What drugs should be decriminalized?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date

What drugs should be decriminalized?

  • Total voters
    10
Sigmund Freud said:
With Hallucinogens, mostly you just see colors, and things look particularly vivid for a while. Stories of people typically getting full on hallucinations of some complex thing that's not really there are overblown, and it's not as if you can't tell the difference between the visual distortions and reality. In particular, stories of people jumping off of buildings because LSD made them think they could fly are obviously bullshit (how did you know they thought they could fly? Did you ask them afterward?
Click to expand...

LSD effects are entirely dose related. Present day dosages (circa 1985 yes, it has been that long) are (were) 30-50 micrograms. Dosage in Tim Leary's day were on the order of 300 micrograms a hit. I remember parts of one trip vividly. Thankgod the 3 of us were in a house. The part I remember; "you know what it is? We are humans!".
2. One could have asked or been told before the subject attempted flight.


This myth comes Diana Linkletter, who committed suicide several months after using the drug, but is often erroneously described as being on it at the time). The hallucinations with deliriants, on the other hand, can't be differentiated from reality. Also, LSD and other psychedelics usually induce a sense of euphoria, while the Deliriants mainly cause stupor and confusion.
Click to expand...

Or a sense of dread, likely whatever the prevelent emotion is simply magnified. My first 7 trips were simply awful, (bad trips as it were) until I learned to trip in a safe (emotionally) enviroment.



Anyway, the only drug most people could synthesize at home would probably be meth. The amphetamines are the simplest synthetic psychoactive compounds, which is probably why they were also they the first to be discovered. Ecstacy, on the other hand, requires more skill than most people have, and LSD requires basically a PhD in Chemistry to synthesize. I mean, even if you had the knowledge, one key ingredient, ergotamine, is so heavily controlled and so rare that you'd have to have a pretty sophisticated criminal network to hope to obtain it. It's definitely not something someone's going to be making in their home.
Click to expand...

Agree on LSD, although ergotamine is a derivitive of a mold which grows on wheat, but yes, impossible for anyone short of a doctorate in chemistry.
Meth; components are highly regulated, very difficult to aquire, hence the involvement of organised crime,

That leaves MJ and opium, readily grown and processed at home.
 
\\((|))// said:
Cite your evidence that all drug companies oppose the legalization of marijuana.
Click to expand...

Cite why Obama would risk losing re-election by persecuting MJ dispenseries at a higher rate than BushII ever contemplated, despite his assurances to the contrary
while a candidate.

Cite why the herb trictophan is illegal.
 
Rune said:
Cite why Obama would risk losing re-election by persecuting MJ dispenseries at a higher rate than BushII ever contemplated, despite his assurances to the contrary while a candidate. Cite why the herb trictophan is illegal.
Click to expand...

Not the issue, is it?

You stated that all drug companies oppose legalization.

I assume you meant marijuana.

Can you offer any evidence that all drug companies oppose legalization of marijuana?
 
\\((|))// said:
Not the issue, is it?

You stated that all drug companies oppose legalization.

I assume you meant marijuana.

Can you offer any evidence that all drug companies oppose legalization of marijuana?
Click to expand...

Can you produce any evidence that neo-cons want to dismantle the federal government and replace it with a government of their own design? Of course not, yet you know it is true, nonetheless.

If you research trictophan, you will discover my reasoning.
 
Rune said:
Can you produce any evidence that neo-cons want to dismantle the federal government and replace it with a government of their own design? Of course not, yet you know it is true, nonetheless. If you research trictophan, you will discover my reasoning.
Click to expand...

That's not what we're discussing, is it?
 
\\((|))// said:
That's not what we're discussing, is it?
Click to expand...

I'll give you a couple facts, you take it from there.

1. MJ has been illegal to grow in this country for decades for any purpose. Even hemp (with barely trace amounts of THC) , solely for manufacturing.
Hemp is actually a miracle plant for manufacturing. Many small farms would still exist if not for this ban. It is successfully and profitably raised in Canada.
This is one of the reasons why there has been so little medical research.

2. Now as the countrywide push for medical legalisation is occuring, all of a sudden permits to grow and research MJ have been issued to 57 pharma companies by the Obama admin, and the feds are busting dispenseries at a record pace.

3. Big Pharma has a long record of having herbs which compete against their drugs banned. Again see trictophan.
 
So you cannot prove that what you said was true. Fair enough.
 
Damocles said:
Almost immediately the violent crimes associated with illegal distribution would cease, the price would reduce so that idiots who take them wouldn't have to steal to get them. Basically look at the improvements one can associate with the end of the First Prohibition and you will see the same benefits associated with ending the Second Prohibition.

It would be far more difficult for the underage to get them as they would sell behind counters where people check IDs, more supportable DUI laws and research into effects could be done (idiots wouldn't be able to claim that MJ has no associated cancers, well unless it really doesn't, for instance because real medical research could be conducted.

You could write whole books about the subject (many have been written about the ending of the First Prohibition).
Click to expand...

Isn't it also possible that people would still make meth and grow MJ themselves and then sell it below the Governments price?

You also said:
"It would be far more difficult for the underage to get them as they would sell behind counters where people check IDs..."

According to the Left, the poor don't have ID's; so why are you trying to keep what would amount to legal drugs, away from the poor?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Isn't it also possible that people would still make meth and grow MJ themselves and then sell it below the Governments price?
Click to expand...

The Buddhist beekeeper likes to generalize without providing any factual evidence. Don't hold it against him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top