three word answer to the concept of drug addiction ruining lives, families and friends: responsible drug use.
Oh, and I found a wiki on the topic: Responsible drug use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

__________________

Namaste,

You misunderstand me. I am not taking issue with the decisions of children to take drugs I am taking issue the the culture of abandonment and abuse to children that follows drug addiction. How many drug addicted infants do we need to see before it becomes repellant? How many abandoned children by drug addicted parents do there need to be? If you choose to poison and destroy your life and body with drugs then so be it. However, other people suffer because of the addiction that comes with drug abuse. Crystal meth for example is considered to be instantly addictive and the life immediately begins to suffer.

In Peace,
David

__________________

Namaste,

I don't even need to answer. The article you referenced answered the question itself:

In Peace,
David

__________________

I don't doubt this. I don't do illicit drugs (unless you count a Lot of Diet Cherry Vanilla Dr Pepper or an alcohol habit that probably works out to an average of 2 drinks a week), and don't think others should either. I also don't encourage people buying more house than they can afford, smoking, becoming lawyers, or voting for Democrats or party-line Republicans, but people are allowed to do all these things that can ruin their lives and the lives of others. Why should drugs be any different?

On the flip side, the War On Drugs And Freedoms Too ruins lives. My sister and brother-in-law at least used to smoke pot. (I think they both quit, but not completely certain.) Would my nephews be better off in some foster home if they had gotten caught? Or would my family be better off with two extra mouths to feed on the same income? And what of those who have been killed or otherwise hurt by avoidable gang violence, in unnecessary police raids, or as a consequence of people defending themselves against one or both of the above? And those are simply the obvious impacts - TWODAFT also encourages a disregard for the law and law enforcement, the money wasted on drug interdiction and enforcement could have gone towards medical research or left in the economy to help create jobs, and there are probably other ripple effects I'm not thinking of at the moment.

So we should also ban peanuts, eradicate all bees, and eliminate anything else that has been linked to sudden death? In all cases, those that are at risk need to keep that risk in mind, and the rest of us should be allowed to live our lives. (That latter possibly including protective attention and/or social support as appropriate.)

__________________
Today's forecast: Government corruption.

Tomorrow's forecast: 100% chance of more 'politics as usual'

Maybe it's finally time to vote Libertarian

Well heres my take on the whole drug situation. From someone who has been involved in just about every aspect of the drug scene at one point in their lives. As a user, as a dealer, as a smuggler and as a drug counselor.

The first major question we must ask ourselves is do we belive that it is the Governments job to protect us from ourselves? Is that our definintion of freedom? At what point does protection become control? While I do belive that some drugs should be illegal due to their addictive and dangerous nature, I also belive that adults should be afforded the right to make their own mistakes.

Drugs like cocaine, heroine and methamphetamines do have major potential to destroy lives. These drugs also have major potential to make the user dangerous to society. That and that alone is the reason they should remain illegal. Now when you look at things like Marijuana, psilocybin mushrooms and a few choice other "drugs" I think that we are seeing a completly different story. These drugs are less addictive and less dangerous then both tobacco and alcohol which are legal and readily available.

Is it really nessicary to arrest approx 785,000, otherwise law abiding citizens, a year for marijuana? The average prisoner costs the goverment $22,650/yr to house costing tax payers billions of dollars a year. Thats not even taking in to consideration the amount of money we are spending on searching out these pot users/dealers/growers. Wouldn't that money and resources be better suited for prevention of violent crime in this country?

Please tell me, in what way would you consider marijuana to be more detrimental than cigarettes or alcohol? I put it to you that this is where to start - decriminalize weed. It's the least addictive, the most helpful, and the most furiously fought - because it offers a free alternative to several expensive prescriptions.

Don't tell me the medical lobby doesn't answer to the drug companies - as does congress.

__________________
And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it." --George W. Bush, Jan. 29, 2007

Now just imagine if we had a society that offered help to these people rather than building more prisons, passing more laws and creating more problems.

The drug problem we have today is a direct result of the history of drug enforcement. Even reports about DARE show that children exposed to this program are as likely or more likely to use drugs than those who are not exposed to the program. And the death of even one, even though there are many more, innocent people at the hands of drug enforcement agents in this nation does not compensate for people wishing to essentially maintain a hypocritical status of locking up "some" drug users.

Hello,

Once again you have missed the point. The issue is not about those who would choose to use drugs. The issue is what about those affected by the drug users. Are you willing to support the idea of taking away the children of those who use drugs? I, personally, don't care what drugs you take. You are free to destroy your own life and I don't really care if that is your choice. However, I do care about those affected by the drug users.
I, personally, believe that drugs (including alcohol and tobacco) are the tools of the slave because that is what an addict is, a slave. If you want to be a slave that is fine. However, that makes me a master because I can live my life without substances to help me get through. Go ahead. Take all the drugs you want. They will make you a failure. They will make you a slave. However, don't whine later and ask for help. After all you have done this to yourself and it is not my, or societies, job to help you. It is yours.

Eglaelin

__________________

Admittedly, I have not read through all of the posts in this thread. I am simply responding to the premise of the thread title.

My position: immediately decriminalize all drugs. Marijuana, heroin, extacy, cocaine, LSD, crystal meth, etc.... Decriminalize all of them.

I have a lot of thoughtfully considered arguments on the subject, upon which I will elaborate as this thread proceeds, but I will start with this: Alcohol is probably the "worst" drug, as far as drugs go. It is one of only two commonly known drugs from which the withdrawal can kill you (the other one being heroin), its intoxication factor is higher than meth, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, etc (only LSD and DMT are higher, IIRC), its impairment factor is the highest of any drug, and it kills more people (through accidents related to driving and overdoses) than all illegal drugs combined.

If our society can handle having the absolute worst drug imaginable being legal, then we can probably handle the rest being legal. And, operating under that assumption, we could immediately remove an enormous burden on our tax dollars (the DEA, prosecuting and incarcerating people for possessing drugs, etc), free up prison space (no more people in jail for possessing drugs), eliminate a large element of the black market (lots of people get rich from the illegal status of various drugs), and end the ongoing hypocrisy of drug laws in the US (for example, cocaine is illegal, but adderall and ritalin, which are basically the same thing, are fully legal and available, in pill form, for your children, to help them get good grades).

Personally, I have experimented with many, many different kinds of drugs. This experimentation was done in my younger days (high school and college). As of today, the most "hardcore" drugs that I do are Jim Beam and Tylenol PM. My company gives me hair tests for drugs, and, as such, I don't do any drugs. So please, spare the the ad hominem of "you just want them to be legal so you can do them". I have no vested interest in the legalization of drugs. My only interest in the subject matter is that I'm tired of contributing tax dollars to an organization like the DEA. I'm essentially contributing a portion of my salary (tax dollars) to an organization that does its best to make sure that I don't smoke a joint. I find that offensive and disgusting on many, many levels. But the level on which I find it most offensive is that they're wasting my fucking money. I already have a mommy, thank you very much.

Now, all that said, would anybody like to "spar" as to why they think that mama government has a constitutional right to tell us what we are allowed to ingest and what we are forbidden from ingesting?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Drink 6 fluid ounces of morphine in one hour, and then inject 6 fluid ounces of whiskey in one hour.

Morphine is not the more detrimental (by the way, if you injected that much alcohol into your bloodstream, you would die before you could say "drunken experiment")...



Pound for pound, alcohol is more intoxicating, addictive, and generally destructive than morphine. However, you have to consider the standard methods of ingestion. Generally, people inject morphine, or take it in concentrated pill form. Generally, people ingest alcohol in extremely diluted form (i.e. beer - about 3% pure). Now, let's turn the tables. Imagine that you're given a morphine drip and you rip it out of your arm and drink it. It probably won't have much of an effect on you. Now, let's imagine that you're watching a baseball game at the local pub and drinking a Bud Light. Now, instead of drinking the Bud Light, you decide to inject it directly into your aorta. Don't ya think that might make you feel just a touch giddy? Now, if you weren't flying high enough on intravenous alcohol, imagine that you told the nurse, "Nurse, I'm still kind of hurting..." Well, shit. She might just dump another brewski into your drip, and then you'd be in all kinds of heaven

My only point here is this - if you're going to compare two drugs, compare them on equal footing. Injecting drug X and saying that it's much more "addictive" than drinking drug Y is absurd. Inject them both or drink them both. That's the only reasonable way to compare them. And, by the way, if you ever start injecting alcohol, you'll make heroin addicts look like reasonable people

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

(1) From what I've seen of your posting here so far, you strike me as the epitome of a "government knows best" liberal. I'm mildly impressed by what you've said about an "example of nanny govt we could do without".

(2) Regarding the bolded, I would like to see a source. As comically inept as the DEA and their cohorts might be regarding accurate classification of drugs, I cannot recall seeing a study stating that marijuana is more dangerous than meth or heroin. If you could produce such a thing, I would be very entertained and sadly bemused.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

The concepts "drug addiction" and "responsible use" are mutually exclusive, whether we're talking about legal or illegal drugs. Any addiction involves putting your dedication to the object of your addiction above the lives of the people about whom you care.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Well, smoking say, 20 joints per day is far worse for you than smoking 20 cigarettes per day.

That may be true, or it may be a bunch of hippie crap. What is un-arguable is that marijuana is one of the least addictive intoxicants ("most helpful and the most furiously fought" notwithstanding) there is. Its use for glaucoma patients and cancer patients is indisputable. As for offering a "free alternative" to "expensive prescriptions", I would have to disagree. Marijuana generally serves to alleviate nausea (particularly in chemo patients) and to provide a general set of mitigating effects. Please offer me specific examples as to what drugs it "replaces".


Good God - of course it does! Intoxicating America (under legally and socially acceptable premises, of course) is big business!

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

On a side note the only detrimental effects of both are from how they are injested, with the exception of Tobacco's very high addiction rates. If you stick Marijuana in a vaporizor there are 0 thats right 0 permenent detrimental effects outside memory loss from irresponsible use (smoking 7+ joints a day for a month or more)

__________________
“His presidency has been remarkably successful,” one historian declared, “in its pursuit of disastrous policies.”

"turn on, tune in, drop out" - Timothy Leary

No, what I stated is directly related to the issue and my original posts. The enforcement of the drug laws is part of the problem. They make matters worse than what you believe.

I don't take drugs. I've been down that road before. I'm not whining. I'm hoping people like you actually take the time to learn something about what is going on in this nation with regards to drugs. It is not merely about addiction. That is a separate issue entirely.

It is the fact that the "drug war" is an institution of racism, a primary source of corruption, the federal government has outright lied and violated their own ethics in the prosecution of this war, more civil rights have been taken away from us in the name of us war (far more than that idiotic Patriot Act), we have violated the sovereignty of foreign nations executing this war and wasted trillions...essentially because Americans cannot take their head out of their ass and realize that there is a drug problem (which can be helped by education and treatment) and there is a drug war (which is the greatest monumental failure in American history since slavery).

If we can put an end to this ridiculous drug war, then maybe we can work on the drug problem.