PDA

View Full Version : THIS JUST IN: 40-year-old War on Drugs not working!



TUSooner
5/14/2010, 11:34 AM
Thus saith the Associated Press.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iLZNYd6C9SGpa2oeiZIqT-HKVrCQD9FMCM103

For the linky impaired:

AP IMPACT: US drug war has met none of its goals

By MARTHA MENDOZA (AP) – 12 hours ago

MEXICO CITY — After 40 years, the United States' war on drugs has cost $1 trillion and hundreds of thousands of lives, and for what? Drug use is rampant and violence even more brutal and widespread.

Even U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske concedes the strategy hasn't worked.

"In the grand scheme, it has not been successful," Kerlikowske told The Associated Press. "Forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems is, if anything, magnified, intensified."

This week President Obama promised to "reduce drug use and the great damage it causes" with a new national policy that he said treats drug use more as a public health issue and focuses on prevention and treatment.

Nevertheless, his administration has increased spending on interdiction and law enforcement to record levels both in dollars and in percentage terms; this year, they account for $10 billion of his $15.5 billion drug-control budget.

Kerlikowske, who coordinates all federal anti-drug policies, says it will take time for the spending to match the rhetoric.

"Nothing happens overnight," he said. "We've never worked the drug problem holistically. We'll arrest the drug dealer, but we leave the addiction."

His predecessor, John P. Walters, takes issue with that.

Walters insists society would be far worse today if there had been no War on Drugs. Drug abuse peaked nationally in 1979 and, despite fluctuations, remains below those levels, he says. Judging the drug war is complicated: Records indicate marijuana and prescription drug abuse are climbing, while cocaine use is way down. Seizures are up, but so is availability.

"To say that all the things that have been done in the war on drugs haven't made any difference is ridiculous," Walters said. "It destroys everything we've done. It's saying all the people involved in law enforcment, treatment and prevention have been wasting their time. It's saying all these people's work is misguided."

___

In 1970, hippies were smoking pot and dropping acid. Soldiers were coming home from Vietnam hooked on heroin. Embattled President Richard M. Nixon seized on a new war he thought he could win.

"This nation faces a major crisis in terms of the increasing use of drugs, particularly among our young people," Nixon said as he signed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act. The following year, he said: "Public enemy No. 1 in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive."

His first drug-fighting budget was $100 million. Now it's $15.1 billion, 31 times Nixon's amount even when adjusted for inflation.

Using Freedom of Information Act requests, archival records, federal budgets and dozens of interviews with leaders and analysts, the AP tracked where that money went, and found that the United States repeatedly increased budgets for programs that did little to stop the flow of drugs. In 40 years, taxpayers spent more than:

_ $20 billion to fight the drug gangs in their home countries. In Colombia, for example, the United States spent more than $6 billion, while coca cultivation increased and trafficking moved to Mexico — and the violence along with it.

_ $33 billion in marketing "Just Say No"-style messages to America's youth and other prevention programs. High school students report the same rates of illegal drug use as they did in 1970, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says drug overdoses have "risen steadily" since the early 1970s to more than 20,000 last year.

_ $49 billion for law enforcement along America's borders to cut off the flow of illegal drugs. This year, 25 million Americans will snort, swallow, inject and smoke illicit drugs, about 10 million more than in 1970, with the bulk of those drugs imported from Mexico.

_ $121 billion to arrest more than 37 million nonviolent drug offenders, about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana. Studies show that jail time tends to increase drug abuse.

_ $450 billion to lock those people up in federal prisons alone. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses.

At the same time, drug abuse is costing the nation in other ways. The Justice Department estimates the consequences of drug abuse — "an overburdened justice system, a strained health care system, lost productivity, and environmental destruction" — cost the United States $215 billion a year.

Harvard University economist Jeffrey Miron says the only sure thing taxpayers get for more spending on police and soldiers is more homicides.

"Current policy is not having an effect of reducing drug use," Miron said, "but it's costing the public a fortune."

___

From the beginning, lawmakers debated fiercely whether law enforcement — no matter how well funded and well trained — could ever defeat the drug problem.

Then-Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, who had his doubts, has since watched his worst fears come to pass.

"Look what happened. It's an ongoing tragedy that has cost us a trillion dollars. It has loaded our jails and it has destabilized countries like Mexico and Colombia," he said.

In 1970, proponents said beefed-up law enforcement could effectively seal the southern U.S. border and stop drugs from coming in. Since then, the U.S. used patrols, checkpoints, sniffer dogs, cameras, motion detectors, heat sensors, drone aircraft — and even put up more than 1,000 miles of steel beam, concrete walls and heavy mesh stretching from California to Texas.

None of that has stopped the drugs. The Office of National Drug Control Policy says about 330 tons of cocaine, 20 tons of heroin and 110 tons of methamphetamine are sold in the United States every year — almost all of it brought in across the borders. Even more marijuana is sold, but it's hard to know how much of that is grown domestically, including vast fields run by Mexican drug cartels in U.S. national parks.

The dealers who are caught have overwhelmed justice systems in the United States and elsewhere. U.S. prosecutors declined to file charges in 7,482 drug cases last year, most because they simply didn't have the time. That's about one out of every four drug cases.

The United States has in recent years rounded up thousands of suspected associates of Mexican drug gangs, then turned some of the cases over to local prosecutors who can't make the charges stick for lack of evidence. The suspects are then sometimes released, deported or acquitted. The U.S. Justice Department doesn't even keep track of what happens to all of them.

In Mexico, traffickers exploit a broken justice system. Investigators often fail to collect convincing evidence — and are sometimes assassinated when they do. Confessions are beaten out of suspects by frustrated, underpaid police. Judges who no longer turn a blind eye to such abuse release the suspects in exasperation.

In prison, in the U.S. or Mexico, traffickers continue to operate, ordering assassinations and arranging distribution of their product even from solitary confinement in Texas and California. In Mexico, prisoners can sometimes even buy their way out.

The violence spans Mexico. In Ciudad Juarez, the epicenter of drug violence in Mexico, 2,600 people were killed last year in cartel-related violence, making the city of 1 million across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Texas, one of the world's deadliest. Not a single person was prosecuted for homicide related to organized crime.

And then there's the money.

The $320 billion annual global drug industry now accounts for 1 percent of all commerce on the planet.

A full 10 percent of Mexico's economy is built on drug proceeds — $25 billion smuggled in from the United States every year, of which 25 cents of each $100 smuggled is seized at the border. Thus there's no incentive for the kind of financial reform that could tame the cartels.

"For every drug dealer you put in jail or kill, there's a line up to replace him because the money is just so good," says Walter McCay, who heads the non-profit Center for Professional Police Certification in Mexico City.

McCay is one of the 13,000 members of Medford, Mass.-based Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, a group of cops, judges, prosecutors, prison wardens and others who want to legalize and regulate all drugs.

A decade ago, no politician who wanted to keep his job would breathe a word about legalization, but a consensus is growing across the country that at least marijuana will someday be regulated and sold like tobacco and alcohol.

California voters decide in November whether to legalize marijuana, and South Dakota will vote this fall on whether to allow medical uses of marijuana, already permitted in California and 13 other states. The Obama administration says it won't target marijuana dispensaries if they comply with state laws.

___

Mexican President Felipe Calderon says if America wants to fix the drug problem, it needs to do something about Americans' unquenching thirst for illegal drugs.

Kerlikowske agrees, and Obama has committed to doing just that.

And yet both countries continue to spend the bulk of their drug budgets on law enforcement rather than treatment and prevention.

"President Obama's newly released drug war budget is essentially the same as Bush's, with roughly twice as much money going to the criminal justice system as to treatment and prevention," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the non-profit Drug Policy Alliance. "This despite Obama's statements on the campaign trail that drug use should be treated as a health issue, not a criminal justice issue."

Obama is requesting a record $15.5 billion for the drug war for 2011, about two thirds of it for law enforcement at the front lines of the battle: police, military and border patrol agents struggling to seize drugs and arrest traffickers and users.

About $5.6 billion would be spent on prevention and treatment.

"For the first time ever, the nation has before it an administration that views the drug issue first and foremost through the lens of the public health mandate," said economist and drug policy expert John Carnevale, who served three administrations and four drug czars. "Yet ... it appears that this historic policy stride has some problems with its supporting budget."

Carnevale said the administration continues to substantially over-allocate funds to areas that research shows are least effective — interdiction and source-country programs — while under-allocating funds for treatment and prevention.

Kerlikowske, who wishes people would stop calling it a "war" on drugs, frequently talks about one of the most valuable tools they've found, in which doctors screen for drug abuse during routine medical examinations. That program would get a mere $7.2 million under Obama's budget.

"People will say that's not enough. They'll say the drug budget hasn't shifted as much as it should have, and granted I don't disagree with that," Kerlikowske said. "We would like to do more in that direction."

Fifteen years ago, when the government began telling doctors to ask their patients about their drug use during routine medical exams, it described the program as one of the most proven ways to intervene early with would-be addicts.

"Nothing happens overnight," Kerlikowske said.

___

Until 100 years ago, drugs were simply a commodity. Then Western cultural shifts made them immoral and deviant, according to London School of Economics professor Fernanda Mena.

Religious movements led the crusades against drugs: In 1904, an Episcopal bishop returning from a mission in the Far East argued for banning opium after observing "the natives' moral degeneration." In 1914, The New York Times reported that cocaine caused blacks to commit "violent crimes," and that it made them resistant to police bullets. In the decades that followed, Mena said, drugs became synonymous with evil.

Nixon drew on those emotions when he pressed for his War on Drugs.

"Narcotics addiction is a problem which afflicts both the body and the soul of America," he said in a special 1971 message to Congress. "It comes quietly into homes and destroys children, it moves into neighborhoods and breaks the fiber of community which makes neighbors. We must try to better understand the confusion and disillusion and despair that bring people, particularly young people, to the use of narcotics and dangerous drugs."

Just a few years later, a young Barack Obama was one of those young users, a teenager smoking pot and trying "a little blow when you could afford it," as he wrote in "Dreams From My Father." When asked during his campaign if he had inhaled the pot, he replied: "That was the point."

So why persist with costly programs that don't work?

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, sitting down with the AP at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, paused for a moment at the question.

"Look," she says, starting slowly. "This is something that is worth fighting for because drug addiction is about fighting for somebody's life, a young child's life, a teenager's life, their ability to be a successful and productive adult.

"If you think about it in those terms, that they are fighting for lives — and in Mexico they are literally fighting for lives as well from the violence standpoint — you realize the stakes are too high to let go."

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved

Let the SOS begin! :)

StoopTroup
5/14/2010, 11:39 AM
NSFW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKaU7NW0K5E

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 11:56 AM
It's a collosal waste of time and resources. It clogs the legal system and penetentiaries with non-violent drug users, but aside from legalizing drugs is there another reasonable alternative?

Bourbon St Sooner
5/14/2010, 12:03 PM
This just in: The sky is blue, except when it's gray.

StoopTroup
5/14/2010, 12:12 PM
I like to watch pot smokers get really stoned and eat at a restaurant until they realized they left their wallet at Home.

1890MilesToNorman
5/14/2010, 12:15 PM
Who brung the tacos?

Breadburner
5/14/2010, 12:32 PM
I like to watch pot smokers get really stoned and eat at a restaurant until they realized they left their wallet at Home.

I hate dealing with people that are on Marijuana time......

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 12:59 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I was more productive, more responsible, more likely to be on time, and less likely to forget **** back in my weed days.

I was also more likely to eat chips and ****, but WTH?

NormanPride
5/14/2010, 01:11 PM
1. Legalize drugs
2. Register Drug offenders
3. Government regulates drugs and taxes the hell out of it
4. Government uses taxes garnished from drug sales to fund rehabilitation programs


Make our drugs cheaper, cleaner, and safer than foreign ones, and we can better track and treat those that use them.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 01:14 PM
Meeting none of the goals after all this time, thats quite ambitious.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 01:42 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I was more productive, more responsible, more likely to be on time, and less likely to forget **** back in my weed days.

They call those "long-term effects."

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 01:43 PM
1. Legalize drugs
2. Register Drug offenders
3. Government regulates drugs and taxes the hell out of it
4. Government uses taxes garnished from drug sales to fund rehabilitation programs


Make our drugs cheaper, cleaner, and safer than foreign ones, and we can better track and treat those that use them.

How do you regulate an international criminal cartel though? Unless a company like Pfizer creates a "recreational and explicit drug division" I just don't how it's feasible to regulate the manufacturing and distribution of these kinds of drugs.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 01:44 PM
Why do those "long term effects" go away when I haven't smoked in years, then smoke? Then, when I quit again it's a repeat of before? lol

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 01:46 PM
How do you regulate an international criminal cartel though? Unless a company like Pfizer creates a "recreational and explicit drug division" I just don't how it's feasible to regulate the manufacturing and distribution of these kinds of drugs.

As a percentage of total consumption how many people buy illegal cigs? Bootleg alcohol? If there's a legal market and domestic production from licensed wholesalers then there's no money in it for the international cartels.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 01:50 PM
Sending ppl to prison simply for having a drug addiction is completely retarded

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 01:54 PM
Even more retarded is sending people who have no addiction at all and just occasionally smoke pot. Can you imagine if every non-alcoholic who ever sipped a beer on saturday night AT HOME with no violence or anything was at risk of having cops storm in with guns and haul them to jail?

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 01:55 PM
As a percentage of total consumption how many people buy illegal cigs? Bootleg alcohol? If there's a legal market and domestic production from licensed wholesalers then there's no money in it for the international cartels.

That's my point though. How many monolithic corporations are eager to get into the explicit drug business, no matter how lucrative it potentially is? It wouldn't exactly be great PR.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:01 PM
The law they are gonna pass in California has companies lining up just like they did for the medical marijuana. Same thing with the law we hope to get here in Nevada. The actual hard part here is gonna be limiting the number of providers to what is allowed in the proposed legislation.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 02:02 PM
legalizing pot I could understand, tons of money to be made off of it and it doesnt have the adverse effects that others have. Legalizing other drugs though, I would never go for that

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:02 PM
And on that note, a corporation publishes High Times. Companies big and small make pipes, bongs, and rolling papers.

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 02:03 PM
Hell, let's give it a shot then. It would be really convenient to be able to purchase my boner pills and my methamphetamine at the same place.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:03 PM
legalizing pot I could understand, tons of money to be made off of it and it doesnt have the adverse effects that others have. Legalizing other drugs though, I would never go for that

And the good part of legalizing pot in that context is that drug enforcement wouldn't be wasting 75% of their time and resources on pot smokers while there are crackheads, coke fiends, heroin addicts in ditches, and meth freaks blowing up their trailers.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:04 PM
Hell, let's give it a shot then. It would be really convenient to be able to purchase my boner pills and my methamphetamine at the same place.

You already can. Walgreens has viagra and diet pills.

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 02:05 PM
You already can. Walgreens has viagra and diet pills.

Are you calling me fat?

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:07 PM
Dunno...I can't see you over my beer gut and man tits.

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 02:08 PM
Nevermind on the Viagra.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:09 PM
Why do those "long term effects" go away when I haven't smoked in years, then smoke? Then, when I quit again it's a repeat of before? lol

I think all of it is just an hallucination on your part. I'm not sure you even know when you smoked or what you smoked. Because your brain is fried, man!


Sending ppl to prison simply for having a drug addiction is completely retarded

They're not. They're being sent to prison because their actions broke the law. It's not about their physical condition, mental condition, or who they are... it's what they do.

The law is very simple: Don't do drugs. There is nothing that would compel a person to break these laws except for their own disdain for the Law. So if you can't obey the law, then you fully deserve the punishment.

If you want to join the frat; you must drink the beer. If you want to participate in society, you must follow the rules.

NormanPride
5/14/2010, 02:10 PM
legalizing pot I could understand, tons of money to be made off of it and it doesnt have the adverse effects that others have. Legalizing other drugs though, I would never go for that

Oh, no doubt it would never happen. But I still think it would help if we legalized it and tracked everyone who used very closely. Drive the illegal cartels out of the market with subsidies, then once you have people registered in the government systems from buying, you can work on getting them off the crap.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 02:16 PM
The law is very simple: Don't do drugs. .

The law also says dont stick your P in someones A, so are you gonna start arresting the back door bandits? The point is, while there are laws being broken, what good does sending someone to jail who has an addiction do? Doesnt benefit society one bit, instead of wasting tax payer money on their prison sentence, waste our money on their required treatment

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:18 PM
I think all of it is just an hallucination on your part. I'm not sure you even know when you smoked or what you smoked. Because your brain is fried, man!



They're not. They're being sent to prison because their actions broke the law. It's not about their physical condition, mental condition, or who they are... it's what they do.

The law is very simple: Don't do drugs. There is nothing that would compel a person to break these laws except for their own disdain for the Law. So if you can't obey the law, then you fully deserve the punishment.

If you want to join the frat; you must drink the beer. If you want to participate in society, you must follow the rules.

Heh...maybe my brain is fried, but it goes great with gravy and toast.

As for the other part, DUH! The whole discussion is about how keeping drugs illegal and making a big deal of it hasn't worked and now peopel are calling for legalization in record numbers. It's silly that the previously mentioned "boner pills" are legal despite the harmful side effects and other, safer substances are frowned on and made illegal.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:28 PM
Heh...maybe my brain is fried, but it goes great with gravy and toast.

As for the other part, DUH! The whole discussion is about how keeping drugs illegal and making a big deal of it hasn't worked and now peopel are calling for legalization in record numbers. It's silly that the previously mentioned "boner pills" are legal despite the harmful side effects and other, safer substances are frowned on and made illegal.

I'm not sure what's involved in those pills you discuss. It doesn't matter. To say "Well, X is legal..." is rotten way to frame an argument.

But you misunderstood my post anyway. I wasn't arguing that drugs should or should not be legal. I was arguing that those who broke law (as it stands) should be punished. They deserve no sympathy.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:31 PM
So it would be more valid for me to say that alcohol, cigarettes, viagra, and valium should be illegal? Then I just turn into a social conservative! lol

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:33 PM
The law also says dont stick your P in someones A, so are you gonna start arresting the back door bandits?

Well, I'm not sure the law says that. But even if it does, you missed my point earlier: "There is nothing that would compel a person to break these laws except for their own disdain for the Law."

There is something that would compel some people to break an anti-sodomy law: sexual drive. But there is nothing inherent in us that compels us to begin using drugs.

Now, there are people who have become hooked on drugs because they were prescribed them and got hooked. (Rush comes to mind.) They broke the law so they need to pay the price, but their actions are at least understandable. Meth use? Naaah. Meth user are meth users because they're jerks.

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 02:34 PM
So it would be more valid for me to say that alcohol, cigarettes, viagra, and valium should be illegal? Then I just turn into a social conservative! lol

Tits, also. Don't forget those. They've practically destroyed everything righteous and wholesome about society.

My Opinion Matters
5/14/2010, 02:35 PM
Well, I'm not sure the law says that. But even if it does, you missed my point earlier: "There is nothing that would compel a person to break these laws except for their own disdain for the Law."

There is something that would compel some people to break an anti-sodomy law: sexual drive. But there is nothing inherent in us that compels us to begin using drugs.

Now, there are people who have become hooked on drugs because they were prescribed them and got hooked. (Rush comes to mind.) They broke the law so they need to pay the price, but their actions are at least understandable. Meth use? Naaah. Meth user are meth users because they're jerks.

loltrollfail.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:36 PM
So it would be more valid for me to say that alcohol, cigarettes, viagra, and valium should be illegal? Then I just turn into a social conservative! lol

Viagra and Valium are prescibed by doctors to overcome a medical condition, so I don't see the relationship. (Yes, they have side effects but almost all drugs do.) Cigarettes and alcohol are massive killers, so legalizing drugs so that they attain the same status as cigarettes and alcohol seems rather counterproductive.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:36 PM
loltrollfail.

Speaking of fail...

Collier11
5/14/2010, 02:36 PM
Well, I'm not sure the law says that. But even if it does, you missed my point earlier: "There is nothing that would compel a person to break these laws except for their own disdain for the Law."

There is something that would compel some people to break an anti-sodomy law: sexual drive. But there is nothing inherent in us that compels us to begin using drugs.

Now, there are people who have become hooked on drugs because they were prescribed them and got hooked. (Rush comes to mind.) They broke the law so they need to pay the price, but their actions are at least understandable. Meth use? Naaah. Meth user are meth users because they're jerks.

How can you say that for sure that everyone has the same drive for sex or that people dont have a drive for drugs even if they havent tried it?

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:38 PM
How can you say that for sure that everyone has the same drive for sex or that people dont have a drive for drugs even if they havent tried it?

Yeah, we are all born in nature with an inherent drive to stick needles in our arms.

Sure... go ahead and stand by that argument.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 02:42 PM
Doesnt have to be needles first of all, 2nd, what would you say inclined me to try and enjoy beer? Obviously there was some drive there, whether it was seeing others do it or whatever, a drive to do something doesnt have to be natural

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 02:47 PM
But I was referring only to natural drives.

Some people are driven to be jerks. That doesn't make it okay. (Fire away)

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 02:56 PM
Xanax (similar to valium) is one of the top 2 drug killers in Florida, behind only cocaine. Viagra doesn't treat a real medical condition...it makes old guys who are naturally flaccid hard. Besides, in the case of valium, arguing that it's a legit drug goes against what you said about using weed to treat anxiety and give people patience in the other pot thread a few days ago. Taking valium to deal with life is no more or less legit than smoking weed for the same reasons in any other way than the law you seem to put so much faith in.

MR2-Sooner86
5/14/2010, 03:07 PM
Yeah, we are all born in nature with an inherent drive to stick needles in our arms.

Sure... go ahead and stand by that argument.

People were born wanting to feel good and enjoy.

How long have people had multiple sexual partners regardless of sex and age? Thousands of years.
How long have people been smoking marijuana? Thousands of years.
How long have people been drinking alcohol? Thousands of years.
How long have people been using coca leaves? Thousands of years.
How long have people been consuming chocolate? Thousands of years.
How long have people been smoking tobacco? Thousands of years.
How long have people been drinking coffee? Thousands of years.

People were drinking beer around 9,000 BC and what good did prohibition do in the 1920's? Nothing.
People have been smoking marijuana for nearly 5,000 years and what good has outlawing it the past 70 years done?
Nothing.

People have been using drugs since the dawn of time and all of a sudden we're going to just stop? Come on!

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 03:07 PM
Xanax (similar to valium) is one of the top 2 drug killers in Florida, behind only cocaine. Viagra doesn't treat a real medical condition...it makes old guys who are naturally flaccid hard.

That's a medical condition. (And no, I don't have it.)


Besides, in the case of valium, arguing that it's a legit drug goes against what you said about using weed to treat anxiety and give people patience in the other pot thread a few days ago. Taking valium to deal with life is no more or less legit than smoking weed for the same reasons in any other way than the law you seem to put so much faith in.

Valium is prescribed to treat medical depression. You have to get a prescription from a psychiatrist. Having a hard time coping with unruly kids is not a medical condition and can often be treated by acting like a responsible parent and not raising thugs.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:11 PM
Valium is NOT used to treat depression. In fact, these days if a doctor prescribes valium or xanax they almost always prescribe an anti-depressant along with it thanks to the fact that valium and xanax, while great for anxiety disorders (which is what they ARE prescribed for) can actually CAUSE depression.

And getting old is not a medical condition.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:12 PM
And why do doctors prescribe valium and xanax to moms who are yanking their hair out due to kids instead of telling them to raise their kids better?

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 03:13 PM
People were born wanting to feel good and enjoy.

How long have people had multiple sexual partners regardless of sex and age? Thousands of years.
How long have people been smoking marijuana? Thousands of years.
How long have people been drinking alcohol? Thousands of years.
How long have people been using coca leaves? Thousands of years.
How long have people been consuming chocolate? Thousands of years.
How long have people been smoking tobacco? Thousands of years.

People were drinking beer around 9,000 BC and what good did prohibition do? Nothing.
People have been smoking marijuana for nearly 5,000 years and what good has outlawing it the past 70 years done?
Nothing.

People have been using drugs since the dawn of time and all of a sudden we're going to just stop? Come on!

I haven't done drugs. You don't have to either. It's not a matter of stopping; it's a matter of not starting.

I realize you may find this hard to believe, but it is quite possible to get through life without resorting to illegal artificial stimulants. A lot of people do it all the time. So there is nothing inherent in us that compels us to do illegal drugs. If we do it, it's because we simply chose to ignore the law. Own up to the responsibility for your actions and don't try to make it look as if you had no choice in the matter.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:14 PM
I DO think everyone has a vice, no matter how much you argue otherwise.

Collier11
5/14/2010, 03:15 PM
Leroy likes jerkin it to Chaucer :D

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:21 PM
I once put my P Chaucer's A.





Of course I called my P a "stif burdoun" and made the pardoner watch.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 03:27 PM
Valium is NOT used to treat depression. In fact, these days if a doctor prescribes valium or xanax they almost always prescribe an anti-depressant along with it thanks to the fact that valium and xanax, while great for anxiety disorders (which is what they ARE prescribed for) can actually CAUSE depression.

I don't know that much about Valium (don't use the stuff). A quick shows that it is use as an anti-anxiety drug. Anxiety is a medical condition.


And getting old is not a medical condition.

Viagra does not treat old age. I can drink gallons of the stuff and I won't get any younger.

I fail to see your point in any of this. If you are arguing that the amount of abuse has made the use of these drugs more harmful than beneficial and want them outlawed, I wouldn't necessarily agree or disagree.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:28 PM
Who cares about all that? Did you miss my dorky English major joke?

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 03:29 PM
I DO think everyone has a vice, no matter how much you argue otherwise.

Not everyone. But certainly it is an age-old problem.

I'm not calling people who have vices evil. I am just saying "Don't try to convince me that you did nothing wrong because everyone else is doing it." That's loser talk.

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 03:30 PM
Who cares about all that? Did you miss my dorky English major joke?

Yeah, I'm still laughing.

Crucifax Autumn
5/14/2010, 03:31 PM
Well, in my defense I've been around a lot of people who did a lot of ****, and most times I just think they are morons and go about my business. I don't do crap because "everyone else is doing it" or everyone else would think I'm way cooler than they do. I'm okay being uncool though.

MR2-Sooner86
5/14/2010, 04:43 PM
I realize you may find this hard to believe, but it is quite possible to get through life without resorting to illegal artificial stimulants. A lot of people do it all the time. So there is nothing inherent in us that compels us to do illegal drugs. If we do it, it's because we simply chose to ignore the law. Own up to the responsibility for your actions and don't try to make it look as if you had no choice in the matter.

Hydrocodon? Codeine? Morphine? Heroin? Oxycodone?

All five come from the same plant but four are legal. Also, all five can become very addictive.

So what's the difference between doing legal and illegal opium?

Leroy Lizard
5/14/2010, 05:30 PM
Hydrocodon? Codeine? Morphine? Heroin? Oxycodone?

All five come from the same plant but four are legal. Also, all five can become very addictive.

So what's the difference between doing legal and illegal opium?

I haven't done either, so I can't tell you.

But whether they come from the same plant is completely irrelevant. Wood alcohol and maple syrup come from the same plant too. What of it?

MR2-Sooner86
5/15/2010, 08:35 AM
I haven't done either, so I can't tell you.

I find it hard to believe. Ever taken a Lortab? You've done those drugs.


But whether they come from the same plant is completely irrelevant. Wood alcohol and maple syrup come from the same plant too. What of it?

Even though what is used to make heroin we use in our prescription drugs so the fact that it is from the same plant is important.

Also, with your logic the fact it shouldn't matter if it comes from the same plant can be applied to the (nonexistent) hemp industry.

Here's a little more information on legal drugs.

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), adverse drug reactions from drugs that are properly prescribed and properly administered cause about 106,000 deaths per year, making prescription drugs the fourth-leading cause of death in the U.S.
Compare this to the death toll from illegal drugs -- which is about 10,000 per year. (http://www.healthiertalk.com/prescription-drugs-more-likely-kill-you-recreational-drugs-0112)

Between 44,000 and 98,000 people die every year in hospitals due to prescription medication errors. The cost for preventable medication errors in hospitals tops $3.5 billion every year. Add to this number the cost for medical malpractice lawsuits, because of prescription errors, is estimated between $17 billion and $29 billion per year. (http://www.personal-injury-info.net/medication-errors.htm)

Prescription drug deaths skyrocket 68 percent over five years. (http://www.naturalnews.com/021635.html)

Florida continues to see a rapid rise in fatal overdoses caused by prescription-drug abuse -- a trend fueled by a cottage industry of cash-only pain clinics -- while deaths from illegal drugs wane, according to a report from the state's medical examiners released Tuesday.
Nearly 1,000 deaths were caused in 2008 by the potent painkiller oxycodone -- a 33 percent increase from 2007, the report says. Four years ago, only 340 deaths statewide were attributed to oxycodone, the most popular drug in the black-market pill trade supplied by pain clinics.
Conversely, deaths from cocaine overdoses declined by 23 percent, to 648 in 2008.
Overall, prescription drugs accounted for 75 percent of the drugs found in overdose victims last year, the report says. (http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/07/27/1573283/prescription-drug-overdose-deaths.html)

Now, how many people have died from overdoses in marijuana? LSD?

Keep on that moral high horse of yours Bible thumpers.

Crucifax Autumn
5/15/2010, 09:57 AM
Zero on both of those and it's been zero for at least the last 50 years.

Okla-homey
5/15/2010, 11:05 AM
I would like to point out, for the record, Portugal decriminalized possession of any and all illicit drugs. To be clear, simple possession, with no intent to distribute, is completely legal in Portugal. From heroin to Ecstasy.

Portugal, while it is in the same financial ruin as much of the rest of Europe because of its social welfare programs which its government can no longer pay for, does not have prisons busting at the seams with non-violent offenders incarcerated on drug charges.

I for one, favor adoption of a similar policy in the US. The so-called "war on drugs" is a farce and was long ago lost. Let's get on with it. We could start by decriminilizing weed. stat!

Leroy Lizard
5/15/2010, 11:05 AM
I find it hard to believe. Ever taken a Lortab? You've done those drugs.

Oh-ho! Now we're getting real personal.

No, I haven't taken those drugs. (But even if I had, so what? They're legal.)


Even though what is used to make heroin we use in our prescription drugs so the fact that it is from the same plant is important.

Heroin and codeine are chemically distinct. You cannot equate them. They have a different molecular structure and different chemical properties.

Prussic acid (Zyklon B) is made from Prussian Blue. Swallow one, then swallow the other and tell me if there is a difference.


Also, with your logic the fact it shouldn't matter if it comes from the same plant can be applied to the (nonexistent) hemp industry.

Marijuana doesn't come from the same plant. Or does it? Not sure.

If you are really on the pro-hemp bandwagon, I won't oppose you. I don't care about hemp one way or the other. (Although I find it strange that the pro-drug crowd champions hemp so much, but then emphasize that you can't get high from it.)



Here's a little more information on legal drugs.

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), adverse drug reactions from drugs that are properly prescribed and properly administered cause about 106,000 deaths per year, making prescription drugs the fourth-leading cause of death in the U.S.
Compare this to the death toll from illegal drugs -- which is about 10,000 per year. (http://www.healthiertalk.com/prescription-drugs-more-likely-kill-you-recreational-drugs-0112)

So your plan is to make illegal drugs legal so this can happen more often? Is that it?

MR2-Sooner86
5/15/2010, 11:58 AM
No, I haven't taken those drugs. (But even if I had, so what? They're legal.)

So because it's legal it's alright? Sure, it can be abused, become addictive, and cause overdose like illegal drugs but since it's legal we don't have to worry about it? I mean ecstasy was legal right up until 1985. Meth was prescribed for almost anything back in the 1950's. Also, heroin is becoming legal in more and more countries as a pain killer.


Heroin and codeine are chemically distinct. You cannot equate them. They have a different molecular structure and different chemical properties.

Heroin comes from morphine which comes from the Opium poppy which codeine comes from.


Prussic acid (Zyklon B) is made from Prussian Blue. Swallow one, then swallow the other and tell me if there is a difference.

Prussian Blue is a synthetic and the cyanide ions in it are added.


Marijuana doesn't come from the same plant. Or does it? Not sure.

Cannabis sativa is used to make hemp. It's not as strong in THC as other cannabis plants. However, you can still smoke it and get high.


If you are really on the pro-hemp bandwagon, I won't oppose you. I don't care about hemp one way or the other. (Although I find it strange that the pro-drug crowd champions hemp so much, but then emphasize that you can't get high from it.)

I just find it stupid hemp was thrown out along with marijuana. Also, you can't get high if you smoke a hemp rope but you can get high if you smoke the plant before it's processed.


So your plan is to make illegal drugs legal so this can happen more often? Is that it?

Again, how many people a year die from marijuana? How many die from LSD? How many die from ecstasy? The deaths from illegal drugs mainly come from heroin and crack cocaine.

Anyway, I found some nice articles around the time some of these drugs were made illegal.

NEGRO COCAINE "FIENDS" NEW SOUTHERN MENACE
New York Times February 8, 1914 (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/negro_cocaine_fiends.htm)

'Heaven dust' they call it. Its use by negro field hands in the South has spread with appalling swiftness and results. There is little doubt but that every Jew peddler in the South carries the stuff.
The New York Times August 2, 1908 (http://www.druglibrary.net/schaffer/History/e1900/growingmenace.htm)

Also, here's the bill the taxpayer is paying for this war.

$20 billion to fight the drug gangs in their home countries. In Colombia, for example, the United States spent more than $6 billion

$33 billion in marketing "Just Say No"-style messages to America's youth and other prevention programs

$49 billion for law enforcement along America's borders to cut off the flow of illegal drugs

$121 billion to arrest more than 37 million nonviolent drug offenders, about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana

$450 billion to lock those people up in federal prisons alone. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses.

Obama is requesting a record $15.5 billion for the drug war for 2011 (http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/AP-IMPACT-US-drug-war-has-met-none-of-its-goals-484040.php)

Also, if our government is so against drugs then why do they promote it? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking)

Anybody here remember Air America? The Iran Contra Affair? Panama? What about Slick Willie's little cocaine job in Arkansas?

Leroy Lizard
5/15/2010, 12:08 PM
So because it's legal it's alright?

Isn't that what the term "legal" means?

Alcohol is a drug. But it's a legal drug. So I can drink it. And I have.


Heroin comes from morphine which comes from the Opium poppy which codeine comes from.

You're still on this logical fallacy that I have already addressed. Heroin is not the same thing as morphine. Again, they have a different chemical structure.

The fact that you can distinguish chemically between the two in a lab should tell you that much.


Cannabis sativa is used to make hemp. It's not as strong in THC as other cannabis plants. However, you can still smoke it and get high.

Okay, and so... what's your point? Hemp is, for the most part, illegal to grow. So is marijuana. And somehow this is supposed to trip me up logically?


I just find it stupid hemp was thrown out along with marijuana. Also, you can't get high if you smoke a hemp rope but you can get high if you smoke the plant before it's processed.

Okay, make it legal to grow hemp rope, but not hemp. (I guess that's where you're heading.)


Again, how many people a year die from marijuana? How many die from LSD? How many die from ecstasy? The deaths from illegal drugs mainly come from heroin and crack cocaine.

Where did death enter the picture? I don't recall saying anything about death in here. (

Anyway, I found some nice articles around the time some of these drugs were made illegal.

As for your articles, I'm not going to spend all day chasing down your links and trying to deduce your arguments. If you have a point to make, make it.

MR2-Sooner86
5/15/2010, 12:20 PM
I'm not going to spend all day chasing down your links and trying to deduce your arguments. If you have a point to make, make it.

Alcohol and prescription painkillers kill more people than marijuana.
Marijuana has never killed anybody from overdose while alcohol has.
Alcohol causes more health problems than marijuana both short and long term.
Alcohol causes social problems not linked to marijuana.
Marijuana has not been linked to increasing the risk of lung cancer.
Marijuana has other benefits besides being a recreational drug (see hemp).
American tax payers are spending billions chasing marijuana smokers.
Prohibition failed the first time with alcohol so why are we going down the same path?

The answer is very simple. Make marijuana legal. Tax it and sell it like you do alcohol. Keep the same laws in place like you do for alcohol when it comes to DUI, selling to minors, and having to be 21 to buy.

Leroy Lizard
5/15/2010, 01:34 PM
Alcohol and prescription painkillers kill more people than marijuana.
Marijuana has never killed anybody from overdose while alcohol has.
Alcohol causes more health problems than marijuana both short and long term.
Alcohol causes social problems not linked to marijuana.
Marijuana has not been linked to increasing the risk of lung cancer.
Marijuana has other benefits besides being a recreational drug (see hemp).
American tax payers are spending billions chasing marijuana smokers.
Prohibition failed the first time with alcohol so why are we going down the same path?

The answer is very simple. Make marijuana legal. Tax it and sell it like you do alcohol. Keep the same laws in place like you do for alcohol when it comes to DUI, selling to minors, and having to be 21 to buy.

You want to legalize marijuana because you consider it perfectly safe, indicating that the danger level of the drug is an important consideration. Is that right?

Then I assume you want to retain the ban on drugs like heroin, which is obviously a dangerous narcotic.

I just want to make sure I understand your point of view.

Okla-homey
5/15/2010, 04:05 PM
I would like to point out, for the record, Portugal decriminalized possession of any and all illicit drugs. To be clear, simple possession, with no intent to distribute, is completely legal in Portugal. From heroin to Ecstasy.

Portugal, while it is in the same financial ruin as much of the rest of Europe because of its social welfare programs which its government can no longer pay for, does not have prisons busting at the seams with non-violent offenders incarcerated on drug charges.

I for one, favor adoption of a similar policy in the US. The so-called "war on drugs" is a farce and was long ago lost. Let's get on with it. We could start by decriminilizing weed. stat!

PORTUGAL PEOPLE!!!!

You know, the nation that opened Brazil. They're not dumarses. They were prescient and much wiser than we in the US who continue to castigate and imprison, at great expense, losers who feel compelled to use hard drugs and regular folks who like to burn a doob for kicks now and again.

Leroy Lizard
5/15/2010, 04:56 PM
PORTUGAL PEOPLE!!!!

You know, the nation that opened Brazil. They're not dumarses. They were prescient and much wiser than we in the US who continue to castigate and imprison, at great expense, losers who feel compelled to use hard drugs and regular folks who like to burn a doob for kicks now and again.

Well, here is the answer to all of your problems:

http://countrystudies.us/portugal/48.htm

Okla-homey
5/15/2010, 05:51 PM
Well, here is the answer to all of your problems:

http://countrystudies.us/portugal/48.htm

Three words.

Vasco De Gama.

and a bonus word:

Magellan.

Leroy Lizard
5/15/2010, 06:06 PM
John Wayne

Clint Eastwood