Feels good man

This is the place for topical debate and discussion about anything in the world (non-Queen related).

Re: Feels good man

Postby y2marmar » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:18 pm

So...your view is that heroin is already such a problem, we should just give up and legalise it? WHat about trying to decrease the availability of it? Crack down on the smuggling in to the country. More awareness of it's dangers.
Surely the LAST thing we need is for it to be legalised.
See me, feel me, touch me, heal me...
 
y2marmar
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:56 am
Location: Ireland
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Feels good man

Postby Zappanalé » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:23 pm

So...your view is that heroin is already such a problem, we should just give up and legalise it? WHat about trying to decrease the availability of it? Crack down on the smuggling in to the country. More awareness of it's dangers.
Surely the LAST thing we need is for it to be legalised.


Why am I getting the very same comments again and again with no support for them?

So, we have a dangerous substance called heroin.
It's addictive and could kill.


Your plan is abdicate all control of the drug into criminal hands that can contaminate it, and sell it at massively inflated prices to the vulnerable.

My plan is to closely control is through license, regulated outlets to those in need of it, in hygene and safety.


Well done you.


I'm going to let you in on a secret.
The fact it's hard to transport around countries in order to sell?

That's the reason it's so expensive and such a lucrative business. I take it you would return to 1920's alcohol prohibition?

Right, that's it. The defence fucking rests. Prosecution (prohibitionists) please answer the following:
1) In what ways is prohibition working?
2) Name me one instance in which prohibiting a drug has solved problems associated with it?
3) Can you give me an example of a prohibited drug which is, you know, NOT still available through the black market?

Time for a wake up call everyone: The very model of prohibition being supported here is the very same model that gives the economic incentives to turn to a life of crime.
 
Zappanalé
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Brizzle
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Feels good man

Postby Elessar » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:30 pm

Zappanalé wrote:That chart comes from the very study I cited.

Now, if you compare the drugs danger to their class, you get...


...no correlation at all.


I agree, but we were talking about heroin a moment ago, which is far and away the winner on both axes.

But concentrating on dependence and harmfulness, as well as legal status, misses one important factor - typical pattern of use. A typical heroin user will need increasingly high doses to get the same effect, because the opioid receptors (I can't remember which class) downregulate in response to increased stimulation. This is why 70 year old women with cancer who weigh 8 stone could be taking a dose of morphine that would kill a 14 stone, 30 year old man - they've developed a tolerance and a dependence. There's no analogous downregulation for alcohol, although obviously it can be very addictive. It's a different kind of addiction though, and one that isn't inevitable. Heroin (and nicotine) addictions are actually inevitable, although the user may respond to that addiction in varying ways. Alcohol isn't always addictive, and is often (okay, maybe I should say 'occasionally') drunk socially and with no intention of getting disgustingly drunk. Heroin is never taken socially, and if it was made legal, that wouldn't change because of the method of delivery. An oral form is possible, but I really can't imagine that ever taking off as the new alcohol. And, of course, it is always addictive, and doses always have to be increased. I think the best advantage that legalising all drugs could have would be to turn heroin into a drug for absolute losers.
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10956
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Zappanalé » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:35 pm

But concentrating on dependence and harmfulness, as well as legal status, misses one important factor - typical pattern of use. A typical heroin user will need increasingly high doses to get the same effect, because the opioid receptors (I can't remember which class) downregulate in response to increased stimulation. This is why 70 year old women who weigh 8 stone could be taking a dose of morphine that would kill a 14 stone, 30 year old man - they've developed a tolerance and a dependence.


I passed briefly over this once already, mentioning that it's a common occurance to those released from prison (often on drug offences) to overdose due to having lost their tolerance.

Once more, the answer is regulation. Drug compounds can be distributed (by however is the best model, that book in the OP has a gazillion of 'em) at various strengths for people of various tolerances

Once again, I must deal with the fatal false dichotomy here, the choice between prohibition and a "free for all". That's not the choice at all. "Legalisation" can include a system of strict, licensed retail, or licensed dispensaries only to those in need (like in Californian with the medical pot). Prohibition, on the other hands, is the absolute abdication of all control.
 
Zappanalé
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Brizzle
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Feels good man

Postby Elessar » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:44 pm

Zappanalé wrote:
But concentrating on dependence and harmfulness, as well as legal status, misses one important factor - typical pattern of use. A typical heroin user will need increasingly high doses to get the same effect, because the opioid receptors (I can't remember which class) downregulate in response to increased stimulation. This is why 70 year old women who weigh 8 stone could be taking a dose of morphine that would kill a 14 stone, 30 year old man - they've developed a tolerance and a dependence.


I passed briefly over this once already, mentioning that it's a common occurance to those released from prison (often on drug offences) to overdose due to having lost their tolerance.

Once more, the answer is regulation. Drug compounds can be distributed (by however is the best model, that book in the OP has a gazillion of 'em) at various strengths for people of various tolerances

Once again, I must deal with the fatal false dichotomy here, the choice between prohibition and a "free for all". That's not the choice at all. "Legalisation" can include a system of strict, licensed retail, or licensed dispensaries only to those in need (like in Californian with the medical pot). Prohibition, on the other hands, is the absolute abdication of all control.



Do you really think that would work then? If they're strictly regulated and you need to demonstrate a medical need for them, the black market will still exist, and if there's 'medical' heroin and cocaine and LSD sitting in a safe in a pharmacy, rates of crime related to that will increase hugely! I don't think legalising drugs under strict regulation will necessarily put drug dealers out of business. All it would do would allow drugs to be legally imported or produced, thus making them easier for the drug dealers to procure. I accept that it could have some very good benefits for drug addicts, but we already have similar programmes for them with less-addictive opiates such as methadone.

How about instead of prison sentences or fines for those caught in possession of drugs, we bring in some kind of compulsory rehab?
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10956
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby JLP » Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:17 pm

Without dissing your ideas Martin. If it were legalised, how would those who cannot afford to buy it actually pay for the drug? Would you advocate heroin, cocaine etc being made available on the NHS? If so, how is that going to be funded considering that the NHS currently refuses to pay for certain life prolonging treatments based purely on cost.
Come on you Tigers.
 
JLP
Site Admin
 
User avatar

 

Growing old disgracefully

      
 
Posts: 11149
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 414 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Zappanalé » Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:13 pm

If it were legalised, how would those who cannot afford to buy it actually pay for the drug? Would you advocate heroin, cocaine etc being made available on the NHS? If so, how is that going to be funded considering that the NHS currently refuses to pay for certain life prolonging treatments based purely on cost.


Are we talking about those with preexisting drug dependancy problems, or those without?
 
Zappanalé
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Brizzle
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Feels good man

Postby JLP » Mon Apr 19, 2010 5:13 pm

Zappanalé wrote:
If it were legalised, how would those who cannot afford to buy it actually pay for the drug? Would you advocate heroin, cocaine etc being made available on the NHS? If so, how is that going to be funded considering that the NHS currently refuses to pay for certain life prolonging treatments based purely on cost.


Are we talking about those with preexisting drug dependancy problems, or those without?



Both.My understanding, and bear in mind I do come into contact with drug dependant people in the NHS, is that many of those who are dependant are unable to buy their drugs unless they resort to crime.

Now if these are made available on the NHS then the cost would have to come from within existing budgets. No Government is going to risk raising taxes to fund drugs like Cocaine or Heroin on the NHS, not when cancer drugs are often unavailable.

I know you compare heroin etc to alcohol. If I want alcohol I go out and buy it. Should alcohol be freely available as it to is an addictive drug?
Come on you Tigers.
 
JLP
Site Admin
 
User avatar

 

Growing old disgracefully

      
 
Posts: 11149
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 414 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Delilah » Mon Apr 19, 2010 5:42 pm

Who thinks that legalization of drugs would increase heroin use? Is it just the fact that it's illegal keeping you from shooting up?

Again, any one of us can get our hands on any drug that we want already. The only things that would change are the suppliers and a reduction in crimes.

I get the knee-jerk reaction, and I see that it always goes to heroin. Not pot, not those magic mushrooms, but heroin. The drug that no one in their right mind wants to take anyway. The drug that anyone who wants it can already get it. I might would understand prohibition if it actually prohibited shit, but it doesn't.
 
Delilah
I'm a pretty c**t
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:18 am
Location: USA
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Elessar » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:03 pm

I do basically agree with most of the anti-prohibition arguments, but I just don't see how it could ever happen. There'd surely be a huge surge in drug use immediately after legalisation which itself would probably have a few fairly nasty consequences: Half a dozen overdoses within the first week and there'd be national uproar. I don't doubt that over time it could prove to be a good move, but I don't think any electorate would back it for long enough to find out.

And that brings me on to my second reservation. The people who advocate legalisation. Yes, there are plenty of liberally-minded, scientifically-minded, intelligent folk who advocate legalisation, and fair play to them. But then there are the hoardes of people who just want to smoke pot. The cause they're fighting for isn't one of social justice, but one of getting high. It's the same as when the age of consent for homosexual sex was lowered from 18 to 16, in line with the age of consent for heterosexual sex. Of course that was the correct thing to do. Of course it was. But it's strange how there weren't many 16 year olds campaigning for the right to bum and be bummed - instead it was mostly middle-aged men. See what I'm getting at? Is this about a fairer society, or is it about people wanting their hobby to be made legal and using whatever argument they can think of to justify their position?
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10956
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Delilah » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:30 pm

Elessar wrote:I do basically agree with most of the anti-prohibition arguments, but I just don't see how it could ever happen. There'd surely be a huge surge in drug use immediately after legalisation which itself would probably have a few fairly nasty consequences: Half a dozen overdoses within the first week and there'd be national uproar. I don't doubt that over time it could prove to be a good move, but I don't think any electorate would back it for long enough to find out.

And that brings me on to my second reservation. The people who advocate legalisation. Yes, there are plenty of liberally-minded, scientifically-minded, intelligent folk who advocate legalisation, and fair play to them. But then there are the hoardes of people who just want to smoke pot. The cause they're fighting for isn't one of social justice, but one of getting high. It's the same as when the age of consent for homosexual sex was lowered from 18 to 16, in line with the age of consent for heterosexual sex. Of course that was the correct thing to do. Of course it was. But it's strange how there weren't many 16 year olds campaigning for the right to bum and be bummed - instead it was mostly middle-aged men. See what I'm getting at? Is this about a fairer society, or is it about people wanting their hobby to be made legal and using whatever argument they can think of to justify their position?


I would respond by asking what exactly is the problem with people wanting to smoke pot legally and fighting for that right? The anti-crowd jumps right to heroin, when really it is more about pot. People aren't fighting to legally shoot up. Pot isn't particularly harmful. It's far less harmful than alcohol. And yes, people will get high no matter what the laws, because that's just part of human nature. You won't rid people of the desire to alter their consciousnesses by making laws against it. I find it perfectly natural for people to advocate for the legalization of marijuana.

And no, I don't smoke pot.

Edited to add: I can't quite imagine a bunch of people running out to do heroin. Pot, mushrooms, acid, sure. Heroin? Doubtful. And as meth is something that you can cook up in your own kitchen, I suspect meth use would stay pretty stable. It's mostly the tame ones that people want legalized for selfish reasons, not the life-destroying drugs.
 
Delilah
I'm a pretty c**t
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:18 am
Location: USA
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Elessar » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:46 pm

Why not just legalise marijuana then? That would have far more support, would have far fewer negative consequences, and would be far easier to do. WHy does the whole lot have to be legalised?
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10956
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Belle Leisha » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:55 pm

Zappanalé wrote:That, of course, would be assuming that "class" reflected the danger of the drug. It doesn't. That's one of the causes of the whole mess over at the ACMD recently- they are demanding drugs be classed according to their potential for harm. Alcohol, theoretically, SHOULD be class A.

I am not convinced that addiction is entirely rational behaviour, and also, when dealing with massively inflated prices and a much higher risk of contamination due to the effects of prohibition, it's quite clear external forces are operating on that person. Thus, they cannot be said to be operating "of their own free will". The status quo forces people into poverty and crime by leaving no alternatives open.




No It's just assuming Heroin is right at the top of lists of both most addictive and most dangerous. That is guesswork mind you but I'm pretty confident if it's not the number one, it's up there.

I'm not sure you can excuse drug related crime because drug addiction is caused by a lot of factors. For that argument you can use the comparisson of murder. In huge numbers of cases the murderer is psychotic, thus not really at all responsible for what they've done, but must still be sentenced because of the danger they pose to society. Some people's vices for which they may or may not be to blame, can only possibly harm themselves, drug addiction included. Others feed their addiction by beating up old ladies, I'm not convinced those people would be model members of society and of no threat, were drug prices lowered because prohibition has been removed.

Here's the main point though.

Remember- it's not a throw up between prohibition and total legalization. There are infinite regulatory measures that can be taken. The Blueprint book is full of 'em.

The chance for harm to other people is lessened, but not removed. The current law isn't working, but removing the laws completely could be equally disastrous if not worse. Revising the law, carefully, until it's seen to be working and then continuing to do so, would be the only reasonable way to go.


Of course harm cannot be removed. Nothing is utterly safe, since human stupidity is the only thing as infinite as human creativity. However, even if harm reduction would occur as a result of legalisation and regulation, that' a reason for it, right?


It's not a choice between legalisation and prohibition, no...that was what *I* said, so I'm not sure why you've thrown it in here as if you're telling me! :lol: I said your points were not arguments for legalisation.

I agree that total prohibition as it stands, isn't right. We can usually rest assured that the motive behind the law isn't right, but other issues, the long term effects of alcohol and tobacco, compared to certain other illegal substances, for example, don't match up to a sensible law. Changing the law, but definitely not removing it. To completely legalise the more dangerous end of the drugs spectrum would be disastrous.
But Eden is burning, either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage, of the changing of the guard


Image
 
Belle Leisha
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

I'm a Restless Kinda Girl, There's No Turning Back Now!

      
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:02 am
Location: Birmingham, UK
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Feels good man

Postby Delilah » Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:36 pm

Elessar wrote:Why not just legalise marijuana then? That would have far more support, would have far fewer negative consequences, and would be far easier to do. WHy does the whole lot have to be legalised?


Why just marijuana? Why not 'shrooms and acid? Why not opium?
I just wonder if the "War on Drugs" has succeeded in making it more difficult to get one's hands on any drug. It seems to me that we're blowing billions of dollars on a completely inept program. Innocent people are slaughtered by the thousands due to these drugs being illegal, and these drugs are still all readily available. It ain't hard to get them. All that death, all that money, and for what?
 
Delilah
I'm a pretty c**t
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:18 am
Location: USA
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Feels good man

Postby Sir Didymus » Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:38 pm

Elessar wrote:
Zappanalé wrote:

Except alcohol isn't quite so habbit forming as heroin, now, is it? It can fuck up lives, but its nowhere near the levels that most Class A drugs do. And its not the legality that's the issue there, but the drug itself.


Actually, it is. The difference is, it's not being forced into users at inflated prices by violent criminals. Alcohol is much addictive than many illegal drugs.


True, but heroin beats it.

Image


Interesting. I'm surprised by alcohol being so high on the list.

To be honest, when I get drunk, I get really drunk. I'm a spirits drinker, so its usually rum and vodka when I'm out, and a house party will involve pints of concoctions. Last year I invented a drink that was mostly Relentless energy drink, mixed with Lambs Navy Rum, Smirnoff Vodka, Jaagermeister, Jack Daniels and cherry red absinthe. Fuck knows what the actual percentages were, but they were flooring people.

Yet, at no point do I wake up after a party and NEED to drink more. I never get hangovers, and I can go for weeks, even months without drinking. If I was asked to give it up now, I could do without a doubt.

Something tells me that given tobacco, weed or anything stronger, that probably wouldn't be the case...

Am I some kind of super mutant? :shock:
"Years will come, years will go, and politicians will do f*** all to make the world a better place. But all over the world, young men and young women will always dream dreams and put those dreams into song."
The Count
 
Sir Didymus
Suburban Wonderfox
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2439
Images: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Manchester, mostly.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 67 times

PreviousNext

Return to Views Of The World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests