New sentencing guidelines might let a bunch of offenders already in federal prison out on parole early:
From WaPo (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111201745.html?wpisrc=newsletter%22)
I think we should build them little crack-huts so they can have a safe place to go smoke.....And provide free pipes and lighters as well.....And tooth-brushes for the ones that still have some left....
Who cares. The victimless crime committers in prison cause too much overcrowding and we all pay their bills. Decrim like in Europe or San Francisco. I'm not certain I want meth addicts along side me at the movies, in clubs, or in restaurants but I damn sure don't recognize their prescription brethren anyway.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell
AOX:
If it's a victimless crime that should be decriminalized, why would you have a hard time having them along side you at the movies, in clubs, or in restaurants? Seems like you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
AOX:
If it's a victimless crime that should be decriminalized, why would you have a hard time having them along side you at the movies, in clubs, or in restaurants? Seems like you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell
You are really showing your intelligence again Aox.
Hardly victimless. This would apply to people in prison for possession w/ intent to distribute as well. Crack is the scourge of inner-city neighborhoods.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
You are really showing your intelligence again Aox.
Hardly victimless. This would apply to people in prison for possession w/ intent to distribute as well. Crack is the scourge of inner-city neighborhoods.
It's the scourge because it is illegal. It's no problem in Europe. They ignore it for much bigger issues.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
AOX:
If it's a victimless crime that should be decriminalized, why would you have a hard time having them along side you at the movies, in clubs, or in restaurants? Seems like you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell
Did you just like my statement so much you wanted to see it repeated?
So let me get this straight. If you kill your pregnant girlfriend with a knife, that is different from shooting her with an AK47? She seems dead both ways. It is murder regardless. And both currently have the same prison sentence.
But if you smoke crack in a downtown alley, that draws a longer sentence than snorting coke in the bathroom of a South Tulsa nightclub? Why? Could it be....wealth, status, location, race?
That's the argument and it doesn't hold up. BTW, you all already sit next to drug abusers, child molesters, murderers and thieves at the movie theater. You think criminals don't enjoy the movies? Usually pretty well dressed but they are there.
Waterboy, I'd be willing to bet if you could break down the cases and sentences, you'd find that a lot of the people in prison for crack were either:
A) In commission of another felony when they were busted.
-or-
B) Repeat offender for the same crime or a repeat felon from other crimes committed in the past.
If it's truly sentence-for-sentence, assumes there were no other crimes being committed when they got the crack charge, and no priors in all cases, then yep, I'd say it's discriminitory. I'm sure has heck not so naive to think that the trade in flake cocaine is any less deleterious to society than people dealing in and smoking rocks.
I'm also not a proponent of harsh sentences for first time drug offenders prison is no place for re-hab for them. For repeat offenders that's a different story. Dealers as well. I don't take any pity on those who deal drugs.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Waterboy, I'd be willing to bet if you could break down the cases and sentences, you'd find that a lot of the people in prison for crack were either:
A) In commission of another felony when they were busted.
-or-
B) Repeat offender for the same crime or a repeat felon from other crimes committed in the past.
If it's truly sentence-for-sentence, assumes there were no other crimes being committed when they got the crack charge, and no priors in all cases, then yep, I'd say it's discriminitory. I'm sure has heck not so naive to think that the trade in flake cocaine is any less deleterious to society than people dealing in and smoking rocks.
I'm also not a proponent of harsh sentences for first time drug offenders prison is no place for re-hab for them. For repeat offenders that's a different story. Dealers as well. I don't take any pity on those who deal drugs.
"well why didn't you say so" munchkin at the door of oz
Tell ya what Ollie.. Yawnnnnnn... Time for a book and a nap.
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/rico2/Noriega.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
AOX:
If it's a victimless crime that should be decriminalized, why would you have a hard time having them along side you at the movies, in clubs, or in restaurants? Seems like you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
"Seems like"?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Waterboy, I'd be willing to bet if you could break down the cases and sentences, you'd find that a lot of the people in prison for crack were either:
A) In commission of another felony when they were busted.
-or-
B) Repeat offender for the same crime or a repeat felon from other crimes committed in the past.
If it's truly sentence-for-sentence, assumes there were no other crimes being committed when they got the crack charge, and no priors in all cases, then yep, I'd say it's discriminitory. I'm sure has heck not so naive to think that the trade in flake cocaine is any less deleterious to society than people dealing in and smoking rocks.
I'm also not a proponent of harsh sentences for first time drug offenders prison is no place for re-hab for them. For repeat offenders that's a different story. Dealers as well. I don't take any pity on those who deal drugs.
The same can be said of any felon. Or any white collar miscreant as well. The criminal does not live in a vacuum. The drug user has to have resources that are usually illegally obtained to feed his habit. But the court is only deliberating on the charges at hand and the fairness of the sentencing is in question.
Of more concern is the quantity of prisoners being released and how the communities will handle them.
Kind of goes without saying that there's a huge difference between some poor guy who had a job and lost his way with crack and hardcore addicts who have known nothing but prison and probation since they were 18.
I believe the story said somewhere around 19,000 nation-wide. 1700 alone in the district that primarily serves Richmond, Va.
It's a scary thought. Some of these 19,000 people will go straight, but a large percentage will return to old neighborhoods, old habits, be ready to settle some old scores, and still have the same criminal skill sets.
Police do what they can to clean up crime then the civil libertarians get involved and create more work for them.
It would take some research I don't have time for at the moment, but I'd be willing to bet that sentences for crack-related offenses are probably stiffer since it's more prevalent in low-income areas. That basically means that people are more apt to kill and steal over it, so it's viewed as more of a scourge.
With cocaine, it's considered more of a white collar drug, the people who use it are more likely to be paying for it out of their own pocket (until they lose their job, that is) and probably a lot less other street crimes associated with it than there is with crack.
I really have a hard time looking at crack or cocaine as a victimless crime like Aox does. Chances are many of the addicts have stolen at one time or another to feed a habit- from family members, employers, or strangers. They've stolen quality time from family and friends with their habit. Don't even get me started on how many lives are ruined by dealers.
Minority leaders ask for more help in crime prevention, in getting criminals out of their neighborhoods. When they get it, then they complain that there's a disproportionate number of blacks in prison. Anyone else catch the irony in that?
Anyone see irony, you ask? Just the irony that comes from having communities decimated (which means only a 10% loss) or, better put, obliterated by a punitive, unbalanced criminal justice system.
I like what Chris Rock said, we need to change 'crack' to 'crackle.'
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Minority leaders ask for more help in crime prevention, in getting criminals out of their neighborhoods. When they get it, then they complain that there's a disproportionate number of blacks in prison. Anyone else catch the irony in that?
Anyone see irony, you ask? Just the irony that comes from having communities decimated (which means only a 10% loss) or, better put, obliterated by a punitive, unbalanced criminal justice system.
I like what Chris Rock said, we need to change 'crack' to 'crackle.'
Is it the criminals committing crimes in those neighborhoods or the punishment being meted out which is decimating them? What's the alternative? Should we just leave them alone and let them keep jackin' their 'hood because it's too discriminitory to put them in DOC custody?
When the majority of violent crimes cease to be committed by minorities, they will finally see parity on the prison rolls.
I think there might be a home in the Democratic party for you, Tim.
I would rather be independent, thank you, though I can assure you that I will not be voting GOP in the foreseeable future.
We could start by giving convicted felons the right to vote, once they have discharged their sentences. We could decrim a lot of drugs, that would help, too.
1) Penalties
Crack was given stiffer penalties because it was resulting in more addicts, more crime, more fatalities, and a higher concentration of users. The nature of crack is to get an immediate and short lived super high. Cocaine, I hear, is a more prolonged high and not as pronounced as crack use. Likewise, the addiction factor of crack, because of its concentration level of method of consumption, is higher than cocaine.
Cocaine can be consumed as a recreational drug. Often its use can be limited to "at parties" or other infrequent uses (severe addiction is also possible). The nature of crack is extreme addiction and a drive to achieve the previous high. Thus, societies sees many functioning cocaine addicts/users but rarely sees crack addicts that function at similar norms in society (read: not a function of race, a function of the problems the drug causes).
Penalties were made stiffer in the mistaken presumption that it would discourage use and IMPROVE life in inner cities. Same way Meth has seen stiffer penalties lately in an attempt to curb its manufacture, distribution, and consumption. So long as cocaine use is not spurring entire neighborhoods to become little more than gang land marketplaces for crack - it will be treated as a lesser problem.
I agree coke is a lesser problem, I disagree that higher crack penalties had any effect.
2) AOX & Europe
AOX, while I am in tentative agreement with you about legalization (tentative in that some drugs should be legalized that do not nearly automatically entail rabid addiction, and legalized in a controlled fashioned like alcohol) - your assessment of Europe is wrong.
Cocaine is illegal in Europe, crack is not such a problem and thus has not received the same attention. It is neither legal nor ignored. In 2002 45 metric TONS of cocaine were confiscated by the EU, in 2003 Spain by itself seized nearly 50 Tons - that is hardly ignoring the problem:
http://www.ciponline.org/colombia/041118serr01.pdf
Likewise, crack use has been on the rise and like in the US, it is raising alarms in poor areas. Crack is not as much of a problem because Cocaine is much harder to get into Europe - it necessarily entails ocean travel of the product. Small planes, submarines, trucks across boarders, or late night drives over the desert can not get Cocaine into Europe. Thus, Cocaine is expensive - which means the manufacture of Crack is more expensive. Which means, of course, that it is the drug of choice for far fewer poor people in Europe.
3) Let my people go!
I'm a firm believer in retroactive reductions in sentences. If whatever crime I committed is only worth 10 years in prison today, why should I still be serving 30 (how many rum runners stayed in prison for decades past the end of prohibition)? I too fear that these people will return to their former lives - but if that is the fear why ever let them go? Another 10 years in prison is not likely to serve any useful purpose.
4) Drug war, in general.
In general the "war on drugs" is a miserable failure. My generation (I'm 28) was there for the full force of the program. I had DARE in 4th grade and again as a Freshmen in high school. It did not alter anyones behavior that I can think of.
Likewise, general trends of drug abuse have not changed. Convictions were up, jail sentences expanding, seizures increased, and money spent soared! But the use never really slacked off. Clearly the system is not working.
Time to let the Puritan method die off.
Certainly in this day and age we could regulate the use of Marijuana and limit the hundreds of thousands of people in our court systems, the murders, and shady dealings associated with its distribution. A high from Marijuana is certainly no more dangerous than alcohol and the hype of "gateway drugs" as long been rejected. Not to mention the medical, industrial, and cash crop aspects of hemp and THC. Regulate it's use to restricted bars to start with - if all goes well relax it further to the state of alcohol.
A kid in high school gets caught drinking at a party and he gets sent home and grounded. Smoking pot and he could get expelled and a criminal record. It just seems strange to me.
I'd worry about the fate of other drugs after some more thought (LSD is non addictive and physically harmless in a controlled setting, opiates are harmless in controlled doses [codeine, morphine, demoral, darveset (sp?), methadone, or even heroine), even cocaine is non addicting and poses no thread in proper doses (nose surgery anyone?]. I'm no expert, but I think many drugs are at least worth considering some alternative use distribution [some might be too dangerous/addictive or whatever, I'm just not sure]). (I started the () and ran with it, sorry).
The notion that drugs are not made for recreation is just a farce. finish your morning coffee, get back from your cigarette break, and have a few at happy hour before you feed me that crap. Somewhere along the line (actually to prevent Chinese immigrants from smoking opium) we decided some drugs were OK and others were not. It's time to re-evaluate our approach.
- - - -
and no, I do not want a crack head moving in next door or sitting by me in a movie. I don't want a drunk either. I want bother controlled to conform with our notions of respect for the rights of others. Don't have parties until 4am, don't drive when you are intoxicated, don't partake in activity that is likely to result in a shootout in my neighborhood.
Similarly, I do not do, sell, nor profit from illegal drugs and that is not a recent development. So I am not seeking to legalize anything for personal gain in any manner.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
I would rather be independent, thank you, though I can assure you that I will not be voting GOP in the foreseeable future.
We could start by giving convicted felons the right to vote, once they have discharged their sentences. We could decrim a lot of drugs, that would help, too.
Which drugs are your favorite? Maybe we can start there...
I think marijuana should be decriminalized, for starters. And inasmuch as we are fostering a narcostate in Afghanistan, I wonder about heroin, too.
Heroin is a different horse altogether (pun intended). Pretty hard to OD and die on weed. If you get too stoned, you can't even find the bong to smoke more.
Heroin has made a comeback in urban areas in recent years, it's another drug which makes people lose jobs, die, and neglect their families. There are also public health issues like HIV which come with it's use.
I'm one of those who doesn't see pot as being any more deleterious than alcohol to society and alcohol is abundant, leads to more health problems, and likely far more impairment-related deaths.
Most heads I've known would smoke it at home and would feel too lazy to get in the car, much less go steal something, and they always somehow manage to make it to work the next day.
Illicit drugs don't have a place in my life, so I've got no vested interest. I've tried pot in the past but never exhaled inhaled. [8D]
More like cracked heads....
Blackwater Mercenaries Poised to Get Fat New Pentagon Contract for "Drug War"
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/67727/
"They're being thrown out of Iraq, they carry a reputation of being brutal and undisciplined killers, but the DoD may have something sweet lined up for Blackwater."
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell
I've never used drugs, narcotics, weed, et al.
Why do them when beer is available (and legal)? [:P]
I dont care if its perfectly legal, cheap, or even free. Why bother using any drug at all? Especially if you know its likely to be addictive. Some drugs are more addictive than others and some people are likely to have an "addictive personality" or genetic predisposition to addiction. "we know addiction exists because we hear about people stealing, even killing to get money or drugs" Some people say, "Well, it makes me feel good." Why dont you feel good anyway? That sounds like a problem right there. Taking a drug will not resolve the underlying problem. If your hand is hurting because you have it placed on a hot stove, you dont take an Advil to releive the pain lol. You learn to not put your hand on the stove. If something in your life is making you sad, or you havent figured out how to be happy yet, to live in a way that will make you happy, you dont take a drug, you let the pain motivate you to learn and grow happy without taking drugs. (have you ever noticed how people that you have met that take drugs seem to have stopped developing, usually they seem to be at the same place mentally and developmentally that they were when they started taking drugs? Often they have the maturity of a high schooler and can no more realize where they are maturity wise than a high schooler can." Then you hear people say how after a person stops using drugs they change, start growing, have become a better person, improved their lives, relationships etc. Definitely seems to be a high correlation between "starting drugs and stopping growing"
Whenever I bring up crimes like stealing or someone killig an attendant at a gas station or something for money. Someone always points out that its not that the person may be bad,, lazy, etc. but that it likely has more to do with them being addicted to some sort of drug.
When people steal for drugs it says 2 things to me.
1. They are addicted, probably desperate for a "hit". Legal or not thats a problem right there.
If someone is addicted then their money is going to be going to the drugs, even if they were rich they would still be spending more of their time and attention on something that is not productive, helpful to their lives. More importantly, an addiction takes away from the time and attention that would normally go to family, friends and personal growth etc. Addiction is not good period, whether its cheap because its legal or not. If someone is willing to steal or kill for a drug, that shows serious life problems are in the offing no matter how legally cheap the drug is.
2. Many people it seems who are stealing for drugs are doing so because they do not have the money to buy the drug. I dont think we could legalize those drugs only for the rich because they would be the only ones who could afford to use them. Only poor people shouldn't use drugs because they cant afford to be addicted because when they are they would have to resort to stealing, prostitution, etc? No matter how cheap a drug could be, if someone is addicted enough to kill or steal for it, that shows they cant function properly. Can someone so addicted be trusted to only use the drug when they are NOT with young children, when driving, at work. The physical and mental health consequences to society will cost as much as the theft and murder. They are basically either doing it to themselves and or others. Legally cheap or not, addiction still costs.
We know serious addiction exists because we see people stealing and killing to get the drugs.
People steel and kill to get THINGS to. Ipods or just $10 from a stranger. The myth of most crimes being committed by someone needing a hit is just that, a myth. Most criminals are probably drug users, but correlation is not causation, not too mention it is totally irrelevant in non-addicting drugs like marijuana, LSD, or mushrooms.
What's more, the Straight Edge factor is usually only applied to certain drugs. Are you telling me you never smoked, drank alcohol, pop, coffee, or chocolate? If you have, you have done drugs. What about prescription antidepressants? Or meds for ADDHT? Mind altering drugs people take to be happy. Heck, some foods have chemicals in them that make you happy, relaxed, or energized.
What's more, having never taken the drugs it is unlikely that you understand what they mean when they say it makes them "feel good." Like Freud and his cocaine habit drugs can take people to a level of pure ecstasy that they can not achieve in any other manner. I've never done crack, so I can not pretend to understand what it feels like and why it is worth seemingly destroying your life for... but maybe it is. I do not know so its hard to intelligently pass judgment. I don't like hot peppers either, but I don't try to stop others from eating them (of course ignoring the socio-economic impact of drug addiction, which could be tempered by more effective means than jail).
What's more, the expense of drugs is unnecessary. The alleged crime for drug money, which I do not wholly buy, would be mitigated in a decriminalized regime because drugs would not be as expensive. Even better, the money generated would not be going to fund running gun battles for sale territory and overseas slave holding drug lords.
No matter your stance on legislating morality or big brother government, or your stance on the socio-economic impact of drugs, or even your history of use or abuse... everyone should be able to tell that the current system is not working. My son is just as likely to try drugs as I was, who was just as likely as my parents. Ghettos are still dominated by drug lords and gangs. Violence to smuggle drugs in, seize sales territory, and all other aspects of an underground culture are still pervasive.
Addiction to anything (cigarettes, food, alcohol, consumption or drugs) is detrimental to our society. Outlawing the underlying activity has never been successful in mitigating the problems (see fat people still wondering around transfats free NYC, cigarette smokers still smoking in spite of restrictions and higher taxes, and the great success of prohibition).
So what do we do Artist?
Non-addicting Marijuana still criminalize? And if so, why? Users have more control than a drunk, its not addictive like tobacco, and would be controlled like alcohol (age limits, access restriction, no oeprating, etc. ).
We just keep putting them in jail... they keep coming back. This is not a solution, its a farce.
CF- There's also a certain taboo factor when it comes to non-addictive drugs like pot. Some people like to feel like they are doing something "bad". Probably the main reason most people in high school or college take their first hit. I don't think you'd see an up-tick in use if it were legalized. If anything, it might lose it's cachet with casual users.
"I'd like a pack of Panama Reds, box please!"
Alcohol's strong addictive properties, negative health effects, and costs to society (absenteeism, divorce, homelessness, etc.) are incredibly well-documented, yet it's legal and the government makes a ton of money off it's trade.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
People steel and kill to get THINGS to. Ipods or just $10 from a stranger. The myth of most crimes being committed by someone needing a hit is just that, a myth. Most criminals are probably drug users, but correlation is not causation, not too mention it is totally irrelevant in non-addicting drugs like marijuana, LSD, or mushrooms.
What's more, the Straight Edge factor is usually only applied to certain drugs. Are you telling me you never smoked, drank alcohol, pop, coffee, or chocolate? If you have, you have done drugs. What about prescription antidepressants? Or meds for ADDHT? Mind altering drugs people take to be happy. Heck, some foods have chemicals in them that make you happy, relaxed, or energized.
What's more, having never taken the drugs it is unlikely that you understand what they mean when they say it makes them "feel good." Like Freud and his cocaine habit drugs can take people to a level of pure ecstasy that they can not achieve in any other manner. I've never done crack, so I can not pretend to understand what it feels like and why it is worth seemingly destroying your life for... but maybe it is. I do not know so its hard to intelligently pass judgment. I don't like hot peppers either, but I don't try to stop others from eating them (of course ignoring the socio-economic impact of drug addiction, which could be tempered by more effective means than jail).
What's more, the expense of drugs is unnecessary. The alleged crime for drug money, which I do not wholly buy, would be mitigated in a decriminalized regime because drugs would not be as expensive. Even better, the money generated would not be going to fund running gun battles for sale territory and overseas slave holding drug lords.
No matter your stance on legislating morality or big brother government, or your stance on the socio-economic impact of drugs, or even your history of use or abuse... everyone should be able to tell that the current system is not working. My son is just as likely to try drugs as I was, who was just as likely as my parents. Ghettos are still dominated by drug lords and gangs. Violence to smuggle drugs in, seize sales territory, and all other aspects of an underground culture are still pervasive.
Addiction to anything (cigarettes, food, alcohol, consumption or drugs) is detrimental to our society. Outlawing the underlying activity has never been successful in mitigating the problems (see fat people still wondering around transfats free NYC, cigarette smokers still smoking in spite of restrictions and higher taxes, and the great success of prohibition).
So what do we do Artist?
Non-addicting Marijuana still criminalize? And if so, why? Users have more control than a drunk, its not addictive like tobacco, and would be controlled like alcohol (age limits, access restriction, no oeprating, etc. ).
We just keep putting them in jail... they keep coming back. This is not a solution, its a farce.
But why even bother with buying something like marijuanna? So what if it makes you feel good or gives you a high?
I have never tried it and am happy and hope to continually get happier and learn to live better every year. Also in answer to your question. No I have never smoked anything, I do not drink pop, have "tried it" on occasion but have no desire to drink it when I can be drinking something healthy instead, I do not drink coffee though have read some articles that indicate that it may have some health benefits but I am not yet convinced that the possible positives outweight the potential negatives. Chocolate, I do eat, only that with a high cocoa content for the health benefits and also as a tasty "sin" or treat. There are so many things to eat and drink that are good and healthy for you, why bother with something that may cause problems or is illegal? (yes I know nothing is perfectly healthy, except for perhaps banannas lol, everything has some bad chemical or another in it, its the balance of good over bad that makes something a healthy good food or not). Plus there is a difference between something that makes you feel good because your healthy and something that makes you feel good because it "mind altering", that is substituting for or changing what is supposed to happen naturally. No I have never taken antidepressants or any prescription drugs "other than some antibiotics when I cut my foot once". If a brain is chemically unbalanced and NEEDS some sort of medication because not doing so is hurting the person and their life, then those may be neccessary. If I thought that chocolate for instance made me feel better, but I found that I was eating it in order TO make me feel better. I would stop eating it. Thats not how you should go about feeling better. That will hurt you in the long run.
If kumquats were illegal would there be a big fuss about it? Would people be sneaking around, breaking the law to get them? There are pleeenty of other things to eat, I think I could live without them and wouldnt rise up in protest if I couldnt. lol
If its illegal, has health concerns, is not easy to come by, "unlike those unhealthy transfats and junk food and their negative consequences, that right there is an example of how in control and wise choosing the average person is"... Why bother?
As for being addictive, I know better from having met and been around people who clearly were addicted to marijuanna. When I was young and stupid I dated someone who smoked pot. I thought, oh people say its not bad, its a minor drug. I wont be that picky about this one thing.... But I quickly changed my tune on that notion, for they had to have some in the morning to wake up and get the day started, had to have some to unwind after work, often sneaked it during work to "make it though the day", had to have it before or after meals for some reason I forgot, had to have it before bed in order to get to sleep, etc. etc. I got sick and tired of playing second fiddle to marijuanna, while they took a hit, while they went to go find some, called around to find out who had some, wait in the car while they went to buy it or sat in some parking lot for who knows how long in order to meet someone to buy it, meet someone to get it, went into nasty houses with drug paraphenalia and trash everywhere and saw a baby crawling around amongst it all. And in my younger days I remember running into quite a few people like that and their friends. I am sorry but I have never seen anyone constantly want chocolate or pop to the extent they would do all of that... Nobody would go to all that effort, so often for, pop or chocolate or kumquats if they were illegal. Nobody. No matter how addictive you say chocolate may be to some. Also there are other mental effects that marijuanna has, for instance the commercial about the guy sitting in the basement saying, "Oh nothing bad ever happens" then you hear his mom yelling at him. Like I said earlier, drugs like that tend to stump peoples growth, they stop evolving, nothing "bad" may happen, but nothing good happens either.
1. There is a continuum among people and their likelihood to be addicted to ____ (fill in blank).
2. There is a continuum among things and their likelihood to be addictive. aka The percentage of people likely to become addicted to_____.
3. There are varying degrees in severity of addiction to certain drugs.
4. There are varying degrees of mental and physical health consequences positive and negative.
To each drug each of these factors has to be added up to see if the over all balance is positive or negative, and the extent of the positive or negative, on the individual and society.
There is a difference between feeling good because you are healthy mentally and physically, and "feeling good or excstatic" artificially because of a chemical substance.
Feeling good naturally is a way of "growing" your own natural "feel good" chemicals. The more physically fit and the more you learn how to be mentally fit, the better and better you will naturally feel. You can with practice and work learn to be naturally high and have a wonderful life. (unless you do have an underlying physical problem and need a medication)
When you take a drug to "feel happy" its like taking testosterone where your balls shrink lol, but in this instance the brains natural "feel happy" mechanism shrinks or with some drugs is even slowly destroyed. The body or brain doesnt need to do the work so the "part" shrinks. Also after a high, there is the low. With some drugs, you then need the drug to feel normal. I dont think I have ever heard of a contented and happy healthy person using drugs to be somehow even happier and healthier or feel "high". Its because they are not as happy and healthy as they want to be, or they have become addicted.
There is that old saying that I have learned is so true in many many ways.
Nothing in life is free. You either earn it, or you will pay for it later.
You can earn your happiness, your "feeling good", or you will pay for it later. One way or another, it may not always be immediately obvious, you will pay for it.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
People steel and kill to get THINGS to. Ipods or just $10 from a stranger. The myth of most crimes being committed by someone needing a hit is just that, a myth. Most criminals are probably drug users, but correlation is not causation, not too mention it is totally irrelevant in non-addicting drugs like marijuana, LSD, or mushrooms.
What's more, the Straight Edge factor is usually only applied to certain drugs. Are you telling me you never smoked, drank alcohol, pop, coffee, or chocolate? If you have, you have done drugs. What about prescription antidepressants? Or meds for ADDHT? Mind altering drugs people take to be happy. Heck, some foods have chemicals in them that make you happy, relaxed, or energized.
What's more, having never taken the drugs it is unlikely that you understand what they mean when they say it makes them "feel good." Like Freud and his cocaine habit drugs can take people to a level of pure ecstasy that they can not achieve in any other manner. I've never done crack, so I can not pretend to understand what it feels like and why it is worth seemingly destroying your life for... but maybe it is. I do not know so its hard to intelligently pass judgment. I don't like hot peppers either, but I don't try to stop others from eating them (of course ignoring the socio-economic impact of drug addiction, which could be tempered by more effective means than jail).
What's more, the expense of drugs is unnecessary. The alleged crime for drug money, which I do not wholly buy, would be mitigated in a decriminalized regime because drugs would not be as expensive. Even better, the money generated would not be going to fund running gun battles for sale territory and overseas slave holding drug lords.
No matter your stance on legislating morality or big brother government, or your stance on the socio-economic impact of drugs, or even your history of use or abuse... everyone should be able to tell that the current system is not working. My son is just as likely to try drugs as I was, who was just as likely as my parents. Ghettos are still dominated by drug lords and gangs. Violence to smuggle drugs in, seize sales territory, and all other aspects of an underground culture are still pervasive.
Addiction to anything (cigarettes, food, alcohol, consumption or drugs) is detrimental to our society. Outlawing the underlying activity has never been successful in mitigating the problems (see fat people still wondering around transfats free NYC, cigarette smokers still smoking in spite of restrictions and higher taxes, and the great success of prohibition).
So what do we do Artist?
Non-addicting Marijuana still criminalize? And if so, why? Users have more control than a drunk, its not addictive like tobacco, and would be controlled like alcohol (age limits, access restriction, no oeprating, etc. ).
We just keep putting them in jail... they keep coming back. This is not a solution, its a farce.
But why even bother with buying something like marijuanna? So what if it makes you feel good or gives you a high?
I have never tried it and am happy and hope to continually get happier and learn to live better every year. Also in answer to your question. No I have never smoked anything, I do not drink pop, have "tried it" on occasion but have no desire to drink it when I can be drinking something healthy instead, I do not drink coffee though have read some articles that indicate that it may have some health benefits but I am not yet convinced that the possible positives outweight the potential negatives. Chocolate, I do eat, only that with a high cocoa content for the health benefits and also as a tasty "sin" or treat. There are so many things to eat and drink that are good and healthy for you, why bother with something that may cause problems or is illegal? (yes I know nothing is perfectly healthy, except for perhaps banannas lol, everything has some bad chemical or another in it, its the balance of good over bad that makes something a healthy good food or not). Plus there is a difference between something that makes you feel good because your healthy and something that makes you feel good because it "mind altering", that is substituting for or changing what is supposed to happen naturally. No I have never taken antidepressants or any prescription drugs "other than some antibiotics when I cut my foot once". If a brain is chemically unbalanced and NEEDS some sort of medication because not doing so is hurting the person and their life, then those may be neccessary. If I thought that chocolate for instance made me feel better, but I found that I was eating it in order TO make me feel better. I would stop eating it. Thats not how you should go about feeling better. That will hurt you in the long run.
If kumquats were illegal would there be a big fuss about it? Would people be sneaking around, breaking the law to get them? There are pleeenty of other things to eat, I think I could live without them and wouldnt rise up in protest if I couldnt. lol
If its illegal, has health concerns, is not easy to come by, "unlike those unhealthy transfats and junk food and their negative consequences, that right there is an example of how in control and wise choosing the average person is"... Why bother?
As for being addictive, I know better from having met and been around people who clearly were addicted to marijuanna. When I was young and stupid I dated someone who smoked pot. I thought, oh people say its not bad, its a minor drug. I wont be that picky about this one thing.... But I quickly changed my tune on that notion, for they had to have some in the morning to wake up and get the day started, had to have some to unwind after work, often sneaked it during work to "make it though the day", had to have it before or after meals for some reason I forgot, had to have it before bed in order to get to sleep, etc. etc. I got sick and tired of playing second fiddle to marijuanna, while they took a hit, while they went to go find some, called around to find out who had some, wait in the car while they went to buy it or sat in some parking lot for who knows how long in order to meet someone to buy it, meet someone to get it, went into nasty houses with drug paraphenalia and trash everywhere and saw a baby crawling around amongst it all. And in my younger days I remember running into quite a few people like that and their friends. I am sorry but I have never seen anyone constantly want chocolate or pop to the extent they would do all of that... Nobody would go to all that effort, so often for, pop or chocolate or kumquats if they were illegal. Nobody. No matter how addictive you say chocolate may be to some. Also there are other mental effects that marijuanna has, for instance the commercial about the guy sitting in the basement saying, "Oh nothing bad ever happens" then you hear his mom yelling at him. Like I said earlier, drugs like that tend to stump peoples growth, they stop evolving, nothing "bad" may happen, but nothing good happens either.
1. There is a continuum among people and their likelihood to be addicted to ____ (fill in blank).
2. There is a continuum among things and their likelihood to be addictive. aka The percentage of people likely to become addicted to_____.
3. There are varying degrees in severity of addiction to certain drugs.
4. There are varying degrees of mental and physical health consequences positive and negative.
To each drug each of these factors has to be added up to see if the over all balance is positive or negative, and the extent of the positive or negative, on the individual and society.
There is a difference between feeling good because you are healthy mentally and physically, and "feeling good or excstatic" artificially because of a chemical substance.
Feeling good naturally is a way of "growing" your own natural "feel good" chemicals. The more physically fit and the more you learn how to be mentally fit, the better and better you will naturally feel. You can with practice and work learn to be naturally high and have a wonderful life. (unless you do have an underlying physical problem and need a medication)
When you take a drug to "feel happy" its like taking testosterone where your balls shrink lol, but in this instance the brains natural "feel happy" mechanism shrinks or with some drugs is even slowly destroyed. The body or brain doesnt need to do the work so the "part" shrinks. Also after a high, there is the low. With some drugs, you then need the drug to feel normal. I dont think I have ever heard of a contented and happy healthy person using drugs to be somehow even happier and healthier or feel "high". Its because they are not as happy and healthy as they want to be, or they have become addicted.
There is that old saying that I have learned is so true in many many ways.
Nothing in life is free. You either earn it, or you will pay for it later.
You can earn your happiness, your "feeling good", or you will pay for it later. One way or another, it may not always be immediately obvious, you will pay for it.
Well said.
I'm glad your lifestyle is working for you. If it is the answer to drug addiction and you don't share it with the rest of the world then its a crime.
Seriously, distilled into a few words, you don't use drugs and you don't think anyone should. Admirable. A cop agrees with you. Astounding.
CF makes more sense though. We continue to think that these are simple lifestyle decisions that prison sentencing is going to modify. When you look at the multiple factors involved with drug usage including Biology, Sociology, education, wealth etc., the concept of incarceration as a cure or even as protection for the rest of us, isn't working. Then to exacerbate the mistake by punishing crack users more than powder users over some idea that they are more dangerous by default, is silly.
Punishing drug users is a political tool right up there with abortion, government waste, taxes and immigration. Easy to get elected using that tool.
And to lump all drugs together as Artist has done is incorrect. Crack, coke, and heroin all create addictions with little effort. Crack was most definitely cooked up by the CIA and used to infiltrate poor minority communities. Narcoterrorists have been aided by USA's intel agencies for decades.
Hey artist, you still think North Tulsans are too lazy and stupid to start their own grocery stores?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I'm glad your lifestyle is working for you. If it is the answer to drug addiction and you don't share it with the rest of the world then its a crime.
Seriously, distilled into a few words, you don't use drugs and you don't think anyone should. Admirable. A cop agrees with you. Astounding.
CF makes more sense though. We continue to think that these are simple lifestyle decisions that prison sentencing is going to modify. When you look at the multiple factors involved with drug usage including Biology, Sociology, education, wealth etc., the concept of incarceration as a cure or even as protection for the rest of us, isn't working. Then to exacerbate the mistake by punishing crack users more than powder users over some idea that they are more dangerous by default, is silly.
Punishing drug users is a political tool right up there with abortion, government waste, taxes and immigration. Easy to get elected using that tool.
Spoken like someone who has never been around addiction or affected by it.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And to lump all drugs together as Artist has done is incorrect. Crack, coke, and heroin all create addictions with little effort. Crack was most definitely cooked up by the CIA and used to infiltrate poor minority communities. Narcoterrorists have been aided by USA's intel agencies for decades.
Hey artist, you still think North Tulsans are too lazy and stupid to start their own grocery stores?
Careful, You will give away all the government's secrets! The black helicopters will be hovering over your house shortly....
Those black helicopters are probably doing another stoopid stakeout on a murder suspect, you know, like the guy with the warrants last year who killed the ten year old last year, or the Wright Elementary debacle. Just hovering around like little angels, they were, silently keeping us safe.
The CIA was most definitely aiding cocaine and heroin shipments into minority communities. How far the orders came down from is anyone's guess, but trafficked they did.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I'm glad your lifestyle is working for you. If it is the answer to drug addiction and you don't share it with the rest of the world then its a crime.
Seriously, distilled into a few words, you don't use drugs and you don't think anyone should. Admirable. A cop agrees with you. Astounding.
CF makes more sense though. We continue to think that these are simple lifestyle decisions that prison sentencing is going to modify. When you look at the multiple factors involved with drug usage including Biology, Sociology, education, wealth etc., the concept of incarceration as a cure or even as protection for the rest of us, isn't working. Then to exacerbate the mistake by punishing crack users more than powder users over some idea that they are more dangerous by default, is silly.
Punishing drug users is a political tool right up there with abortion, government waste, taxes and immigration. Easy to get elected using that tool.
Spoken like someone who has never been around addiction or affected by it.
There goes any credibility you had with me. Moronic remark. Yes, I have been around a lot of addicted personalities and have been directly affected by it. Family, friends, employees and co-workers. Chances are I saw it from a different perspective than you but of course your view is unassailable. Just lock the bastards up eh? Now that you have outed my circle you feel better?
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Those black helicopters are probably doing another stoopid stakeout on a murder suspect, you know, like the guy with the warrants last year who killed the ten year old last year, or the Wright Elementary debacle. Just hovering around like little angels, they were, silently keeping us safe.
The CIA was most definitely aiding cocaine and heroin shipments into minority communities. How far the orders came down from is anyone's guess, but trafficked they did.
It is my understanding that the Contras were involved-and that's not meant as a witty rejoinder, either.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I'm glad your lifestyle is working for you. If it is the answer to drug addiction and you don't share it with the rest of the world then its a crime.
Seriously, distilled into a few words, you don't use drugs and you don't think anyone should. Admirable. A cop agrees with you. Astounding.
CF makes more sense though. We continue to think that these are simple lifestyle decisions that prison sentencing is going to modify. When you look at the multiple factors involved with drug usage including Biology, Sociology, education, wealth etc., the concept of incarceration as a cure or even as protection for the rest of us, isn't working. Then to exacerbate the mistake by punishing crack users more than powder users over some idea that they are more dangerous by default, is silly.
Punishing drug users is a political tool right up there with abortion, government waste, taxes and immigration. Easy to get elected using that tool.
Spoken like someone who has never been around addiction or affected by it.
There goes any credibility you had with me. Moronic remark. Yes, I have been around a lot of addicted personalities and have been directly affected by it. Family, friends, employees and co-workers. Chances are I saw it from a different perspective than you but of course your view is unassailable. Just lock the bastards up eh? Now that you have outed my circle you feel better?
You lock up the drug dealers. They are pieces of $H!*. The simple addicts need drug court. Tulsa County has an outstanding program. If they refuse to go into rehab and actively try to kick the habit, they need to be locked up or put on ankle monitors so they can be monitored and caught during their next crime spree to get their fix. The damage they do to the community far outway any expense that is occurred by them being in prison, monitored or in a manditory lock-down rehab facility.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
It is my understanding that the Contras were involved-and that's not meant as a witty rejoinder, either.
WHAT??? YOU MUST BE CRAZAY!!! Contras involved in drug smuggling??? GRASSY KNOLL! TIN-FOIL HATS! BLACK CHOPPERS! YAAAAAAAHHHHH!
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
It is my understanding that the Contras were involved-and that's not meant as a witty rejoinder, either.
WHAT??? YOU MUST BE CRAZAY!!! Contras involved in drug smuggling??? GRASSY KNOLL! TIN-FOIL HATS! BLACK CHOPPERS! YAAAAAAAHHHHH!
Artist, I commend you on your healthy life-style and it's apparent results. I wish it was easier for others to make good life-style choices as if it were second nature. I'm not lampooning you at all, just pointing out it's not so easy for a lot of people. If anything, you are probably in a minority and that's not a bad thing at all. A lot of people would like to have what you do.
I am a believer that many chronic ailments people suffer from like depression or allergies, can be significantly helped by diet, excercize, proper nutrition, and limiting the number of foreign substances you ingest. Mental well-being is helped by focusing on positive relationships, situations, and exploring whatever your concept of spirituality is.
(I always tell people to take my advice, because obviously, I'm not using it. [;)] )
Many people suffer from a compulsive disorder of one sort or another. For some people it gets channeled into lifestyle choices which are detrimental to their health, relationships, and spirituality (alcoholics, drug addicts, gluttons, shopaholics, etc). It can start as obsessive-compulsive thinking toward negative relationships, stress, situations, and no sense of spirituality. Then it manifests itself in substance abuse, chemical addictions, over-eating, buying things to make you feel better, or any number of compulsive behaviors in order to anesthetize those things which bring a person discomfort. Some people might turn to prescribed AD meds or anxiety drugs (Xanax is one of the most unnecessarily over-prescribed meds on the market), some people self-medicate with illicit drugs or alcohol.
And yet there are others who might partake of a little pot every now and then or get a good alcohol buzz a few times a year being just caught up in a moment.
For others, compulsion is used in productive ways which don't necessarily harm their health, but going to extremes can still affect their relationships and spirituality (i.e. the "workaholic"). I have a whole dissertation about some of the greatest preachers and missionaries in history likely having a compulsive disorder which is put to good and productive use to benefit others, but I'll save that for another time.
I don't have a clue what your workday is like. I'm guessing for the sort of work you do, you must be a self-starter and are able to stay focused and motivated in order to make a living. If you find yourself working 16-hour days on your projects, it's somewhat of a compulsion, but it's creative, doesn't hurt others, and the rewards are healthy- so long as you aren't sleep-deprived. [;)]
Personally for me, I'm the type that when I get into something, I don't dip my toe in the water, I jump in head first and learn to swim. I can see that from every occupation I've ever had, and every hobby I've had (I have a small warehouse full of stuff from one of my previous hobbies [xx(]). Having a conscious awareness of that compulsive tendency has kept me from experimenting with dangerous drugs.
I still remember the first Xmas break after I graduated from high school, I was at a party with former classmates from HS where someone brought an 8-ball of cocaine. I headed for the door as soon as I saw it. "Conan where are you going? You mean you've been at college for a semester and you haven't tried cocaine?" I knew better. I'd heard enough stories about the high that I knew I'd like it, want all I could get and wind up dead, broke, in prison or all three.
I believe everyone has the potential for compulsive behavior. It's just that some people manifest it in ways which don't harm others around them.
My thinking on drug and alcohol offenses, is that first time offenders for using or driving while impaired should be fined enough that it gets their attention. Subsequent offenses, it should get stiffer. Finally if someone shows that progressive fines, loss of priveledges, and mandated re-hab aren't working, they are a threat to others safety and should be locked up to protect the public. I disagree with Waterboy's point that incarceration doesn't protect the public.
In the case of habitual drunk drivers or habitual users who also have violent crimes on their record, they need to be locked away to protect others, as it's apparent that they have some sort of sociopathic disorder or physical dependency which doesn't allow them to respond to the same treatment others do and never will.
As far as crack getting stiffer sentencing guidelines, I can understand why it did due to a lot of the associated crimes which have come along with this plague and what it does when it infests a neighborhood.
I'll say it again, because it bears repeating: It's incredibly ironic that minority leaders have asked for all sorts of help in ridding their communities of crack and blight. Now that's become a reality, they are upset about a disproportionate number of minorities sitting in prisons.
http://www.pinknoiz.com/covert/contracoke.html#IV
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/storm.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/9712/exsump2.htm#VII.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r1KfHaIF_Y
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/10/25/contra/index.html?pn=1
....for starters.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
You lock up the drug dealers. They are pieces of $H!*. The simple addicts need drug court. Tulsa County has an outstanding program. If they refuse to go into rehab and actively try to kick the habit, they need to be locked up or put on ankle monitors so they can be monitored and caught during their next crime spree to get their fix. The damage they do to the community far outway any expense that is occurred by them being in prison, monitored or in a manditory lock-down rehab facility.
Drug Court is a great program. That rehab deal, though, that's where the program suffers. The state funds rehabs, sort of, but not enough. Something to keep in mind, Rehabs usually work on very thin budgets. Their "free-will" clientel are not necessarily wealthy people, and a lot of rehabs work at "break-even", without worrying about the concept of generating income.
And State funds come with strings, example: I used to work at a big private non-profit rehab here, that gets state funds, but only under the prerequisite that they house people who are essentially insane criminal types. People who will tell you they're not there for substance abuse, people who have serious mental issues. The State closed a bunch of Mental facilities, then paid for some of those people to be housed at rehabs. Normal people looking for help, have to deal with absolute nuts.
Can't stop drug-related crimes, or drug and alcohol abuse, it's always going to be there. But the Drug Court system in this County is fantastic, you are correct. The rehabs themselves are hurting bad, one of these days rumors of closings are going to be reality. The State needs to realize their value.
Jaynes, you ever check out Dennis Hopsicker's Madcow Morning News? (//%22http://www.madcowprod.com/%22) Nope, no links between the CIA and heroin and cocaine running. Nope, no idea who the child molestor from Wright was for two days, just move along, everyone . . .
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Jaynes, you ever check out Dennis Hopsicker's Madcow Morning News? (//%22http://www.madcowprod.com/%22) Nope, no links between the CIA and heroin and cocaine running. Nope, no idea who the child molestor from Wright was for two days, just move along, everyone . . .
Hey, they had to get the money from somewhere. How better to supply an army of
terroristas than with the proceeds from drug trafficking?
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And to lump all drugs together as Artist has done is incorrect. Crack, coke, and heroin all create addictions with little effort. Crack was most definitely cooked up by the CIA and used to infiltrate poor minority communities. Narcoterrorists have been aided by USA's intel agencies for decades.
Hey artist, you still think North Tulsans are too lazy and stupid to start their own grocery stores?
I was actually trying to point out the differences in drugs. Chocolate is not the same as marijuanna, marijuanna is not the same as meth. Please read what I wrote again.
As for North Tulsans being too lazy and stupid to start their own grocery store. I cant believe I would have ever said or suggested such a thing. You can go back through old posts and check but I am sure that is a mischaracterization at best.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I'm glad your lifestyle is working for you. If it is the answer to drug addiction and you don't share it with the rest of the world then its a crime.
Seriously, distilled into a few words, you don't use drugs and you don't think anyone should. Admirable. A cop agrees with you. Astounding.
CF makes more sense though. We continue to think that these are simple lifestyle decisions that prison sentencing is going to modify. When you look at the multiple factors involved with drug usage including Biology, Sociology, education, wealth etc., the concept of incarceration as a cure or even as protection for the rest of us, isn't working. Then to exacerbate the mistake by punishing crack users more than powder users over some idea that they are more dangerous by default, is silly.
Punishing drug users is a political tool right up there with abortion, government waste, taxes and immigration. Easy to get elected using that tool.
Spoken like someone who has never been around addiction or affected by it.
There goes any credibility you had with me. Moronic remark. Yes, I have been around a lot of addicted personalities and have been directly affected by it. Family, friends, employees and co-workers. Chances are I saw it from a different perspective than you but of course your view is unassailable. Just lock the bastards up eh? Now that you have outed my circle you feel better?
You lock up the drug dealers. They are pieces of $H!*. The simple addicts need drug court. Tulsa County has an outstanding program. If they refuse to go into rehab and actively try to kick the habit, they need to be locked up or put on ankle monitors so they can be monitored and caught during their next crime spree to get their fix. The damage they do to the community far outway any expense that is occurred by them being in prison, monitored or in a manditory lock-down rehab facility.
Not surprising that you would see the answer to such problems as a function of the courts, the jails and the police. If you could step out of your role within that paradigm you might see it differently.
No one likes drug dealers, except maybe their mothers. Their motivations are pure greed. Their enablers however, pawn shops, dirty cops, cab companies, restaurant/club owners, scum bag attorneys, johns...the people who all make the system work so well? They are just businessmen making a living.
"Just say no."
No.
(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/HPM/BM1172~Say-No-To-Crack-Posters.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/HPM/BM1172~Say-No-To-Crack-Posters.jpg)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
Take my eye, please!!!
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
"Just say no."
Ixnay.
Sometimes it's okay to say yes to crack:
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/146/334045848_7fb302782a.jpg)
Sometimes it's just repugnant:
(http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/images/hillary_clinton_boobs_bill_cleavage.jpg)
You could have spared us of that second crack.... It's a bad reminder of what's in the future....
Extended and revised remarks regarding this issue.
1. Alcohol is a drug.
2. Many psychotropics that are currently available by prescription only should be OTC.
3. Marijuana is not harmless.
4. Drug abuse destroys too many families.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Extended and revised remarks regarding this issue.
1. Alcohol is a drug.
2. Many psychotropics that are currently available by prescription only should be OTC.
3. Marijuana is not harmless.
4. Drug abuse destroys too many families.
In re: Item 3- many things are not harmless when put in the hands of the wrong people.