd probably be democratic socialism.
What I meant was, why don't we just punish people who end up doing harm to others, not just because doing drug X has a 90% chance of causing harm to others.
Good example is alcohol. Many can enjoy a few drinks and cause no harm to others. The ones that do cause harm should be charged though.
Absolutely.
Our society is paranoid about things that "might cause harm to others". I think it's this attitude that ultimately restricts our personal freedoms, because it seems we do not even trust ourselves to be responsible.
People should have the freedom to take whatever substances they like, but only when they know the risks and possible consequences. If an innocent bystander is hurt by someone on drugs then the offender would be just as guilty as if he/she were not on drugs, since it was the offender's choice to be in a mentally-altered state.
What is important is that we have the freedom to make the choice. Without the ability to choose, we cannot say we are free.
When they go to hospital you pay for their stupidity with your tax money...let alone their (if they have any) poor children who have to suffer the consequences of their parents fucked up choice.. you really support these things?
What I meant was, why don't we just punish people who end up doing harm to others, not just because doing drug X has a 90% chance of causing harm to others.
Good example is alcohol. Many can enjoy a few drinks and cause no harm to others. The ones that do cause harm should be charged though.
Absolutely.
Our society is paranoid about things that "might cause harm to others". I think it's this attitude that ultimately restricts our personal freedoms, because it seems we do not even trust ourselves to be responsible.
People should have the freedom to take whatever substances they like, but only when they know the risks and possible consequences. If an innocent bystander is hurt by someone on drugs then the offender would be just as guilty as if he/she were not on drugs, since it was the offender's choice to be in a mentally-altered state.
What is important is that we have the freedom to make the choice. Without the ability to choose, we cannot say we are free.
I think one reason is that we don't regulate what goes into the drugs, also it would be ethically wrong to even legalize drugs that are there just to get high off (yes that sounds kind of hypocritical since I drink alcohol).
Personally I would never want illicit drugs to be legalised because of what they do to people. I can tolerate people smoking but I don't really like the act of smoking because when you are out, you inhale the smoke and it's disgusting.
I'm happy to give up some (redundant) freedoms, if it means we can live our lives a little safer.
Do you have the same position for all drugs reguardless of potency? because if you look at the chart on the previous page, while alcohol and cannabis arent that bad some of these are essentially death pills or "im-going-to-fuck-you-up-pretty-bad" pills.
Legalising them will reduce the stigma and allow people to seek treatment.
a freedom you want people to be exercising
sooo... should alcohol be banned?
I think Alchohal is JUST as bad.
Yes drugs cause many bad things etc, but in OUR country Alcohol is the issue.
In AMERICA drugs is the issue.
When I say "issue" I mean the root of 90% of all crimes, does the CBD ring a bell?
It's embarssingly become Australian "culture" to have drinking games, to get "pissed" to jump on any girl you see when drunk. It's effing disgusting. Australia lacks so much culture because all we have to offer are meat pies and booze. FFS im angry atm from writing this.
We are a country with so much potential, in movies, music, aboriginal ART, biomedicine, nanotechnology, and all we have to show for it is alcoholics.
What makes it worse, you get immigrants come here, see that beer is "accepted as norm/cool" they get into it and racial gangs and groups form, and then we become racist. This is specifically an issue for African migrants as well. You cannot say "oh, they were into beer before" because COME ON, they lived in war torn countries and could not afford/would spend money on BETTER things then alcohol.
I know I am not being single minded on this issue, because the POLICE COMMISSIONER of Victoria said its going to take around 2 decades to remove alcohol FROM OUR CULTURE.
I know not EVERY Australian (this means me and you) is obsessed with booze, for example last Christmas I went to a great family who had grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins etc all around a feast drinking LIGHT wine, and LGIHT alchohal, and remaining sane throughout the evening.
FFS, 13-16 year olds are drinking BEER, whereas in other developed nations it is drank around 17-20 onwards (generalisation, no evidence). It's become like "Australian" to do it.
I know I have sort of went off topic, but im trying to build a correlation b/w beer and drugs, both are as bad as each other, but in Australia beer is the root cause of all evil. And no I am not saying ban alcohol. Other countries haven't banned it, and they do not have bloody alcohol fuelled violence
I think Alchohal is JUST as bad.
Yes drugs cause many bad things etc, but in OUR country Alcohol is the issue.
In AMERICA drugs is the issue.
When I say "issue" I mean the root of 90% of all crimes, does the CBD ring a bell?
It's embarssingly become Australian "culture" to have drinking games, to get "pissed" to jump on any girl you see when drunk. It's effing disgusting. Australia lacks so much culture because all we have to offer are meat pies and booze. FFS im angry atm from writing this.
We are a country with so much potential, in movies, music, aboriginal ART, biomedicine, nanotechnology, and all we have to show for it is alcoholics.
What makes it worse, you get immigrants come here, see that beer is "accepted as norm/cool" they get into it and racial gangs and groups form, and then we become racist. This is specifically an issue for African migrants as well. You cannot say "oh, they were into beer before" because COME ON, they lived in war torn countries and could not afford/would spend money on BETTER things then alcohol.
I know I am not being single minded on this issue, because the POLICE COMMISSIONER of Victoria said its going to take around 2 decades to remove alcohol FROM OUR CULTURE.
I know not EVERY Australian (this means me and you) is obsessed with booze, for example last Christmas I went to a great family who had grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins etc all around a feast drinking LIGHT wine, and LGIHT alchohal, and remaining sane throughout the evening.
FFS, 13-16 year olds are drinking BEER, whereas in other developed nations it is drank around 17-20 onwards (generalisation, no evidence). It's become like "Australian" to do it.
I know I have sort of went off topic, but im trying to build a correlation b/w beer and drugs, both are as bad as each other, but in Australia beer is the root cause of all evil. And no I am not saying ban alcohol. Other countries haven't banned it, and they do not have bloody alcohol fuelled violence
thats pretty harsh...Nah im not being rude/racist (u didnt explicitly say this, but its important to point out)
australia is recognised for many many things =="
racial gangs form becuz they arent actually accepted into the new community or are bullied so they group themselves together to protect themselves, not because of alcohol...
just saying :D
Actually, there is evidence that the perception that others are taking drugs (like marijuana) is enough to cause more people to take it.
And when they asked college students to guess how many people take marijuana, they overestimated it. So there is a lot we can do about perception, with ad campaigns, to reduce drug usage.
The fight against marijuana has been lost. The fact that it can be grown very easily in ones backyard makes it impossible to police. It shouldn't be made legal however, as more will try it, and as I mentioned before, ultimately it is just a stepping stone for people to experiment with more dangerous substances. Not good.
I think Alchohal is JUST as bad.
Yes drugs cause many bad things etc, but in OUR country Alcohol is the issue.
In AMERICA drugs is the issue.
When I say "issue" I mean the root of 90% of all crimes, does the CBD ring a bell?
It's embarssingly become Australian "culture" to have drinking games, to get "pissed" to jump on any girl you see when drunk. It's effing disgusting. Australia lacks so much culture because all we have to offer are meat pies and booze. FFS im angry atm from writing this.
We are a country with so much potential, in movies, music, aboriginal ART, biomedicine, nanotechnology, and all we have to show for it is alcoholics.
What makes it worse, you get immigrants come here, see that beer is "accepted as norm/cool" they get into it and racial gangs and groups form, and then we become racist. This is specifically an issue for African migrants as well. You cannot say "oh, they were into beer before" because COME ON, they lived in war torn countries and could not afford/would spend money on BETTER things then alcohol.
I know I am not being single minded on this issue, because the POLICE COMMISSIONER of Victoria said its going to take around 2 decades to remove alcohol FROM OUR CULTURE.
I know not EVERY Australian (this means me and you) is obsessed with booze, for example last Christmas I went to a great family who had grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins etc all around a feast drinking LIGHT wine, and LGIHT alchohal, and remaining sane throughout the evening.
FFS, 13-16 year olds are drinking BEER, whereas in other developed nations it is drank around 17-20 onwards (generalisation, no evidence). It's become like "Australian" to do it.
I know I have sort of went off topic, but im trying to build a correlation b/w beer and drugs, both are as bad as each other, but in Australia beer is the root cause of all evil. And no I am not saying ban alcohol. Other countries haven't banned it, and they do not have bloody alcohol fuelled violence
But I must say, I am so glad I am able to vocie my opinions and not be attacked by members on this forum. I highly respect this, and appreciate it.
I once voiced an almost exact same opinion at school and was told "go back to your own country" and was called many other derogatory comments.
I think the intelligence of members here is very clear.
Thank you :)
I find it interesting that, in that dependence/harm chart, that there are plenty of drugs (including cannibis) that rank lower than alcohol and tobacco yet are illegal.
...why?
I find it interesting that, in that dependence/harm chart, that there are plenty of drugs (including cannibis) that rank lower than alcohol and tobacco yet are illegal.
...why?
Politics.
The strange case of the man who took 40,000 ecstasy pills in nine years
· Usage increased to 25 tablets a day at peak
· Memory problems and paranoia may be lasting
================================
Doctors from London University have revealed details of what they believe is the largest amount of ecstasy ever consumed by a single person. Consultants from the addiction centre at St George's Medical School, London, have published a case report of a British man estimated to have taken around 40,000 pills of MDMA, the active ingredient in ecstasy, over nine years. The heaviest previous lifetime intake on record is 2,000 pills.
Though the man, who is now 37, stopped taking the drug seven years ago, he still suffers from severe physical and mental health side-effects, including extreme memory problems, paranoia, hallucinations and depression. He also suffers from painful muscle rigidity around his neck and jaw which often prevents him from opening his mouth. The doctors believe many of these symptoms may be permanent.
The man, known as Mr A in the report in the scientific journal Psychosomatics, started using ecstasy at 21. For the first two years his use was an average of five pills per weekend. Gradually this escalated until he was taking around three and a half pills a day. At the peak, the man was taking an estimated 25 pills every day for four years. After several severe collapses at parties, Mr A decided to stop taking ecstasy. For several months, he still felt he was under the influence of the drug, despite being bedridden.
Hallucinations
His condition deteriorated and he began to experience recurrent tunnel vision and other problems including hallucinations, paranoia and muscle rigidity. "He came to us after deciding that he couldn't go on any more," said Dr Christos Kouimtsidis, the consultant psychiatrist at St George's Medical School in Tooting who treated him for five months. "He was having trouble functioning in everyday life."
The doctors discovered that the man was suffering from severe short-term memory problems of a type usually only seen in lifetime alcoholics. But evaluating the full extent of his condition was difficult as his concentration and attention was so impaired he was unable to follow the simple tasks involved in the test.
"This was an exceptional case. His long- term memory was fine but he could not remember day to day things - the time, the day, what was in his supermarket trolley," said Dr Kouimtsidis. "More worryingly, he did not seem aware himself that he had these memory problems."
With no mental illness in his family and no prior psychiatric history, the doctors concluded that his unique condition was direct result of his intense ecstasy use.
"This is obviously an extreme case so we should not blow any observations out of proportion," says Dr Kouimtsidis. "But if this is what is happening to very heavy users, it might be an indication that daily use of ecstasy over a long period of time can lead to irreversible memory problems and other cognitive deficits."
For 10 years, MDMA has been suspected of causing these kinds of effects in heavy users. It is thought to be due to its disruption of the regulation of serotonin, a brain chemical believed to play a role in mood and memory. It remains unclear whether these effects are the result of permanent neurotoxic damage or just temporary reversible alterations in the brain.
A special two-part MDMA study in recent issues of the Journal of Psychopharmacology (available online at sagepub), suggests long-term side-effects may be temporary. The researchers from the University Of Louisiana could find no significant relationship between depression and recreational ecstasy use.
In the case of Mr A, a structural MRI brain scan failed to show any obvious damage or atrophy in his brain. However, these results, says Dr Kouimtsidis, are difficult to interpret. "A scan of this type is not sensitive enough," he said.
Such limitations in brain scanning technology, along with ethical and legal barriers to giving MDMA to human test subjects, have limited direct observation of the drug's effects in humans.
Instead, scientists have had to use recreational drug users as subjects in their studies. Conclusions from this are often flawed because few, if any, drugs users use ecstasy in isolation.
Cannabis user
Mr A was also a heavy cannabis user, and when he was encouraged to decrease his use, his paranoia and hallucinations disappeared and his anxiety abated. But his memory and concentration problems remained, leading the doctors to suspect that these may be permanent disabilities.
When he was admitted to a specialist brain injury unit and put on anti-psychotic medication, he did start to show some improvement. "Unfortunately, he discharged himself before we were able to complete the assessment," says Dr Kouimtsidis. "We continued to support him. But he started to use cannabis again and he dropped out. We tried to re-engage him but we lost him about a year ago."