Why Would We Legalize this Poison?
- Thread starter DawnODay
- Start date
Kant
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
I essentially agree with you when it comes to what I have shortened to "etc." Drugs are a bit different, however, because they cause a loss of reason, and thereby cause the user to violate other people's rights without realizing it.
Take PCP, for instance. It causes delusions that compel people to violence against others, pretty much at random, including deadly attacks on strangers who in no way consented to involvement. Would you legalize PCP?
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
Simple, because we have no business legislating prohibitions of victim-less "crimes".
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Are you high right now? Because you're reasoning is faulty. Just because you smoke marijuana or drink alcohol does not mean you will go out and commit a crime. What you're arguing is that anytime someone takes any drug they're going to go out and cause harm. This just isn't factually true.
You've also gone who knows how many posts without looking at how marijuana may actually help with depression. It also helps with PTSD, pain, or even AIDs/HIV.
My problem with you racist dawn is that you don't want people to have healthcare and then when they try to find an alternate solution you want to criminalize that. So my question still stands racist dawn: why do you hate the poor so much?
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Then by that same line of logic you would have to support the prohibition of everything from booze to coffee and high fructose corn syrup.
Social media is making folks nuttier than all the drug abuse combined across all drugs. Should we ban that too??
Here is the thing.....you don't know that.
Plenty of people use all sorts of drugs and nobody ever knows because they can handle it.
If they violate others, then arrest/prosecute them for that violation, you don't go throw their neighbors in prison just because they also had alcohol in the house when drunk piece of shit beat his wife.
Something alcohol is famous for.... On any given day there are tens of thousands of drunk pieces of shit violating everyone around them.
And many more just want a glass of wine with their steak, or a good buzz with friends and NEVER abuse or kill anyone.
This same logic extends to so many things...guns!! Do you support banning and criminalizing gun ownership? Some people abuse/neglect/come totally unfucking glued and run deadly attacks on strangers who in no way consented to involvement, should all people have their guns taken because of what they might do with them??
IMO it's not just the right thing to do but the M'arican thing to hold that individual accountable for their behavior, not punish everyone else for using the same substance/tool/service that person used when they lost control for whatever reason.
PCP, LSD, Mescaline, DMT, psilocybin, salvia....licking toads and whatever else folks want to do.
Last edited:
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
Those are valid classic liberal/libertarian positions, and I respect them. I'm simply not convinced they are the best policy.
Your argument based on alcohol, though common, is not compelling. It is a fallacy: because we allow this bad thing, we must allow all bad things. That doesn't make sense.
Likewise, the argument based on gun rights does not hold up. It's a straw-man. Gun ownership does not, by its nature, impair reason. Drugs like PCP, pot, and toad excretions do. Therefore, there is a more compelling reason to regulate drug use. (There is also the fact that gun ownership is a constitutionally protected right, while drug use is not, but that's beyond the scope of this argument, which is based on general political philosophy.)
Unless you want anarchy, some level of Government regulation is necessary. Even classical liberal/libertarian philosophy accepts that. Then it becomes a question of where do you draw the lines. Because of its bad effects, I would draw the line to include pot among illegal substances. Because those effects are limited, you wouldn't. Both are valid positions. On this, we'll simply have to respectfully disagree.
quietlylooking
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2012
- Posts
- 1,302
The original report was from a meta-analysis. It wasn't designed to look at causation. It only looked at whether a level of pot smoking as a teenager was associated with depression later in life. This is not the same as causation. There could be an underlying factor responsible for both (like a bad family environment, a sense of alienation, etc.). The effect size was not huge, and the confidence interval was pretty big. Not sure this is behind a paywall or not, but it might give you some better insights.
BoyNextDoor
I hate liars
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Posts
- 14,158
The correlation of people self medicating when they are depressed is. It just is.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
By what measures?
Pretty much every reputable study out there not done by big pharma/ booze/tobacco/prison guard and police unions says the war on drugs is a monumental 8 TRILLION dollar total failure with the counter intuitive results of just making everything 10x worse, not a damn bit different than with alcohol prohibition.
The control freaks have been trying to ban drugs for a century now and it's been a total disaster from start to present.
You can't even keep them out of super max uber prisons.
It's not a fallacy it's logical consistency.
And it does make sense when those bad things are all part of the same group of "bad" things.
To say you're ok with booze and dangerous OTC's but other recreational/therapeutic drugs are not ok because they cause some folks to lose control and do terrible shit, or that the side effects might harm someone, just like the drugs you are for some reason ok with, is what doesn't make sense.
So then why not alcohol and OTC meds many of which have effects just as bad if not worse and verifiably more deadly than pot??
That logical inconsistency is why I don't buy it.
That makes me wonder what it is REALLY that irks you so bad about other people who consume different drugs than you that you think the government needs to destroy their lives and lock them up.
No.....because I think everyone should have freedom of choice in consumption I wouldn't.
I don't think meth is a healthy life choice, but as long as you don't fuck with other people I see no valid reason to send the government in to finish destroying their lives for them at great expense to the taxpayer. Save that money for the hazmat clean up after the OD.
Yes but only one position is logically consistent.
Last edited:
Pocketshaver
Loves Spam
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2018
- Posts
- 317
its part of their ploy for control
Get everyone dumbed in up liberal run schools. use drugs to get the rest of them.
Get everyone dumbed in up liberal run schools. use drugs to get the rest of them.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
You know, I'm accustomed to arguing here with people like dan_c00000, which is like shooting fish in a barrel. It's refreshing to debate someone who actually knows how to do it. You have me seriously reexamining my position on the matter, though you have not yet convinced me to change my mind.
It's only inconsistent if you ignore historical and societal factors. Remember that prescription and OTC drugs have been fully vetted by the FDA, and their production is regulated to ensure at least some level of consistent quality. The best analysis I have found of all this, although it arguably supports your side more than mine, is here: C. Dow, 10 Things We Know (As In, Actually Have Published Evidence For) About Cannabis And Health, WBUR (Mar. 1, 2019).
It includes this:
In 2017, a National Academy of Medicine panel drew roughly 100 conclusions on the health effects of cannabis. Only three benefits stood out:
• “We found conclusive evidence that cannabis can reduce nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy,” says [professor of anatomy and neurobiology at the University of California, Irvine Daniele] Piomelli, who served on the panel.
• There is “substantial” evidence that cannabis modestly reduces self-reported involuntary muscle contractions in people with multiple sclerosis.
• There is “substantial” evidence that cannabis modestly reduces chronic pain. “It’s not as strong as a narcotic pain reliever like an opiate,” Piomelli notes. “So it’s not as effective, but it may be more usable long term.”
As for most other health problems, few good studies have been done. But the list of cannabis’s benefits may never be long....
In fact, the Food and Drug Administration has approved just three (synthetic) THC drugs — Marinol and Syndros (dronabinol) and Cesamet (nabilone) — to treat nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy.
And that approach, says [associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Dr. Ryan] Vandrey, is how cannabis should be tested and sold as medicine: “The ideal path forward is where we figure out which components of the cannabis plant help with specific symptoms or health conditions, and we develop refined and targeted medicines,” says Vandrey.
• “We found conclusive evidence that cannabis can reduce nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy,” says [professor of anatomy and neurobiology at the University of California, Irvine Daniele] Piomelli, who served on the panel.
• There is “substantial” evidence that cannabis modestly reduces self-reported involuntary muscle contractions in people with multiple sclerosis.
• There is “substantial” evidence that cannabis modestly reduces chronic pain. “It’s not as strong as a narcotic pain reliever like an opiate,” Piomelli notes. “So it’s not as effective, but it may be more usable long term.”
As for most other health problems, few good studies have been done. But the list of cannabis’s benefits may never be long....
In fact, the Food and Drug Administration has approved just three (synthetic) THC drugs — Marinol and Syndros (dronabinol) and Cesamet (nabilone) — to treat nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy.
And that approach, says [associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Dr. Ryan] Vandrey, is how cannabis should be tested and sold as medicine: “The ideal path forward is where we figure out which components of the cannabis plant help with specific symptoms or health conditions, and we develop refined and targeted medicines,” says Vandrey.
So that's what I would favor. "Legalize" cannabis the same way we "legalize" opium, by creating fully tested and targeted prescription drugs designed for specific treatments.
The article goes on to establish: "Smoking marijuana can harm your lungs"; "Cannabis ups your risk of a car crash"; "Cannabis has other risks"; etc. Ibid. I admit, the same is true of alcohol and cigarettes, but those are now legal (and regulated) due to various historical and societal factors. I'm still not convinced there is any good reason to change the historical fact that various other substances that have similar risks are now illegal. We should keep them that way rather than put more dangerous drugs into the legal marketplace.
Last edited:
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
I'm only here to present my argument, not to convince you.
So much trust in that huge government bureaucracy the FDA to be totally impartial and fair. I don't trust those fuckers, they are just market mongers and money grubbers. Warning label makers on a power trip.
Yea...so fake weed is good but the plant itself is DANGEROUS, because you can't patent a plant the way big pharma can do with pills. Give them all your money, it's LEGAL because the FDA said so.
Could have grown 5lbs of the real deal in your back yard for a few bucks....but then how will Pfizer get $350 a pill out of your insurance company???
See how that works.....
OF COURSE!! Because then Dr. Ryan gets a cut from big pharma.
And the cut is much bigger when they are the only ones who control the drugs. Ok....so you only want it legal if only the elites get to make money on it and nobody can enjoy it, because those things would be horrible?
Personally, in my opinon, if your every day Joe or Suzy can't obtain or grow their own and use/sell it like any other crop? It's not legal.
If only the elites/connected get to, that's organized crime, corruption, direct observable oppression and abuse of the US citizenry.
Historical and societal factors like what?
I'm not saying we shouldn't have some regulations on it, just that it should be freely accessible/trad-able/sell-able within those regs just like any other crop such as tobacco or product like booze. Can't use poison to produce it, can't sell it to kids, can't consume it it in certain places or operate in a capacity that presents a public threat (driving, heavy equipment etc.). Nor am I saying legalize DUI's, assault, public intoxication etc. I'm not an anarchist. I'm saying stop treating folks who aren't doing those bad behaviors like they are just because they are consuming something that COULD lead to it.
Last edited:
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Thanks for the shout out! Hey, remember when you threatened me with violence? I noticed you used another violent image. I think you've got a serious problem and really need to examine more than your desire to lock up poor minorities.
It's interesting that you claim you're "free market" but you had no problem with your racist hero Scott Walker giving away 4.5 billion dollars to a giant company that has, so far, produced nothing.
It's also interesting that you think weed is poison yet you have no problem when your racist hero Walker allows a giant company a water and air pollution exemption. Maybe you can explain why it's ok for a giant corporation to forcibly (and with tax payer money) poison citizens it has already robbed and yet when those same citizens want to exercise their "free market" power you want it to be illegal for them to do so.
Poor racist dawn all "she" can do is ignore me and get exposed as the racist fraud "she" is.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
D. Lockwood, Teen-made marijuana brownies land girl in emergency room, DA says, Racine County Eye (Mar. 5, 2019).
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Meanwhile Foxconn factories in China are giving workers cancer and you're proud of that. Good job dawn. Anytime you want to tell us why you like it when people get cancer we'd love to hear about it.
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
Explain how consenting adults engaging in behavior that harms no non-consenting adults results in anarchy.
Is anarchy running rampant in Louisiana because my wife and I engaged in oral sex there last year? After all, it was against the law and we need laws, according to you, to save the state from us.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Yea....freaking out on edibles isn't new. Still never killed anyone.
Meanwhile nearly 240 people die DIRECTLY from OD'ing on alcohol....every single day.
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
"Consenting adult" is a really difficult concept isn't it?
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Dawn's problem is that "she" is really an authoritarian. "She" wants to enforce whatever absurd beliefs "she" has on people. See my other post about the contradiction between "her" support of Foxconn gearing up to pollute Wisconsin (with tax payer money no less). A person like dawn doesn't actually care about individual freedom, what "she" cares about is everyone following whatever rules "she" comes up with on a daily basis.
BabyBoomer50s
Pen Pal
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2018
- Posts
- 9,933
I like the way you think Dawn. Reasoned, logical, fact-based. And as one who lives in California (where pot is legal), I agree with your position. There’s an excellent piece that just came out in The Federalist today titled “Seven Arguments for Legalizing Marijuana That No One Should Believe.” You might enjoy reading it, as it debunks some of the more common myths.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Says one of the most authoritarian lefties on the board.
Yea....can't have freedom and liberty....that's just un-American!!!
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
dan_c00000's problem -- well, one of many, actually -- is that he is so understandably insecure in his intellect and in his masculinity that he cannot handle that a woman regularly and consistently crushes him in these debates, so he has to pretend I'm male and misconstrue my positions to the point where he actually changes what appears in my quotes before responding to them.
Funny, the cited article directly addresses that.
Many libertarians and a growing number of conservatives argue that legalization is the “pro-freedom” position. Actually, the exact opposite is true. Marijuana use attacks, degrades, and impairs the very thing that allows us to act freely: our brains.
We can’t make free choices if we aren’t in control of ourselves. Someone who is under the influence of an intoxicating drug such as marijuana is subject to coercive forces that interfere with his decision-making. And let’s not forget the long-term effects of marijuana, which permanently inhibits the ability of the brain to properly function.
Human freedom is the product of order, both in ourselves and in society in general. This realization gave rise to the system of ordered liberty and natural law upon which our government is based.
This order is reflected in the human ability to make rational decisions. Choices that are not under the control of reason are not free, but random and chaotic. Since intoxicating drugs interfere with our ability to reason properly, they are the very antithesis of liberty.
The idea that marijuana can be justified by an appeal to freedom or liberty is self-defeating in the same way that drinking seawater to remedy thirst is counterproductive. It is a perversion of liberty that turns liberty against itself. So if you consider yourself a champion of freedom and liberty, then you should oppose marijuana legalization.
We can’t make free choices if we aren’t in control of ourselves. Someone who is under the influence of an intoxicating drug such as marijuana is subject to coercive forces that interfere with his decision-making. And let’s not forget the long-term effects of marijuana, which permanently inhibits the ability of the brain to properly function.
Human freedom is the product of order, both in ourselves and in society in general. This realization gave rise to the system of ordered liberty and natural law upon which our government is based.
This order is reflected in the human ability to make rational decisions. Choices that are not under the control of reason are not free, but random and chaotic. Since intoxicating drugs interfere with our ability to reason properly, they are the very antithesis of liberty.
The idea that marijuana can be justified by an appeal to freedom or liberty is self-defeating in the same way that drinking seawater to remedy thirst is counterproductive. It is a perversion of liberty that turns liberty against itself. So if you consider yourself a champion of freedom and liberty, then you should oppose marijuana legalization.
T. Hsiao, 7 Arguments For Legalizing Marijuana That No One Should Believe, The Federalist (Mar. 9, 2019), citing T. Hsiao, The Libertarian Case for Drug Prohibition, Public Discourse (Jan. 28, 2018).
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
Actually, it's probably less harmful than drinking a glass of wine.
I can't say about other states, including WI, but in CA, there were probably no prisoners in state prisons for strictly MJ offenses. I believe it's legal now but, even when it wasn't, offenders would be sentenced to county or local jails, rather than the state pen.
This is not to say I am an advocate of MJ, except for certain medical problems. You're better off not using anything. However, if you use use some drug, MJ is probably the one that does the least damage. I am, of course, referring to adults.
FEELINGLUCKYPUNK
Loves Spam
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Posts
- 668
Let your MC or MP know you wanna be an African shithole as soonas possible. Netherlands is miles ahead of us.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Free choice isn't actually freedom, government control and punishment is!!!
That's the most insane self contradicting pile of shit I've seen in a long time.
We get it Dawn, YOUR drugs are ok....but you just can't let other people choose what they want to consume responsibly and you feel a need to send the government in to destroy their lives if they prefer different drugs than the ones you're a fan of.
Probably support government regulation over sex positions too don't ya??
Let me guess you have an article for that too??
"Real freedom is having the government tell you how you can and cannot fuck. The libertarian case for totalitarian state control over your genitals. " LOL
Last edited:
Similar threads
