NationStates Jolt Archive

Topics about narcotic substances come and go on a regular basis here and on many other general forums aswell. The most discussed subject when it comes to drugs are probably the legalization or prohibition of what is usually called 'soft drugs'. It's all been done to death.

So, my question is, where and when did you form your view on drugs, hard, soft, doesn't matter. Poll coming.

Home when I was I kid,

Home when I was a teenager,

College when I was a young adult.

Most of them were about "drugs are bad, but weed is grey".

Weed, e's and other less addicting drugs are good, highly addictive ones not so much.

Weed, e's and other less addicting drugs are good, highly addictive ones not so much.

Ahh, all well and good, but how did you come to hold this view?

My father simply ensured I had access to all of the information, pro and con, about drugs long before I entered the target age groups for taking them. I made up my own mind then.

I don't smoke, drink or use any other mind-altering substance, save Caffeine and sugar. But neither do I condemn those who choose otherwise.

Ahh, all well and good, but how did you come to hold this view?

Hmmm, well I havn't seen weed for instance fuck up someones life, but I have seen heroin seriously fuck up not just the abuser but the family as well. So it's partially based from experience I guess.

School earlier, the same old 'drugs are ALL BAD, CANNABIS WILL KILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, HEROIN DIVIDES THE UNIVERSE BY ZERO!' kind of thing as everyone gets.

Then my own experiences later.

All I can say is that I don't regret taking anything stronger than Cannabis. Herion can fuck people up, crack is probably the worst for that, though.

School and parents simultaneously. Mostly clashing views. I've formulated my proposal based on an insight from my father and my own reasoning.

Drugs are bad. Some are worse than others.

Drugs are bad. Some are worse than others.
And how old are you?

most of my attitudes about drugs come from direct experience with them.

thus I can say

huffing=bad
meth=bad
e=bad
heroin=bad

etc.

I formed it in health class. Which probably makes me a subject of the state propaganda.
*nods oh so very much*

Weed, e's and other less addicting drugs are good, highly addictive ones not so much.

pretty much my view. i came to it by using weed, e's, shrooms and stuff myself. so i guess that counts as research ;)

other drugs i have researched myself, and that's the reasoning behind my choice never to use many other drugs (eg heroin, cmeth, etc), and the reasoning behind my political views on drugs

Topics about narcotic substances come and go on a regular basis here and on many other general forums aswell. The most discussed subject when it comes to drugs are probably the legalization or prohibition of what is usually called 'soft drugs'. It's all been done to death.

So, my question is, where and when did you form your view on drugs, hard, soft, doesn't matter. Poll coming.

I formed it in health class. Which probably makes me a subject of the state propaganda.

School earlier, the same old 'drugs are ALL BAD, CANNABIS WILL KILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, HEROIN DIVIDES THE UNIVERSE BY ZERO!' kind of thing as everyone gets.


Meh, my school wasn't as bad as this.

Meh, my school wasn't as bad as this.
We even had some performers in, it was terrible. Although gave us some classic in-jokes for college.

"Under my... favourite... chair" being the best one (that being where 'Derek' hid his heroin spoons).

... where's the option for "from school"? For me it was primarily based on what I was taught in school, but a combination of that and other things like what I read on forums... oh, and what I watched in YouTube videos like the following episode of Penn and Teller...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=31mjvdPP7dQ

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2HgrAuvUvtg

http://youtube.com/watch?v=72viXhsKU-M

I have two friends who have had their experiences with drugs, and that taught me to stick with pot. Indeed.

How am I to learn from people who haven't experienced it?

I seem to find the "Don't smoke pot!" bullshit crowd when it comes to drug information.

A mix of many. From friends and family, school, and then I researched, not took, but researched about drugs. They seem like a big a waste of time and money. 'Cept for cigarettes and alcohol, that is.

Some of them are harmless fun. Some of them are not. They should all be legal though.

I'm all for the legalisation of soft drugs and strict strident controls over hard drugs. By limiting access you create a black market which allows for crime to flourish. By getting rid of that barrier you reduce crime.

The affects of drugs vary from person to person. Some of the inherent affects are constant while others aren't. Some people have good experiences, others have negative.

People should be able to decide for themselves based on accurate information that explains the positive and negative elements of all drugs. By restricting access to information you allow for people to become ignorant and they either are led to believe that all drugs are bad or they try it and become addicted without knowing what would happen because of the lack of information.

Let's see...

Well, I'll start with Alcohol. I have absolutely zero fondness for it at all. Nor do I have a real opposition to it. I don't like the smell of any alcoholic beverages, I don't particularly have any desire to taste them. I don't much care for people who are drunk. But then, I can't say I'd care for them much sober either.

Cigarattes. Smell horrible. Leaves a lot of waste around. Obviously addictive. I don't like them. Never even thought about trying them.

Marijuana. I don't care about it. It probably makes the same smell as smoking, so I'd probably not want to be around it either.

Heroin, Crack, Cocaine, I have no experience with, not personally.

Now as to medical drugs. Antibiotics are fine. So are other drugs like blood thinners, cholesterol reducers, and the like, but I have serious concerns about the mental health care industry in regards to pharmaceuticals. (in fact, mental health care is a major concern on mine). The fact is, these drugs are potentially hazardous (having messed me up), and poorly handled. And I'm not even talking about things like ADHD or the like. There needs to be a thorough review of the practices in this field, with the shameful excesses corrected.

Caffeine I don't mind though.

Anyway, that's my view, though it's highly abbreviated and not at all complete.

Hysteria over weed creates whatever 'gateway' effect there is (and there really isn't much).

When you smoke your first j and your head doesn't spin off your neck and you don't eat a baby and punch your mom in the face, or (to use actual examples) you don't turn flat, skip your brothers birthday party (kids birthday parties while high??? FANTASTIC! There's cake and streamers and silly little games and noise makers and people just as amped to be silly as you are...whats not to love?), mow down kids on bicycles or shoot your friend in the face (too easy), well then you know you've been lied to about drugs.

If they lied about weed then maybe they lied about heroin, too.

We need to fucking get a grip. If I smoke a j, eat a twinkie and watch some TV it shouldn't be federal case...no matter how judgmental my stupid little poorly drawn dog is...

Hysteria over weed creates whatever 'gateway' effect there is (and there really isn't much).

When you smoke your first j and your head doesn't spin off your neck and you -snip- ...well then you know you've been lied to about drugs.

If they lied about weed then maybe they lied about heroin, too.

We need to fucking get a grip. If I smoke a j, eat a twinkie and watch some TV it shouldn't be federal case...no matter how judgmental my stupid little poorly drawn dog is...

totally agree :)

Hysteria over weed creates whatever 'gateway' effect there is (and there really isn't much).

When you smoke your first j and your head doesn't spin off your neck and you don't eat a baby and punch your mom in the face, or (to use actual examples) you don't turn flat, skip your brothers birthday party (kids birthday parties while high??? FANTASTIC! There's cake and streamers and silly little games and noise makers and people just as amped to be silly as you are...whats not to love?), mow down kids on bicycles or shoot your friend in the face (too easy), well then you know you've been lied to about drugs.

If they lied about weed then maybe they lied about heroin, too.

We need to fucking get a grip. If I smoke a j, eat a twinkie and watch some TV it shouldn't be federal case...no matter how judgmental my stupid little poorly drawn dog is...
:cool:

you know those talking dog commercials bother me.....I am like "the point the dog starts talking to you, maybe you need to worry about what the hell kind of weed you are smoking, because that's not normal"

:cool:

you know those talking dog commercials bother me.....I am like "the point the dog starts talking to you, maybe you need to worry about what the hell kind of weed you are smoking, because that's not normal"

This is why I like cats. Cats wouldn't judge you like that, or keep planting flags in your backyard.

They'd judge you on other, more trivial and random things, but not on weed. Unless you blow it in their face and they don't like it.

Then they'll piddle in your slippers.

OH! That live action one where the dog 'misses his friend' HA! A stoned person is the only person on earth who can 'outplay' a dog.

Really, when it gets right down to it, pets are about as stony as a kids birthday party.

I've learned most of it myself. A lot can be learned from statistics, I've found. Especially regarding pot and its danger levels.

The only one that's iffy that I am against is e. Just because of the problems with long term use. Pot just doesn't show anything truly long term.

No experience needed.

I've learned most of it myself. A lot can be learned from statistics, I've found. Especially regarding pot and its danger levels.

The only one that's iffy that I am against is e. Just because of the problems with long term use. Pot just doesn't show anything truly long term.

No experience needed.

Yeah, but if you have it that Jimi Hendrix song starts to make more sense...


Why does Firefox spell check recognize Hendrix but not Jimi?

This is why I like cats. Cats wouldn't judge you like that, or keep planting flags in your backyard.

They'd judge you on other, more trivial and random things, but not on weed. Unless you blow it in their face and they don't like it.

Then they'll piddle in your slippers.

OH! That live action one where the dog 'misses his friend' HA! A stoned person is the only person on earth who can 'outplay' a dog.

Really, when it gets right down to it, pets are about as stony as a kids birthday party.
:p my kid asked me (on the live action commercial) "so if I do a bunch of drugs will dogs talk to me too? or will I just think they are talking?"

nice lesson they are teaching to kids these days.

Yeah, but if you have it that Jimi Hendrix song starts to make more sense...

I'm sure my love of his music would only greatly improve. :D


Why does Firefox spell check recognize Hendrix but not Jimi?


right click => add to dictionary

End of idiocy.

Weed, e's and other less addicting drugs are good, highly addictive ones not so much.

Indeed. And cocaine. Immature though it is, it is tremendously good fun.

I formed my opinions myself, by experiance. No amount of instruction and information can replace what one's own body can suggest.

:p my kid asked me (on the live action commercial) "so if I do a bunch of drugs will dogs talk to me too? or will I just think they are talking?"

nice lesson they are teaching to kids these days.

That little puzzle is a good one when you're doing halucinagens.

"Hey, the floor is boiling.

That's new.

I guess there is two options-

For the first time ever, the floor has started to boil and it just happens to be when I took a whole load of mushrooms...

-or-

It looks like the floor is boiling because I just took a whole load of mushrooms.

Well, since I'm still standing on it, and I also have never been able to stand on boiling things before, I'm going to go with option B and return to enjoying the show.

School wishes they gave me there view on drugs, but I researched it myself.


Funny story though, my friend who does the most drugs won the DARE contest in elementary school. What does that say about drug education?

That little puzzle is a good one when you're doing halucinagens.

"Hey, the floor is boiling.

That's new.

I guess there is two options-

For the first time ever, the floor has started to boil and it just happens to be when I took a whole load of mushrooms...

-or-

It looks like the floor is boiling because I just took a whole load of mushrooms.

Well, since I'm still standing on it, and I also have never been able to stand on boiling things before, I'm going to go with option B and return to enjoying the show.
:p I had one of those earlier today, I was eating celery and all of the sudden it looked neon pink.....like this color (http://www.w3schools.com/html/ref_color_tryit.asp?hex=FF69B4), and I was like "wth?!" and then I was like "hmm.....I probably need to sleep"

since July 10 I have had 19 hours of sleep all together....but not all at once. Lack of sleep does weird things to my brain.

I don't do drugs, I just smoke weed ;)

Lack of sleep does weird things to my brain.
The most buggered I ever got was not on any drugs (which, btw, are perfectly good, and usually fun, in moderation; like any substance in life) but on the heady heights of sleep deprivation.

72 hours in Paris with around 1-2 hours of sleep, and I was laughing harder than I'd ever done on weed or LSD; seeing stranger things than I'd ever seen on mushies; arseing about in a manner more silly than I'd ever been on coke, pills or MDMA....

Good times. :p

The most buggered I ever got was not on any drugs (which, btw, are perfectly good, and usually fun, in moderation; like any substance in life) but on the heady heights of sleep deprivation.

72 hours in Paris with around 1-2 hours of sleep, and I was laughing harder than I'd ever done on weed or LSD; seeing stranger things than I'd ever seen on mushies; arseing about in a manner more silly than I'd ever been on coke, pills or MDMA....

Good times. :p

Breathing heavily for several minutes is fun too.

That little puzzle is a good one when you're doing halucinagens.

"Hey, the floor is boiling.

That's new.

I guess there is two options-

For the first time ever, the floor has started to boil and it just happens to be when I took a whole load of mushrooms...

-or-

It looks like the floor is boiling because I just took a whole load of mushrooms.

Well, since I'm still standing on it, and I also have never been able to stand on boiling things before, I'm going to go with option B and return to enjoying the show.
i guess that's the problem i had the first (and last) time i tried shrooms... while i knew i wasn't actually 20 feet below the room i was in and looking up at myself and the room, it fucking felt like it :p
then i got all scared and shit went weird :(

:cool:

you know those talking dog commercials bother me.....I am like "the point the dog starts talking to you, maybe you need to worry about what the hell kind of weed you are smoking, because that's not normal"

y'all have anti-weed adverts over there still? :eek:

i guess that's the problem i had the first (and last) time i tried shrooms... while i knew i wasn't actually 20 feet below the room i was in and looking up at myself and the room, it fucking felt like it :p
then i got all scared and shit went weird :(
Well, that's the trick...not getting scared. The last time I got really scared was on acid watching 'The Cell'...the movie wasn't scary, but listening to Screamin' Jay Hawkins on headphones waiting for it to start was...



y'all have anti-weed adverts over there still? :eek:

Oh man, and they're horrible.

Well, that's the trick...not getting scared. The last time I got really scared was on acid watching 'The Cell'...the movie wasn't scary, but listening to Screamin' Jay Hawkins on headphones waiting for it to start was...
I'm in a frenzy! Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

*nods oh so very much*

Well, I like it that way.

My views on 'drugs' evolved through personal and peer experience from my mid-teens onwards.

I think that the biggest problem with any 'war on drugs' is the label. To classify all the vast range of substances that are illegal (I can only speak regarding the UK) under one catch-all banner and shout from the rooftops that 'DRUGS ARE BAD' is beyond stupid. It's an insult to intelligence of the population.

I also find it amusing in the extreme that it would cost me the same or less to buy a bag of grass just now as it cost me the first time I bought any... 21 years ago. Makes me wonder just what the 'war' is achieving in the case of cannabis, other than criminalising a substantial slice of the population for what would most likely be victimless crimes if access to the substance didn't involve consorting with criminals in the first place.

Besides, if Law is truly a codifed expression of the will of society and society ignores said legislation then it become morally unenforceable in my book.

I'm in a frenzy! Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

Brujo is what did me in.

And Screamin' Jay Rules!

Researched the subject myself, and I've found that the medical, but primarily the legal, risks are too great.

ehh, I had dare, health, etc in school and my father works for a mental hospital where many addicts are admitted. I have also seen people, mostly celebrities, trash their careers and enter rehab many times, only to return to their druggie ways.

at the same time, I have had friends who managed to do some drugs in ways that did not harm anybody. they are not addicts. Ive had a teensy bit of drug experience myself and was not irreparably scarred by it.

So Ive managed to figure out what drugs not to do, how to be safe when you are doing drugs, and how hard it is to rehabilitate an addict of serious drugs. Ive also experienced prescription drug addiction and I know that drugs of all kinds can be dangerous.

So, my question is, where and when did you form your view on drugs, hard, soft, doesn't matter.

From personal experience. You left that out in the poll.

From personal experience. You left that out in the poll.

Yeah, I also forgot "From school", but to be fair, that would usually be classified as propaganda. Personal experience is pretty close to researching it yourself though, so just vote for that :) Second poll ever, don't judge me too hard.

I picked the "from propaganda" category, but it really has to do with my political ideology. Doing drugs is substance slavery. We submit our bodies to capitalism and our minds become less sharp. We need to be able to focus on our studies and the revolution.

I picked the "from propaganda" category, but it really has to do with my political ideology. Doing drugs is substance slavery. We submit our bodies to capitalism and our minds become less sharp. We need to be able to focus on our studies and the revolution.

Dang, another poll category I forgot to add... I'm taking notes for my next poll now... :)

But if you grow your own and just use it outside of studies and such, as a quick recreation, would you still opose it? I mean, pot could pretty easily be called the most perfect grass-root movement, eh? ;)

Topics about narcotic substances come and go on a regular basis here and on many other general forums aswell. The most discussed subject when it comes to drugs are probably the legalization or prohibition of what is usually called 'soft drugs'. It's all been done to death.

So, my question is, where and when did you form your view on drugs, hard, soft, doesn't matter. Poll coming.

done just about all of them,not fond of most as i have gotten older,still like a occasional line of coke or a puff of weed.
i grew up when everyone was doing drugs,my parents included...and they were very succesfull professionals.

If you have the nerve to put me in the same option as MTV, you must be on drugs. :mad:

If you have the nerve to put me in the same option as MTV, you must be on drugs. :mad:

But it's Celebrity Death Match! The pinnacle of Claymation Entertainment! I would feel honored to be mentioned alongside such an indescribably good program!

I'm against drug use as a general rule.

That said, certain drugs can be therapeutic and it's up to the individual to decide whether they're appropriate in their case.

Weed, e's and other less addicting drugs are good, highly addictive ones not so much.

Cocaine makes you an asshole, makes you hang around assholes and robs you blind.

Crack field-strips your arteries, over-revs your heart and you have to buy it from some of the scummiest motherfuckers this side of Gehenna.

LSD, well...bell bottoms and shitty psychadelic art, 'nuff said. Oh, and it re-wires your brain. Anything the military was looking into, I'll pass on.

E turns you into a infant/nympho, dehydrates you and scrambles your neurons. Plus there's that vapid rave music you have to hear. Also, it overamps your pleasure center, and leaves you feeling pain as a result. Like heroin with dance beats.

PCP makes you act as if you're invincible and makes you insanely paranoid. Bad combination. The cops don't even warn you anymore when they know you're on it. ("Confirmed PCP OD, 1 Adam 12, just plug 'im till he drops and stay back.") Anything less than a melon-head shot and you've just pissed him off.

Whippits (usually NO2) are basically just a fance way of asphyxiating yourself, and as such result in a shit-ton headache. My brain really likes oxygen, call me crazy.

Huffing is for people who can't afford meth. And who are mind-numbingly stupid.

Meth is great for turning yourself into a toothless, thieving, lying scumbag. The only drug so far proven to actually make a mother forget love long after she's off it. What? It's made from ammonia? Yummy!

Heroin makes you use more and more to feel the same basic high until you finally use too much or mix it with something in order to feel something new. The drug itself is a user, which is why it's so popular in the entertainment industry (they can smell their own).

Mushrooms can be cool. Problem is, there are very few places where your environment won't harsh your trip. You must go to nature, as Bill Hicks said, and laugh for the first hour as you realize that euphoria comes from a cow's ass (many psilocybin shrooms grow on cow turds). DO NOT GO TO AN AMUSEMENT PARK -- tripping on a rollercoaster is bad news. Illegal because they make people realize that all humanity is one and there's no such thing as death (bad for the arms industry and the effectiveness of all political advertising).

*****

If you're at a concert or a ball game and the person behind you is rude, obnoxious and belligerent, is he drunk or stoned? Drunk. You cannot get into a fight on weed because it is fucking impossible. Marijuana grows without cultivation, and grazing animals won't eat it (hence "weed"), so there's no need to add value to the product and all who want it can grow it themselves. Making it illegal made it more expensive, and where money is, cartels, gangs and all the crap they engender soon follow. What's an ouce cost now? $200 for low-end shit? What would an ounce cost if it were legal? Well, what's tobacco cost per ounce? $1? And that shit requires cultivation, pest control and processing! Seems to me that if you made it legal, the government could charge a bit more for it than they charge for cigarettes, and they'd make a killing, regulating it just like they do booze. You don't hear about anyone dying in a booze turf war since Prohibition ended, do you?

That said, weed is a motivation sapper if consumed as a chronic lifestyle. While not as detrimental as booze, I've seen plenty of friends sink into a "work just to get high" frame of life, and it can get pathetic. So the substance isn't addictive, but the lifestyle can be. When I gave it up at 22, it just didn't appeal to me. In fact, I can't stand the smell of it anymore.

Legalizing marijuana would unburden the cops, the courts and the jails of a significant portion of its caseload. I suppose the bail bonds industry would take a hit (no pun intended), but it would be worth it. For all teh commercials that warn of stoned drivers -- uh...they have sobriety checkpoints already, don't they? You can invent a THC breathalyzer and again, treat the shit like you treat alcohol without any significant added police expense.

Well. That's my drugs pitch. Please remember it for the next time this thread topic comes up so I don't have to. My memory isn't what it used to be back in my late teens. Heh.

Cocaine makes you an asshole, makes you hang around assholes and robs you blind.

Ah, but it's only *psychologically* addictive, which makes it okay. ;) Nah, not really. I used to associate with a lot of users on one job, and they seemed pretty much on the level, but it is expensive, no question.

LSD, well...bell bottoms and shitty psychadelic art, 'nuff said. Oh, and it re-wires your brain. Anything the military was looking into, I'll pass on.

That's probably a good rule of thumb, but I think LSD is pretty harmless if you're not a latent mental defective. If Cary Grant can take it a thousand times and still film 'Arsenic and Old Lace,' it can't be *too* harmful. :p

Heroin makes you use more and more to feel the same basic high until you finally use too much or mix it with something in order to feel something new. The drug itself is a user, which is why it's so popular in the entertainment industry (they can smell their own).

That's true. I use opiates myself, but I'll take a week off here and there to let my system clean itself out.

If you're at a concert or a ball game and the person behind you is rude, obnoxious and belligerent, is he drunk or stoned? Drunk. You cannot get into a fight on weed because it is fucking impossible. Marijuana grows without cultivation, and grazing animals won't eat it (hence "weed"), so there's no need to add value to the product and all who want it can grow it themselves. Making it illegal made it more expensive, and where money is, cartels, gangs and all the crap they engender soon follow. What's an ouce cost now? $200 for low-end shit? What would an ounce cost if it were legal? Well, what's tobacco cost per ounce? $1? And that shit requires cultivation, pest control and processing! Seems to me that if you made it legal, the government could charge a bit more for it than they charge for cigarettes, and they'd make a killing, regulating it just like they do booze. You don't hear about anyone dying in a booze turf war since Prohibition ended, do you?

That said, weed is a motivation sapper if consumed as a chronic lifestyle. While not as detrimental as booze, I've seen plenty of friends sink into a "work just to get high" frame of life, and it can get pathetic. So the substance isn't addictive, but the lifestyle can be. When I gave it up at 22, it just didn't appeal to me. In fact, I can't stand the smell of it anymore.

Legalizing marijuana would unburden the cops, the courts and the jails of a significant portion of its caseload. I suppose the bail bonds industry would take a hit (no pun intended), but it would be worth it. For all teh commercials that warn of stoned drivers -- uh...they have sobriety checkpoints already, don't they? You can invent a THC breathalyzer and again, treat the shit like you treat alcohol without any significant added police expense.

Well. That's my drugs pitch. Please remember it for the next time this thread topic comes up so I don't have to. My memory isn't what it used to be back in my late teens. Heh.

I dunno - I've never used marijuana, but I've gotten into fights with users. I think it's impossible to *win* a fight on pot, but not to participate. :p

As to the cost of it, remember that Congress is the biggest gangster when it comes to your tax dollar. It may be $200 on the street, but the government's no fool - they'd squeeze the user for every last cent. I'm not a fan of locking people up for having a bit of it in their glovebox, but legalization probably isn't the best route, I'd think.

This is my view:

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/albums/wdc_gallery/sunset.jpg

This is my view on drugs:

http://www.winthrop.edu/kaleidoscope/Nosearch/kaleidoscope.jpg

Any questions?

I'm against drug use as a general rule.

That said, certain drugs can be therapeutic and it's up to the individual to decide whether they're appropriate in their case.

My 84 year old Grandpa might be able to get some weed to cope with this Chemo.

My 84 year old Grandpa might be able to get some weed to cope with this Chemo.

Damn. If I were on Chemo at 84, I'd go straight to something a bit harder. But I'm not much of a fighter when it comes to pain - good for him.

Ah, but it's only *psychologically* addictive, which makes it okay. ;) Nah, not really. I used to associate with a lot of users on one job, and they seemed pretty much on the level, but it is expensive, no question.



That's probably a good rule of thumb, but I think LSD is pretty harmless if you're not a latent mental defective. If Cary Grant can take it a thousand times and still film 'Arsenic and Old Lace,' it can't be *too* harmful. :p



That's true. I use opiates myself, but I'll take a week off here and there to let my system clean itself out.



I dunno - I've never used marijuana, but I've gotten into fights with users. I think it's impossible to *win* a fight on pot, but not to participate. :p

As to the cost of it, remember that Congress is the biggest gangster when it comes to your tax dollar. It may be $200 on the street, but the government's no fool - they'd squeeze the user for every last cent. I'm not a fan of locking people up for having a bit of it in their glovebox, but legalization probably isn't the best route, I'd think.

I stand hilariously corrected!

So what is the best route, then?

I think it's impossible to *win* a fight on pot

You're damn right it's impossible to win a fight against me.

I stand hilariously corrected!

So what is the best route, then?

I'm not entirely sure. It seems like a choice between a bloated ATF budget, if pot is legalized and taxed, and a bloated law enforcement budget if it isn't. At the very least, we shouldn't be wasting our time and money jailing non-dealers.

I'm not entirely sure. It seems like a choice between a bloated ATF budget, if pot is legalized and taxed, and a bloated law enforcement budget if it isn't. At the very least, we shouldn't be wasting our time and money jailing non-dealers.

Wait -- how bloated is ATF now just dealing with booze? I don't think adding one more item would tax the Bureau all that much. Given that you'd eliminate a vast portion of the DEA, DARE and the Czar's office, I think you'd at least break even, if not save some money.

Wait -- how bloated is ATF now just dealing with booze? I don't think adding one more item would tax the Bureau all that much. Given that you'd eliminate a vast portion of the DEA, DARE and the Czar's office, I think you'd at least break even, if not save some money.

Problem is, you have so much foreign production with marijuana that the DEA would still be arresting smugglers and illegal dealers, maybe even at the same rate. Alcohol and tobacco are natural commodities in this country - they're basically our crops, and have been since Day 1; but there's a transnational industry already present in smuggling marijuana into this country, which I don't think would go away. It would be rather difficult for the government to rationalize legalizing it anyway, given its stance on it and other drugs and the recent tobacco lawsuits and regulations - I just don't see it happening without an expansion of government powers.

If you're at a concert or a ball game and the person behind you is rude, obnoxious and belligerent, is he drunk or stoned? Drunk. You cannot get into a fight on weed because it is fucking impossible :p. Marijuana grows without cultivation, and grazing animals won't eat it (hence "weed"), so there's no need to add value to the product and all who want it can grow it themselves. Making it illegal made it more expensive, and where money is, cartels, gangs and all the crap they engender soon follow. What's an ouce cost now? $200 for low-end shit? What would an ounce cost if it were legal? Well, what's tobacco cost per ounce? $1? And that shit requires cultivation, pest control and processing! Seems to me that if you made it legal, the government could charge a bit more for it than they charge for cigarettes, and they'd make a killing, regulating it just like they do booze. You don't hear about anyone dying in a booze turf war since Prohibition ended, do you?

That said, weed is a motivation sapper if consumed as a chronic lifestyle. While not as detrimental as booze, I've seen plenty of friends sink into a "work just to get high" frame of life, and it can get pathetic. So the substance isn't addictive, but the lifestyle can be. When I gave it up at 22, it just didn't appeal to me. In fact, I can't stand the smell of it anymore.

Legalizing marijuana would unburden the cops, the courts and the jails of a significant portion of its caseload. I suppose the bail bonds industry would take a hit (no pun intended), but it would be worth it. For all teh commercials that warn of stoned drivers -- uh...they have sobriety checkpoints already, don't they? You can invent a THC breathalyzer and again, treat the shit like you treat alcohol without any significant added police expense.

Well. That's my drugs pitch. Please remember it for the next time this thread topic comes up so I don't have to. My memory isn't what it used to be back in my late teens. Heh.

QFT
they already got a breathalyser thing for drugs over here - it takes a swab of your sweat iirc and analyses it for narcotics. they been using it round nightclubs round here for a while.

Problem is, you have so much foreign production with marijuana that the DEA would still be arresting smugglers and illegal dealers, maybe even at the same rate. Alcohol and tobacco are natural commodities in this country - they're basically our crops, and have been since Day 1; but there's a transnational industry already present in smuggling marijuana into this country, which I don't think would go away. It would be rather difficult for the government to rationalize legalizing it anyway, given its stance on it and other drugs and the recent tobacco lawsuits and regulations - I just don't see it happening without an expansion of government powers.

It practically grows wild out here. Northern California would be more than happy to meet the growing needs of at least the western states. It'd be like a slightly different kind of Napa.

Option 1, 2 and 3 would apply here. My parents never so much taught me but taught by example: on the one side: a father who'd fall asleep drunk at a party and on the way home insult every one of us - on the other hand, my always responsible mother who'd drive us home and pretend not to notice the state, my father was in.

I was interested in the topic of drugs and so I did read things about the different drugs and continue to do so. I have gained an addiction to caffeine though.

Discussions with my boyfriend made me re-think my political stance. He told me much about the relation between drugs and society and what he said was logical.

It practically grows wild out here. Northern California would be more than happy to meet the growing needs of at least the western states. It'd be like a slightly different kind of Napa.

Doesn't it already? Well, maybe not in an official capacity just yet, but I hear that's where a good deal of it comes from. :p

I learned to stay away from drugs watching friends get fucked up and lose all of their ambition and cogent behavior. I learned it after half of the band I was in stopped showing up to practices 'cuz they were too fucked up to care about music any more. I don't do drugs, I don't drink, and I don't smoke.

I don't do drugs, I don't drink, and I don't smoke.

That is... kinda sensible... :)

Heh the old drugs thread huh.

Well to be honest I can't be bothred to trawl through the 5 pages of wit, insight, bigotry, stupidity and so on and so forth. So applogies if anybody has already said this but my tupence worth.

Drugs as defined as a substance put into the body in order to chance it's chemstry. Then everything is a drug. There is some substance that we all take to effect our moods. Be it chocolate , beer or heroin. Drugs are, have been, and will continue to be a part of humanity for as long as we exist.

Deny this if ya like, but you would be quite wrong.

Boring as.

Heh I bet he does do drugs. I bet he is as suceptiple to a choc craving to beat away his blues as the rest of us are.

I learned to stay away from drugs watching friends get fucked up and lose all of their ambition and cogent behavior. I learned it after half of the band I was in stopped showing up to practices 'cuz they were too fucked up to care about music any more. I don't do drugs, I don't drink, and I don't smoke.

Boring as.

Boring as.

Yeah, it's really boring to respect your body and not fund crime and entrench poverty. :rolleyes:

Det Supt Willie MacColl, the SCDEA's national drugs co-ordinator, said: "People boycott disposable nappies, choose organic vegetables and fair trade goods such as coffee but these same people think nothing of having a line of cocaine that's caused immeasurable harm."

The anti-drugs agency claims there are 18,000 murders a year in Colombia - 50 each day - associated with drug trafficking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6272684.stm

Boring as.

You can always substitute them with extreme sports or something I suppose

Yeah, I also forgot "From school", but to be fair, that would usually be classified as propaganda. Personal experience is pretty close to researching it yourself though, so just vote for that :) Second poll ever, don't judge me too hard.
:headbang:

And yet, you had "From my religion" as a separate option as if to imply that SCHOOL is more along the lines of propaganda than RELIGION? Schools teach about the validity of different religions, while the books churches give out to little kids refute doubts like "what about other religions, couldn't they be right as well?" with things like "these are only doubts that the DEVIL fills your mind with" blatantly trying to scare people out of questioning, yet my middle school health teacher said he didn't agree with what he called "scare tactics" being used in an ANTI-TOBACCO video he showed us.

And then you compare personal experience to research. If that's the case then let me cite personal experience; back in grade 6 when a group of people in the class took stuff out of the substitute teacher's purse before she came in and then put it on my desk to make it look like I did it, IIRC not one person in the class stood up for me by saying I didn't, but somehow the teacher could tell I didn't. The vast majority of people, whatever their reasons (and they never gave them) had more reason to lie than do teachers, who saw through their lies.

And religion is ALSO "of the majority"

Weak analogy? Maybe, but in my case personal experience, if I'm going to treat it like research, indicates that the vast majority of people choosing a very small percentage of people to pick on, by making them look worse than they are, for whatever reason, is in the same direction as religion.

Topics about narcotic substances come and go on a regular basis here and on many other general forums aswell. The most discussed subject when it comes to drugs are probably the legalization or prohibition of what is usually called 'soft drugs'. It's all been done to death.

So, my question is, where and when did you form your view on drugs, hard, soft, doesn't matter. Poll coming.My mom once summed up her feelings on drug use:

"Drugs are a fun place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there."

My folks never tried the bullshit "drug r bad, mkay" crap with me. They were honest about their own past experiences, and gave me useful advice. Instead of feeding me the misinformation that is so popular in American public school programs, my folks gave me factual information about psychoactive substances, narcotics, etc. The fact that my mom is a PhD psychologist and my dad is a neuroscientist certainly didn't hurt.

My folks taught me to always read up on what you are putting in your body. That includes medications, too! When I was 11 and I had to be treated for anemia, I ended up doing my science project on anemia and iron deficiencies. (I'm a giant nerd.)

I pretty much agree with what my parents taught me. Having tried a lot of drugs, my conclusion is that it was fun to experiment but I am content to be drug free nowadays.

However, for anybody who thinks that drugs are for losers, keep in mind: I graduated as valedictorian of my high school class, after spending much of my Junior year on acid (during classes). I used marijuana, LSD, 2CB, GHB, cocaine, ephedrine, ecstasy, and alcohol during college, and I graduated with honors and three degrees in four years.

It's quite possible to be a winner who also uses drugs. It's also possible to be a loser who uses drugs, or a winner who doesn't use drugs. Drugs don't make you a winner OR a loser.

However, for anybody who thinks that drugs are for losers, keep in mind: I graduated as valedictorian of my high school class, after spending much of my Junior year on acid (during classes). I used marijuana, LSD, 2CB, GHB, cocaine, ephedrine, ecstasy, and alcohol during college, and I graduated with honors and three degrees in four years.

It's quite possible to be a winner who also uses drugs. It's also possible to be a loser who uses drugs, or a winner who doesn't use drugs. Drugs don't make you a winner OR a loser.

I think it depends on the drug, and on the person.

I don't have a problem with people using most drugs (having used some myself over the years) as long as they keep their life together.

However, I've met a few people who use meth or heroin, and all of them are dead now except one, who is a complete fuckup.

She and her husband lost their business, their home, their children, and are homeless vagrants now who only live to smoke more meth or inject more heroin.

I think it's a lot harder not to spin wildly down to nothing if you're doing meth or heroin. Some other drugs don't seem to raise this risk in the slightest.

And no, I don't believe the "gateway" bullshit, either.

I think it depends on the drug, and on the person.

I don't have a problem with people using most drugs (having used some myself over the years) as long as they keep their life together.

However, I've met a few people who use meth or heroin, and all of them are dead now except one, who is a complete fuckup.

She and her husband lost their business, their home, their children, and are homeless vagrants now who only live to smoke more meth or inject more heroin.

I think it's a lot harder not to spin wildly down to nothing if you're doing meth or heroin. Some other drugs don't seem to raise this risk in the slightest.

And no, I don't believe the "gateway" bullshit, either.
I can agree with that.

Myself, I always swore I would never do a drug that is physiologically addictive. It just never seemed worth the risk.

My brief but intense romance with cocaine was the closest I've come to being a real addict, and coke is the only drug I've done that I actively warn people not to try.

How you do drugs is also very important. Drink enough alcohol and you've got serious problems. Take enough E, same deal. Drinking every now and then isn't anything evil, but if you find yourself getting drunk every single day...

That's why I tried to avoid drugs like the opioids. The physiological responses to those drugs is such that it makes it particularly hard to cut back or control how much you use. It's already hard enough for me to resist doing fun things, without being physically addicted on top of it!

How you do drugs is also very important. Drink enough alcohol and you've got serious problems. Take enough E, same deal. Drinking every now and then isn't anything evil, but if you find yourself getting drunk every single day...

Some people are addicted to TV, to videogames, to sex, to gambling...

Some people are addicted to TV, to videogames, to sex, to gambling...
Exactly.

In my experience, there is a small number of commonly-available drugs which are dangerous to even try. PCP. Heroine. Stuff like that.

But most drugs are only dangerous when you get into the realm of addiction. Now, that's certainly a serious and legit danger, and I'm not trying to pretend it isn't, but a whole lot of things are dangerous if you're an addict. Addiction is dangerous, whether your personal vice is pot or poker or World Of Warcraft.

I believe that the use of narcotics is disgusting and unworthy of human beings. However, that being said, the will is inalienable, and no one has the right to stop a person from doing something only unto himself.

I learned about drugs from Defenders of the Earth and Captain Planet.

I formed my view on drugs when I was doing a drug report in 8th grade for Health. Everyone up to that point had been doing the usual "DRUGS R TEH EBIL COMMIES OF SATANICAL DEATH!!!!!!ONE!!1"
My report went like this: "Pot really isn't that bad for you, you can't overdose on THC, it’s less addictive then alcohol, has low withdrawal symptoms, and impairs you to about the same degree of getting drunk. I support the legalization of pot based on the research I've done." My health teacher freaked out, and I got a D+.

I formed my view on drugs when I was doing a drug report in 8th grade for Health. Everyone up to that point had been doing the usual "DRUGS R TEH EBIL COMMIES OF SATANICAL DEATH!!!!!!ONE!!1"
My report went like this: "Pot really isn't that bad for you, you can't overdose on THC, it’s less addictive then alcohol, has low withdrawal symptoms, and impairs you to about the same degree of getting drunk. I support the legalization of pot based on the research I've done." My health teacher freaked out, and I got a D+.

Yay for standing up to The Man (in health teacher form)!

Doing drugs is substance slavery.

So is drinking water.

Yeah, it's really boring to respect your body and not fund crime and entrench poverty. :rolleyes:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6272684.stm

And this is true because every drug is cocaine.

Several places. I know they are bad and won't use them :) I don't even take Tylenol for a headache.

My parents taught me, I researched the subject myself, from my friends.

And yet I had to vote for MTV's Celebrity Deathmatch.

Why? 'Cause...
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/CelebrityDeathmatchMillsLane.jpg
"I'll allow it!"

Problem is, you have so much foreign production with marijuana that the DEA would still be arresting smugglers and illegal dealers, maybe even at the same rate. Alcohol and tobacco are natural commodities in this country - they're basically our crops, and have been since Day 1; but there's a transnational industry already present in smuggling marijuana into this country, which I don't think would go away. It would be rather difficult for the government to rationalize legalizing it anyway, given its stance on it and other drugs and the recent tobacco lawsuits and regulations - I just don't see it happening without an expansion of government powers.

Sure it would go away! Marijuana grows (I have to say this again), like a weed. I've found it in Pacific Northwest forests just a-hangin' out in the undergrowth.

Besides, we import a lot of booze, too.

Legalize it in butter form only. It would make "getting baked" into a double pun.

Yeah, it's really boring to respect your body and not fund crime and entrench poverty. :rolleyes:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6272684.stm

All the harm drugs cause are because they're lucrative -- people and gangs and cartels make money off 'em. Why? 'Cause they're expensive. Why? 'Cause bypassing legal import procedures and law enforcement is difficult and requires money. Why? Wait for it -- BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL.

Try again.

Boring as.

I don't need to fuck with my head to have fun.

Yeah, it's really boring to respect your body and not fund crime and entrench poverty. :rolleyes:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6272684.stm

Respect for a body that's going to die anyway? Provided mine looks good, and does what its supposed to, I coulnd't care less about what I put in it.

Drugs, much like anything else, are fun in moderation.

Actually, my view is into my neighbour's kitchen but as she often walks around the house 'sans clothing' it is still a very nice view indeed

Actually, my view is into my neighbour's kitchen but as she often walks around the house 'sans clothing' it is still a very nice view indeed

Not living in a house that's four inches apart from your neighbor's is pretty nice too. :p Explains, in part, why my stay in California will be a short one. :)

whatever anyone does in their own nice quiet room with the rubber walls ain't no body's bussiness but their own.

the problem is with people having a problem with the problem and the problems created by outlawing the possession of anything.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, if you don't want people to have something, don't make it and don't create incentives for people to make or supply it. which if anything, outlawing possession makes all the more incentives for people TO manufacture and distribute substances other people deem to be harmful, by making it's market value a temptation many with little or no other opportunities find extremely difficult to resist.

that goes for guns and cars as well as recreationally consumed neurotropic substances.

i really see anything a majority of people don't desire to have in ciriculation as exactly the same problem.

and yes, some things are harmful. governments are harmful. maybe we should outlaw those?

but how precisely would/could we go about doing so?

far better to exercise our own good sense, whatever good sense we might have, and allow others to exercise theirs.

=^^=
.../\...

All the harm drugs cause are because they're lucrative -- people and gangs and cartels make money off 'em. Why? 'Cause they're expensive. Why? 'Cause bypassing legal import procedures and law enforcement is difficult and requires money. Why? Wait for it -- BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL.

Try again.

I shall try again; try to understand the hypocrisy of people who are only more than willing to preach to others to give things up in the name of a common good, but say 'screw the poor' when their own little tipple is threatened.

If you really believe that all that is holding back South America from becoming a shining beacon of fair trade is the fact that drugs are illegal, you've clearly been smoking something strong before you came on here.

I shall try again; try to understand the hypocrisy of people who are only more than willing to preach to others to give things up in the name of a common good, but say 'screw the poor' when their own little tipple is threatened.

If you really believe that all that is holding back South America from becoming a shining beacon of fair trade is the fact that drugs are illegal, you've clearly been smoking something strong before you came on here.

That's nice.

How about replying to my post now?

How does legalizing any drug "screw the poor" exactly? (This oughta be good.) Also, where did I preach for anyone to give up anything in the name of the common good (besides perhaps crime)? And nothing of what I typed had anything at all to do with South America.

Let's see if I can make crystal somehow clearer in deference to whatever it is befuddling your ability to read and comprehend. The reason drugs (specifically marijuana) are lucrative is because they're illegal. Removing the illegality removes the cost of doing business. If we can all grow our own, and we could, were it legal, why would anyone buy from a dealer? No weed dealers, no weed money, no weed-related crime, less burden on police and the justice system (including corrections, already severely overburdened).

I've got no problem with you taking the thread into new areas, but doing it it as a reply to my post was unnecessarily confusing.

That's nice.

How about replying to my post now?

How does legalizing any drug "screw the poor" exactly? (This oughta be good.) Also, where did I preach for anyone to give up anything in the name of the common good (besides perhaps crime)? And nothing of what I typed had anything at all to do with South America.

Let's see if I can make crystal somehow clearer in deference to whatever it is befuddling your ability to read and comprehend. The reason drugs (specifically marijuana) are lucrative is because they're illegal. Removing the illegality removes the cost of doing business. If we can all grow our own, and we could, were it legal, why would anyone buy from a dealer? No weed dealers, no weed money, no weed-related crime, less burden on police and the justice system (including corrections, already severely overburdened).

I've got no problem with you taking the thread into new areas, but doing it it as a reply to my post was unnecessarily confusing.

I do unnecessarily confusing quite well. :) It was one of those 'you's' that wasn't actually referring to you, if you see what I mean.

What I was trying to get at is that I am disgusted by that growing section of society that preaches about how we should consider ourselves evil for our impact on global warming, poverty etc, and we must make sacrifices, change the way we live, eat nothing but celery (but only humanly farmed celery) and so on and so forth. And then, when have finished with this holier than thou sermon, retreat to use a 'harmless' drug that they feel shouldn't be anyone else's business.

Now, this is the extreme end of the spectrum, based on personal experiences, and perhaps not entirely relevant in a wider context. Having said this, however, there can be no doubt that the manufacturing and supply of drugs causes crime, poverty, and widespread fatalities. Whether it is in South America, where people are killed in the gangs, or the back streets of Brixton, where the dealers will happily beat up the debtor, or the old lady is mugged because someone needs money to feed the habit, it has a huge impact.

Your argument that it is only because it is illegal has some truth, but you can only take this so far. There are many products from some of the regions drugs are produced that are perfectly legal (for example diamonds), but where the trade is just as brutal as for drugs. Likewise, the legality of drugs would not in anyway prevent drug related crimes, such as those addicted to it stealing in order to make their purchases.

If it were any other business, then even a legal drugs trade would be boycotted as unethical and immoral. But, because "it's my body" and the fashionable nature of the Notting Hill social drugs, people are willing to turn a blind eye to the appalling standards people must endure to bring you your 'harmless' drug.

I do unnecessarily confusing quite well. :) It was one of those 'you's' that wasn't actually referring to you, if you see what I mean.

I do, thanks for explaining.

What I was trying to get at is that I am disgusted by that growing section of society that preaches about how we should consider ourselves evil for our impact on global warming, poverty etc, and we must make sacrifices, change the way we live, eat nothing but celery (but only humanly farmed celery) and so on and so forth. And then, when have finished with this holier than thou sermon, retreat to use a 'harmless' drug that they feel shouldn't be anyone else's business.

Okay. I can understand that.

Now, this is the extreme end of the spectrum, based on personal experiences, and perhaps not entirely relevant in a wider context. Having said this, however, there can be no doubt that the manufacturing and supply of drugs causes crime, poverty, and widespread fatalities. Whether it is in South America, where people are killed in the gangs, or the back streets of Brixton, where the dealers will happily beat up the debtor, or the old lady is mugged because someone needs money to feed the habit, it has a huge impact.

None of this would happen were the drugs made legal.

Your argument that it is only because it is illegal has some truth, but you can only take this so far. There are many products from some of the regions drugs are produced that are perfectly legal (for example diamonds), but where the trade is just as brutal as for drugs. Likewise, the legality of drugs would not in anyway prevent drug related crimes, such as those addicted to it stealing in order to make their purchases.

Diamonds are a bad example. A) they're not something you ingest, and B) the DeBeers cartel controls something like 85% of the diamond supply in order to keep prices artificially high. Why we all don't rise as one and slay them, I don't know, but something should be done. I never understood why the revolution-era French beheaded Marie Antoinette. I see these assholes inflating the cost of pressurized coal, and then I get it.

Other mind-altering substances are sold and regulated by the government without detriment to the countries that produce them. When's the last time you heard of a rash of armed robberies for cigarettes or booze? The trade in a widely consumed product whose proces are not artificially inflated by an oligarchy with the complicity of politicians is very unlikely to be brutal.

If it were any other business, then even a legal drugs trade would be boycotted as unethical and immoral.

I'm sorry, I just don't understand this sentence.

But, because "it's my body" and the fashionable nature of the Notting Hill social drugs, people are willing to turn a blind eye to the appalling standards people must endure to bring you your 'harmless' drug.

Standards which, I must point out again, exist because the price is so high and there's lots of money at stake. And that's because they're illegal.

I formed my view on drugs when I was doing a drug report in 8th grade for Health. Everyone up to that point had been doing the usual "DRUGS R TEH EBIL COMMIES OF SATANICAL DEATH!!!!!!ONE!!1"
My report went like this: "Pot really isn't that bad for you, you can't overdose on THC, it’s less addictive then alcohol, has low withdrawal symptoms, and impairs you to about the same degree of getting drunk. I support the legalization of pot based on the research I've done." My health teacher freaked out, and I got a D+.
Really? Someone who had to go to university for years to get a degree to teach, when degrees are typically for high-pay jobs and teaching is a low-pay job, (as such, they would presumably do so out of dedication to helping others learn) would deliberately suppress independent research?

See my other posts in this thread...

Well, when I grew up in the 40's and 50's in a suburb of Boston, drugs were not a problem. In fact, I never heard about them until after I spent several years in the military and there was the Hippie movement, flower children and all that. (I went on active duty in 1961.)

I tried hash one time in 1972 or 1973 when I was in Thailand. I became paranoid and knew if I were caught, I would lose my job and my career. I was married at the time and had two kids. Wouldn’t be good if I lost my job and although the high was OK, it wasn’t great. I decided drugs just were not worth it.

All the illegal drugs should remain illegal and the punishments for using or selling drugs like cannabis, which is wrongly called a 'soft drug', should be made more severe.

It worries me a lot that drugs have become so widespread, in London it seem to have taken over with so many people flouting the law openly by smoking cannabis in parks and the streets, in open view of the public!

A review of the current policy on how to stop drugs is in order so that the War on Drugs will hopefully be won and that society will become free of them.

I oppose the use of drugs by people and hope that no government would ever take leave of it's sense and legalise drugs.

Cannabis use is now too open in London, where I live. People smoke cannabis in parks and in passing me on the streets, I have lost count of the number of people I see buying from dealers or smoking in public.

The government needs to scrap the liberal measures of stopping drugs and begin a real War on Drugs, one severe and forceful enough to stop people selling, buying and taking drugs,

I oppose the use of drugs by people and hope that no government would ever take leave of it's sense and legalise drugs.

Cannabis use is now too open in London, where I live. People smoke cannabis in parks and in passing me on the streets, I have lost count of the number of people I see buying from dealers or smoking in public.

The government needs to scrap the liberal measures of stopping drugs and begin a real War on Drugs, one severe and forceful enough to stop people selling, buying and taking drugs,

Bwhaahahah does that include alcohol, and tabbaco? Or any other substance that we may use to alter our mood, chocolate, tea, coffee? Should we take it a step further and do away with gambling, and all sporting events, what about music, film and litritaure, all of the arts?

Shall we become a fully fledged nanny state, and do only that which our goverments decide is safe for us to do?

I oppose the use of drugs by people and hope that no government would ever take leave of it's sense and legalise drugs.

Cannabis use is now too open in London, where I live. People smoke cannabis in parks and in passing me on the streets, I have lost count of the number of people I see buying from dealers or smoking in public.

The government needs to scrap the liberal measures of stopping drugs and begin a real War on Drugs, one severe and forceful enough to stop people selling, buying and taking drugs,
If you care so much about it, then try actually putting some thought into this.

Give SPECIFICS. What EXACTLY do you think the government should do to wage this "real" War on Drugs? How do you propose to totally stamp out drug use? How much will it cost? Which agencies will be responsible?

Using drugs is generally foolish, and I avoid them myself (except for caffeine, because coffee owns and all), but don't expect others to do so.

My view on drugs is normally downwards and obscured by the items, which are in front of the place I hide them in.

All the illegal drugs should remain illegal and the punishments for using or selling drugs like cannabis, which is wrongly called a 'soft drug', should be made more severe.

It worries me a lot that drugs have become so widespread, in London it seem to have taken over with so many people flouting the law openly by smoking cannabis in parks and the streets, in open view of the public!

A review of the current policy on how to stop drugs is in order so that the War on Drugs will hopefully be won and that society will become free of them.

The "war on drugs" has been being fought since at least 1972, and the people on drugs are winning it (okay, that's just a rephrasing of a Bill Hicks joke for comedic effect, but still). What's that say about the war effort? Misguided? Whatever it says, the "war" is certainly expensive. Never mind the cost of enforcement and policing itself, but the cost in incarceration of nonviolent "criminals" guilty of nothing worse than the guy who sells beer at the football game. Marijuana is no more harmful and usually found to be less harmful than the drugs we have already decided are legal.

I oppose the use of drugs by people and hope that no government would ever take leave of it's sense and legalise drugs.

Cannabis use is now too open in London, where I live. People smoke cannabis in parks and in passing me on the streets, I have lost count of the number of people I see buying from dealers or smoking in public.

The government needs to scrap the liberal measures of stopping drugs and begin a real War on Drugs, one severe and forceful enough to stop people selling, buying and taking drugs,

Uh...that's what the government HAS been doing, at least in the US, since the Reagan era.

Tell me, those cannibis smokers in London, after lighting up, do they go out and look for people to harass and beat up? Are they violently belligerent? In short, are they harming you in any way? Document THAT, and I'll agree to better policing -- the cannibis isn't the problem, unless you also agree that pubs are the problem, too.