"Alcohol and drug use is a medical issue as opposed to a character or moral issue and there is a national movement to develop and adopt a 'best practice' approach to addressing it within the scope of routine patient care," said Dr. Katherine McQueen, InSight medical director and assistant professor of medicine at [the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston].That's a bit of truth you hear frequently from the medical community, but almost never in the political arena.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Baylor medical researchers: Substance abuse a medical, not character or moral issue
Here's a heartening quote I agree with from the Sherman Herald-Democrat ("Alcohol and drug use is a medical issue," Sept. 28):
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
37 comments:
Yeah no doubt about it, back when I was smoking dope, with Led Zep cranked up, partying with friends and trying to lay every female available I was having an extreme medical problem. Give me a break.
In your case, poor character, then. ;)
Pot smoking isn't the same as cocaine or heroin addiction, or even alcoholism. Pot is not physically addictive.
That said, because marijuana has medical uses - including for symptoms of depression and anxiety - it is sometimes used to self-medicate habitually. But if social drinking is not a character flaw, social pot smoking shouldn't be, either because it's less likely to lead to addiction. If you didn't hurt anyone listening to Zeppelin and chasing skirt, who cares what you smoked? It's abuse, not mere use, that causes all the problems - that, and the government's decision to force consumers to purchase the product through black markets instead of legal ones.
You can drink, but DWIs are punished severely and kids can't purchase it. That's what they should do with pot. Booze and harder drugs are where the question of medical or moral comes in. There, addiction is a real problem and the line becomes less clear.
SIMPLY AMASING!!!
It may take time and even with our governments and all those who feed of this CASH COW and it's power with their SELF SERVING MANIPULATED AGENDAS, THE TRUTH IS STARTING TO COME OUT!
There may come a time in this country "" WE RETURN TO "" where PEOPLE MIND THEIR OWN DAM* BUSINESS. Where Americans are held accountable for their ACTIONS, NOT OTHERS PERSONAL BELIEFS AND BIGOTED BIASES!!!
The only ones against the decriminalizing or even legalizing pot, are those who believe they have the right over others bodies! As well as the right to FORCE their beliefs on how people should live on others. And saddest of all are those who make a living of this CASH COW """ ON BOTH SIDES OF THE LAW """!
Change is coming, sadly it will not replace the lives ruined and lost nor the families terrorized and destroyed!!!
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
I agree Pot is relatively innoculous. But it does rob one of motivation and caring. I can testify that most any drug can be used to a point safely. That is drug use as opposed to abuse. Abuse does not happen because your walking down the street and are invaded by some virus or other germ. It does indeed happen because of a character or moral issue/defect. I've seen people shoot heroin smoke crack use meth and all the other bad stuff but know not to do it to much. Still stupid yeah but not a medical issue
The difference between 'use' and 'abuse' for some might be a genetic or otherwise predetermined disposition for addiction that's beyond the addict's control. Maybe you have no trouble stopping after two drinks, but my system craves more. Why some people become addicts and some don't is indeed probably a medical issue.
BTW, Celtic: As an admitted past offender, do you think your life, or society, would have been improved by your long-term incarceration for your drug use/character defects?
At the risk of seeming Darwinian, there's a reason why we don't lock up every single person with a drug problem (including alcohol, of course) in America and put them through rehab.
Aside from the simple impossibility of doing so, it has to do with a little something called responsible behavior. You know, the kind that is assumed that every adult is cognizant of? The kind which makes living in a (putatively) free society worthwhile?
Those that haven't learned that lesson - or seemingly, cannot learn it - usually suffer one form of punishment or another for that failure. Sometimes, that punishment can be inflicted by Mother Nature, Herself, courtesy of doing something stupid and paying for it with your life. IMHO, OD'ing on a known killer such as alcohol, heroin or cocaine, after having been told of their potential lethality, falls under that category.
As has been pointed out, use does not equal abuse. But no matter how intellectually dishonest it is, we always find those favoring drug prohibition conflating the two into one. Such a conflation, however, takes the wind out of their sails when you point out the same goes for alcohol. Then, according to the prohibs, their 'social drinking' becomes legitimate. The hypocrisy should be self-evident.
So, I'd rather live in a country where I run the occasional risk of crossing the path of a drunk or a tweaker or a heroin junkie or a _____ (fill in the blank) who hasn't learned those lessons yet, than live in some kind of Orwellian Nanny-State where every single possibility to responsibly exercise free will in living has been regulated or prohibited out of existence. Punish the jerks, yes, but leave the grown-ups alone.
--BTW, Celtic: As an admitted past offender, do you think your life, or society, would have been improved by your long-term incarceration for your drug use/character defects?--
Had I been a dealer, had I been intentionaly giving heroin away to develop an addict, to bilk money from later as many do. My life be better? Oviously not I would be in prison, but society yes. And had the dealers back then, knew that getting caught would have costed them their lives, then I would be better off now, as I would never have wasted so many years on pot and acid as it would not have been available. At least not at a price I could have afforded.
Interesting, Celtic - the DEALERS were to blame for your decision to do drugs? Takke responsibility for your own shit.
Less than a gram of controlled substance is a felony, even for possession, not just dealing. Obviously we'd all be better off if you had a felony, couldn't get a job, etc., right? By far, most people in prison for drugs were convicted of possession, not dealing. If you think YOU deserved the chance to recover from your mistakes, why would you begrudge them the same chance? Oh yeah ... hypocrisy.
Addictive, not addictive, no matter what the substance pot vs. meth vs. alcohol blah blah....Why are we not looking at the fact that the government want too much control over us and the habits we have. Why not make all drugs legal for adults over the age of 18 or 21. People don't seem to think about the fact that drug laws didn't exist until the 1920's or so and it seems to me that the more laws we pass concerning drugs the more people are using them. For the most part I don't think that legalizing drugs will make people more likely to abuse them. If we didn't spend so much money locking people up for drug charges we could use that money to fund free treatment for those who do use and then abuse them. I'm not saying that using drugs is good for a person but why do we let our government have a sayso in the matter? Baffles me.
--By far, most people in prison for drugs were convicted of possession, not dealing.--
So your saying that the majority of people in prison for drugs are there for having less than a gram of a controlled substance. They are there for simple possesion? I hope not as you would be either a liar or a brain washed fool.
Dealers were not the cause of my decision, they enabled my decision. And I suppose that at 16 you were perfectly responsible. I suppose you'll say that any 16 your old should be able to face the tidal wave of media do it messages that flooded all life in the 60's.
And eventually by 19 I did wise up. I joined the Military. Most of my friends from that time are now in the pen either for dealing or for killing each other over drugs. A few others wised up also.
And I'm not begrudging anyone's mistakes. I'm trying to present a situation that would prevent them from making such mistakes. Anything wrong with that?
Celtic, did you have any drug education in public school? If you were in the public education system anywhere from the late 1960's onwards you had to have, as it was part of the curriculum. So you were exposed to information - however slanted it might have been - regarding illict drugs and their effects.
And you chose to do them, anyway. You could have done a Nancy Reagan and 'just said no'...but despite the anti-drug education, you said yes. Should everyone else be held hostage to your seeming inability to control yourself?
If people persist in drinking themselves to death, society generally allows them to. Why? Because it would be far more damaging to society to engage in the kind of Nanny-State-ism that you seem to be advocating.
(To me, this is no different than saying to the government "Please take from me and everyone else the opportunity to make responsible decisions and live by their consequences, please, please, please!" And just where does that kind of thing stop? No place you want to be, as any escapee from a Communist system of government could tell you from personal experience.)
Lest we forget, this was tried once before (alcohol Prohibition) and is universally recognized as having been a serious mistake. Drug prohibition, following in the footsteps of the previous prohibition, is proving to be an even greater mistake.
I don't drink alcohol and don't like to be around people who do, for various painful, personal reasons I won't detail here. But for all my dislike of it, I would never in a million years call for its banning again, because I know that, just as with illicit drugs, doing so would lead to much worse tragedies than the personal ones I've seen it exact upon people who've used it to excess. The same kind of tragedies this idiotic Drugwar is exacting on our society right now.
If you can't control your appetites, then abstain. But don't demand that a grown man eat pablum because the baby can't have steak.
A couple of fact clarifications: 1) less than a gram of controlled substance is a felony in Texas for everything EXCEPT marijuna; small amounts of pot are a misdemeanor, and 2) it's absolutely correct that most drug arrests are for possession, not dealing. In 2005, e.g., "Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 88 percent some 696,074 Americans were charged with possession only."
Grits, you in typical liberal fashion attemp to respond to a question with a disconnected truth.
The statement was made by anonymous that the majority of people in prison for drugs are there for simple possesion not dealing. You respond with, and substitute, "arrest" for "prison."
Obviously any one doing almost anything registered as a felony will be arrested. But you know as well as me that those with small amounts of whatever are released and go right back to it again. Even many dealers with small amounts are released.
--kaptinemo said Lest we forget, this was tried once before (alcohol Prohibition) and is universally recognized as having been a serious mistake. Drug prohibition, following in the footsteps of the previous prohibition, is proving to be an even greater mistake.--
Yeah no doubt about it the people and the families of people killed by killed by drunks on the road and in crimes all agree that it was a bad Idea. Definetly universal. And you want to add thousands more deaths, just for the do your own thing liberal mentality. Or are you one of the ones who might make alot of money off it? Just thinking of the fun not the consequences. Anyway this thinking is crazy our kids have enough poison easily avilable to them with alchohol and tobacco. They don't more. We need to execute drug dealers.
Celtic, if you ever passed a joint you're a "dealer" under Texas law. It's called "delivery."
If the Google site search were working I'd find the exact statistic, which I've quoted before on Grits, but it's true for prison, too: most in prison for drugs are there for possession, and a large number of those are for less than a gram of powder. Current laws are making the problem worse, not better, no matter how bad you think the drugs are that you tried but no one else should ever use.
There are dangerous criminal gangs involved in drug smuggling who the government cannot ignore and must combat. But when we equate those criminal gangs with everyday addicts battling what's at bottom a health condition, the laws harm society more than they protect it.
Celtic, first off, you don't know me, and to try to smear me as a 'liberal' is what's called in the debate business an ad hominem attack. It's usually the last move of someone who's run out of ammunition in a debate. (For your information, I consider myself a Goldwater conservative of the widest, deepest stripe.)
You tend to forget that there was only a 13 year period in which alcohol Prohibition took place. Meaning, that many of the people who first voted for it later voted against it when the time came to retire it.
In other words, the vast majority of the same people who thought it was a good idea later scrapped it. They did so knowing what kind of a mess it had created. They did so knowing that people would still face the possibility of dying of alcoholism, or dying of vehicular manslaughter, or the chance of dying from an alcohol-fueled murder, etc. existed and could possibly increase as the population increased. Credit them with some intelligence; they knew what was at stake. As do today's drug law reformers.
I repeat what so obviously has irked you: If you can't control your own appetites, you have no business engaging in behavior that threatens your self-control. That should be obvious. But if others can handle the responsibility inherent in being a grown-up, and use various intoxicants responsibly, as the vast majority do with alcohol, then leave them be. They shouldn't be forced into the same behavioral straightjacket that your psyche demands you live with. Because the kind of Government-Knows-Best thinking you seem to be advocating is what has landed us in this DrugWar mess to begin with.
No real conservative would put up with that crap...
kaptinemo please keep in mind that I did not bring prohibition of alchohol in to this debate. I only used the example of the deaths and social problems of alchohol and tobacco as an example of what will happen if drugs vastly more dangerous such as as meth and heroin ect are legalised. The only statement I've made anywhere as to law and booze was that I would not allow it to be used as an excuse for any illegal activety. No one would get a lighter sentence because they were drunk. A drunk who kills a van load of people as has happened many time would be charged with 1st degree premeditated murder and treated accordingly.
If these dangerous drugs get legal as many here seem to want then get ready. This country will slide into anarchy. And until that point you will be getting the crap taxed out of you to pay for all the social problems that will develop. It's an insane idea.
And don't try to tell me Goldwater would be for this. He was a great man.
Celtic, the very crux of the drug laws revolve around the concepts underpinning prohibition.You can't swing the proverbial dead cat without hitting it. Whether it is alcohol, other drugs, contraceptives, anything one group or another blames for society's failures, the modus operandi is the same. Ban the substance so that people won't have access to it legally. Which of course, is simple-minded to the point of being moronic, as it has never worked, even in the most repressive of societies. History makes that clear.
As to your claim that society would collapse should the other drugs become legal, need I remind you that from the beginning of the Republic until 1914, some very 'dangerous drugs' such as opium, morphine, cocaine, etc. as well as cannabis were widely available over the counter for the asking, no prescriptions needed. Society was hardly in a state of collaspe then. On the contrary; Americans were far freer then than now, simply because there weren't armies of bureaucrats feverishly devising new laws to ensnare otherwise honest people, children weren't menaced by illicit drug dealers because the breed had no reason to exist (until the laws made the trade profitable, that is) and drug addiction, if not cured, was cheaply maintained because the cost of those drugs were not dictated by the black market as they are now. Compare that with today, and you see they didn't have the problems then we have now. Because of drug prohibition and the laws creating it.
As to Barry Goldwater's supporting the idea behind cannabis re-legalization, I suggest that you might find this Google Search string of some interest. Read a few of the articles in that search string. Then tell me that he didn't favor it WHEN HE WAS ONE OF THE VOICES WHO SPOKE IN SUPPORT OF THE PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION 200.
Yes, he was indeed a great man, and as such, knew that it was individual liberties which formed the bedrock of the greatness of America, and anything that encroached upon those liberties was inherently destructive of them. The drug laws of this country are just such destructive influences. He stood against them, as do I. As would any true conservative. It's the hallmark of modern liberals who want to use the Gub'mint to be a surrogate Mommy and Daddy and tell everybody how to ive and what to do. It was the progenitors of the modern liberals, the so-called 'progressives', that initiated the DrugWar as we know it today, because they felt the average person didn't know their arse from a hole in the ground and had to be led about by the nose. And we have been paying for that arrogance ever since. The DrugWar has proven to be too high a price for it.
Rusty made this comment to me a few days ago under the grits post Mexican Meth.
--Kill drug dealers, did you know those countries THAT DO, or used to. Had and have to kill more EVERY YEAR, FACT!!!—
I challenged him to point me to one credible source that proved killing dealers caused a rise in drug use among the general population. He failed to respond, because he can’t do it. There are several countries that do kill dealers and have basically zero drug use problems. Sure there will always be a small hardcore group that will continue but the social ill’s we face today would virtually be gone.
You said
--anything one group or another blames for society's failures, the modus operandi is the same. Ban the substance so that people won't have access to it legally. Which of course, is simple-minded to the point of being moronic, as it has never worked, even in the most repressive of societies. History makes that clear--
This is the same kind of logic Nambla would love to see adopted. It could be said about anything disgusting or out of the norm. History does not make this clear. Not enforcing laws i.e. not making the punishment fit the crime is the problem. A good example is speeding. The laws are not meant to stop speeding, they are meant to be a source of revenue. There are many counties in this country that depend on these fines to stay afloat. It’s the same with drugs. To many people, government included make to much money from the trade.
You talk about there not being laws against many drugs prior to the turn of the century and that is true. In fact I think that prohibition banned many drugs along with alcohol. When repealed only alcohol was legalized. The point is the laws were put into effect because it was recognized that society was beginning to suffer. Effects of some drugs not fully realized, prior were beginning to be understood.
Tell me one prosperous country that has legal meth, crack, pcp, and heroin or other opiates. I know pot is basically harmless, definitely the most innocuous of all drugs legal or otherwise, but it does still have ill effects.
And crime won’t stop if addictive drugs are legal. Addicts will still need money to buy it. Do you want it to be free also? An open air market with flashing neon “free drugs here”?
Are you with that dumass LEAP organization that propagandizes that it will then be unavailable to kids if legal? Hell, we all know they can’t get tobacco and alcohol under our legal system don’t we?
It’s insane dude, that’s all I can tell you. But I will agree with one thing, if we aren’t going to enforce drug laws, or any law for that matter then that particular law should be repealed. And there are many that should be repealed. But drugs are not one of them.
Like I said before execute dealers and do it publicly and painfully and I guarantee the drug problem would disappear overnight. I don’t know if you read all my posts under the Mexican Meth post but you should.
Whig--Boy aren't you the rocket scientist. And your the liar too. Cut and paste anything I've wrote about "the extreme dangers of cannabis,". Are you so stoned that you read meth crack heroin and see pot?
Loose caracter because, I, when young did drugs and even now like girls? Jeeze imagine that. Lie to them? Where did that come from? Another time lapse? Guess you never had sex stoned. Makes that much better too, in case you don't know. I've smoked a ton of pot in most ports of the world. I've got the bad memory to (or Lost) prove it.
I've not said anything about being against medical use either. Cut and paste that also liar.
--Actually, you are wrong even about that. Cannabis can treat deception, it is that powerful. It makes you conscious of your own inadequacies and helps you to correct them, to grow as an individual and to become a better person.--
Christ you sound like a cultists. Take a clue from someone who's been there with Pot lay off for awhile the real world isn't that bad.
Celtic, regarding your belief that nations that execute drug users and dealers don't experience increases in drug use and trafficking, you might want to look at this China has experienced a 12 fold increase in drug use since 1990, despite making annual public spectacles of executing drug users and dealers in stadiums. Evidently, it's not working.
Now, as to this:
This is the same kind of logic Nambla would love to see adopted.
This is what is known as conflation, and I mentioned this above in an earlier posting. It is intellectually dishonest to claim a concensual crime such as drug usage is tantamount to a moral crime such as pedophilia. Such is unworthy of you.
You talk about there not being laws against many drugs prior to the turn of the century and that is true. In fact I think that prohibition banned many drugs along with alcohol. When repealed only alcohol was legalized. The point is the laws were put into effect because it was recognized that society was beginning to suffer. Effects of some drugs not fully realized, prior were beginning to be understood.
Are you aware that there was a racial component to the drug laws, long since forgotten but quite evident back in the day that they were first proposed? That the justification for the laws had little to do with actual physical harm caused by the targeted drugs, but purported harm caused by the users of those drugs? Users which were usually (conveniently) stereotyped as being members of 'lesser' races, such as African-Americans, Hispanics and Asians? You might want to look here and here for written and spoken statements by the progenitors of our drug laws to understand their motivations. It becomes quite evident that public health was not their number one concern, but continued oppression of what they viewed as dangerously inassimilable minorites who couldn't 'handle' their intoxicants. And the only intoxicant that was new back then was cocaine in the hydrochloride form; the addictive properties of opium had been known for centuries, but the drug itself had few regulations priot to 1914.
Tell me one prosperous country that has legal meth, crack, pcp, and heroin or other opiates.
Excluding the drugs PCP, meth & crack, which did not esxist then, I'll provide you with the answer no prohibitionist wants to hear: THIS ONE. THIS NATION
Consider how much of the national treasury has been urinated down a fiscal toilet these past 20-30 years courtesy of this DrugWar, and then think about the time prior to 1914 before the first Federal drug laws were formed. Taxes in the US were very low. The currency was worth far more than it is today (a 20 dollar bill bought one ounce of gold; inflation has caused that same ounce to rise to 600+ dollars) Government was small and largely unobtrusive. The middle class was on the rise. Standards of living were rising as well. The nation was enjoyinga degree of prosperity that has seldom been duplicated save during and after WWII.
But what do we have today? Well, for starters, we don't have the money that was pee'd away that could be used for so many things, such as repairing our crumbling infrastructures. We could have used that money also to make an Apollo class type project for energy independence that would have freed us from having to spend so much and send so much money overseas. I could go on, but you get the gist. We were in many ways a richer country, and not just monetarily but civilly too; government knew it's place and didn't intrude in the daily lives of its' citizens as it so arrogantly does today. Mainly thanks to the weakening of the Bill of Rights...and that thanks to the DrugWar.
The DrugWar has pauperized us in more ways than one, allowing for inroads and encroachments upon those very liberties I mentioned above regarding Mr. Goldwater's philosophy. What we have been doing has not worked at all, and just sprays gasoline on the fire, not water. It's long past time to fight this fire the right way, by choking off it's 'oxygen' courtesy of depriving the cartels of their profits the only way that will be effective, and that's to eliminate the profit motive. And that means legalization and regulation. Cut organized crime off at the knees.
Or we can continue to hear their laughter at our foolishness for playing into their hands with our posturing and our faux moralizing in maintaining their gravy train, as we do now.
kaptinemo said-- Well good responses. But they will take us away from the subject.
I unfortunately have no time for it now as I'm going to the balloon festival in Albuquerque NM tomorrow.
I regret you brought up the racial content as I am well aware of that. I will have much to say. Much that will get biggot hurled at me. But I will get back tues. Good debate thanks.
celtictexan,
We have many more discussion to come. You have been provided with MORE THAN ENOUGH TRUTH! Yet you still refuse to face the REALITIES WE LIVE WITH!
Our young and old a like, MANY OF THEM INNOCENT VICTIMS! Are being killed by "" BOTH "" the good guys and the bad guys, AND NEITHER ARE BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE, FACT!! Our homes are no longer our castles free from invasions and abuse! They are being abused AT WILL by the very PUBLIC SERVANTS sworn to protect and serve!
Law Enforcement has been corrupted by this failed policy. To the point of turning in to profiteers using forfeiture laws to subsidize there own agendas, FACT!
We as tax payers grant budgets for our law enforcement. Yet when do we get a refund from the MILLIONS confiscated through forfeitures?? When will their next budget request be down sized due to the PROFITS MADE??? Is this a path we even want to be going down??? If they don't get the budgets they want, will they just increase their profiteering???
You are either a part of the solution or part of the problem! You support a known failure of a policy THAT HAS NEVER ACCOMPLISHED "" EVEN "" ONE OF IT'S STATED GOALS!!! WHY???
As for executing drug dealers, you might want to look at MEXICO. They have been executing EACH OTHER IN PUBLIC FOR YEARS. Do you really think these thugs WHO ARE KILLING PEOPLE NOW, will accept your idea without KILLING OTHERS BEFORE THEY GO DOWN??? WHAT WOULD THEY HAVE TO LOSE???
The bottom line is supply and demand. As long as there is a demand somebody will take the risks to profit from it! And when the laws and punishment are based on biases and manipulated fear to trample over our CONSTITUTION AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, your right WE HAVE THE WORLD WE LIVE IN TODAY!
As for heroin, you might want to look at what Sweden has been doing for the last several years!
And as for Barry Goldwater, my father introduced us when I was 17 and I had the pleasure meeting him several times. As well as other state officials like Bruce Babbitt. And you can bet INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS was high on Barry’s LIST!!!
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
whig,
ct reminds me of a person who quits smoking, you know the ones who go OVERBOARD on everybody else for his own weakness. The kind that believe everybody should be held to his standards because of his weakness, NOT THEIR OWN!
I have debated with this type MANY TIMES. More often than not when they can not support their position with fact and the realities we live with, they revert to insults and anger to avoid the truth.
One has to expect this kind of response after YEARS AND YEARS of propaganda and manipulated facts and truths. And those of us WHO ACTUALLY did fight this war, and did cause UNWARRANTED harm to others, KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO FACE """ YOURSELF """ WITH THE TRUTH. It an't easy, by any stretch of the imagination!
But VERY FEW have remained as blind to the truth after discussing the issue using facts and reality. I believe he will come around, he may never agree on all of what we feel is the answer, WHICH IS HIS RIGHT!! But time and time again when he sees the unrealistic and merit less position he supporting, THE TRUTH WILL LEAD HIM OUT!
The great thing I see, is ALL the excellent responses and open dialog, "" FROM SO MANY DIFFERENT AMERICANS ""!!! Only with this openness and continued discussion will we find the answers to our problems. Lets give the Brother a chance to argue his beliefs, and each time his position ISN'T supportable with facts. Will be another step closer he will come to learning to address our problems without the taught biases, fear and preconditioned thinking!
I still got hope for the Brother, I know he lacks a lot of class and common cilvility. Time will tell if that is just his fear lashing out, or just a personal flaw???
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
Rusty, we were all taken by this fraud of a DrugWar, every last one of us.
The sad fact is that the truth of the futility of ther DrugWar was evident to our so-called 'leaders' long ago, at least as far back as 1920. But for a myriad of reasons they chose to maintain the farce, and compound it. Some for the most despiccable of reasons: they benefited from it at the expense of everyone else. Which included the cynical and Machiavellian wasting of the lives of the police and special agents they set to do a task they knew was impossible from the beginning.
When you follow the money, you inevitably find that politics did indeed make for strange bedfellows. The fact is that the very pols who rant and rave so much about illegal drugs need the dealers to deflect public criticism of their own failures as much as the dealers need the pols to keep the laws in place to generate obscenely inflated profits from ordinarly cheap agricultural products and their equally cheap derivatives. Symbiosis, thy name is DrugWar.
Hey Rusty, no offense but is there any way you could reduce your capitalization use? In Internet parlance it's considered yelling, and most of your posts contain a lot of caps.
grits,
OOPS, sorry!
Rusty
ko,
WELL SAID! Sorry about the caps, but I have not figured out how to make the letter in bold print , yet?
You pretty much covered it all, and nothing but the truth as well! The thing that bothers me most, is when our people are given the truth and realities we live in, the overwhelming majority AGREE this policy is wrong! Yet nothing happens??? I understand it will take time to wean people off this cash cow. But with each day another American family is terrorized and abused and many time destroyed! ALL FOR WHAT????
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
First of all let's all stick to the subject, which was my original post's to Grits Mexican Meth post. Lets leave pot out, which regardless of what Whig has said I've not really responded to except to say it is the least harmful of all drugs.
Alcohol and tobacco are Genie's already out of the bottle. I'll only use those to as an example of how ridiculous it is to say that legalizing other drugs would keep them out of the hands of children. Anyone who believes that government control has prevented kids from getting it, are blind to facts.
Lets stick to the drugs that we all know to be very dangerous and/or addicting. Meth, Heroin, other opiates, Ecstasy, crack, cocaine, legal medical drugs that can be abused, etc.etc.
kaptinemo said... Celtic, did you have any drug education in public school?--
A little back ground about me. I quit high school in 1966, my freshman year. I'm not stupid but I was a smartass, know it all punk. Up till that time the only drug education I had gotten was about pot and at that time I hadn't even tried it as it was not available. I'd never even seen it. I didn't drink either as I didn't like beer. I use to get to drive the best cars in town, as people would pick me up to drive while they got drunk. (Oh! I forgot government control of alcohol prevents it from getting to kids.)
Then the 60's revolution really kicked in. Turn on, tune out, Timothy Leary, acid all that. So gradually we all became "hippy's". Pot and acid started to become plentiful. Instead of all the puking and fighting I'd seen with booze, there was laughing, eating good music, easy girls. I didn't smoke pot at first either but eventually joined in. Even started doing acid. Then came the bad stuff heroin, meth. (we called it crank). Things went bad again, only worse than alcohol, people were shooting up, over dosing, threatening lives, stealing for money. I knew when to get away. I joined the Navy Dec. 1970. I got my first formal drug education there. Except for the obviously false stuff they said about pot, the rest was true. I kenw it true from my own experience. I continued to smoke pot for awhile even after I got in the Navy. Never touched acid again.
Then three tours of Nam. I saw the utter devastation of so many there, from the cheap and pure stuff provided by the NVA. I witnessed a tragedy caused by that, took on a collateral job as drug counselor and am where I am now on this issue.
Also while in I gained discipline thanks to some older and wiser men that knew what to do with smart ass punks. They beat the crap out of me a few times. I got my high school diploma some college and many various technical degrees/licenses. Short history of me.
Jess said...I'm not saying that using drugs is good for a person but why do we let our government have a sayso in the matter? Baffles me.
Jess said...
Addictive, not addictive, no matter what the substance pot vs. meth vs. alcohol blah blah....Why are we not looking at the fact that the government want too much control over us and the habits we have.
kaptinemo said...Because the kind of Government-Knows-Best thinking you seem to be advocating is what has landed us in this DrugWar mess to begin with.No real conservative would put up with that crap...
kaptinemo said...It's long past time to fight this fire the right way, by choking off it's 'oxygen' courtesy of depriving the cartels of their profits the only way that will be effective, and that's to eliminate the profit motive. And that means legalization and regulation.
Anonymous said... There, addiction is a real problem and the line becomes less clear.
This doesn't make any sense to me. I agree with the government knows best statement and that it was the liberal progressives that got us into this mess but, you want to turn control over drug's to the government? All of you, but Jess especially doesn't seem to recognize that legalization gives all the power to the government. That is crazy.
We all agree that the profit motive is what drives the drug trade. So what? You all want to give that power to the government? Have you any idea how much power the government would have if half the population were addicted to something the government controls. Have any of you ever watched Dune?
Have any of you ever watched "Requiem for a dream"? One of the best anti drug movies ever made. (If you haven't seen it watch it before you respond to me). Don't you realize that the government would become the dealer, giving out a "real good taste" if you do what they want?
Rusty tell me exactly how are things going to change when Phillip Morris or Budweiser or whoever is manufacturing and selling heroin or whatever. What are we going to have Crack next to the Jack Daniels?
Anonymous don't just say addiction makes things less clear. Think about government control over addicts. Just like tobacco look at the profit the government rakes in through taxes by subsidizing farmers to grow it, then regulating and taxing it to addicts. How much tax money is spent on treating them when the lung cancer and emphysema and cirrhosis kick in? Power is what this would mean to government. And just like tobacco, and alcohol, to hell with peoples lives and health.
kaptinemo said...But for a myriad of reasons they chose to maintain the farce, and compound it. Some for the most despiccable of reasons: they benefited from it at the expense of everyone else.
And what? You want to let them benefit more. The government, the insurance companies, the health industry, the lawyers.
Rusty said...The thing that bothers me most, is when our people are given the truth and realities we live in, the overwhelming majority AGREE this policy is wrong!
Yeah it's wrong. I agree if your talking about the drug war as currently fought. The thing is you want to legalize it which would stop nothing. I want to end it.
kaptinemo I read your link about China. I see nothing about executions. China has always been a hotbed for the opiates. Remember the opium wars. Britain's effort to control China by controlling opium? The grab for power and money you all want to give our government.I also see the same fallacy of providing methadone to addicts. In fact the article seems to describe more about China being a conduit for opiates and meth. Probably to the USA. Chinese immigrants if you all will be honest, were the source for opiates in this country in the beginning. And if you all will be honest almost all our drug problems are the result of foreign governments like China and Mexico and many others profiting off of it instead of trying to stop it. Our own government has allowed Afghanistan to grow it's largest poppy crop in years. Something the Taliban stopped to a degree. They allowed and controlled just what they needed to profit from us.
kaptinemo said... Excluding the drugs PCP, meth & crack, which did not esxist then, I'll provide you with the answer no prohibitionist wants to hear: THIS ONE. THIS NATION
Your response on this doesn't cut it Kap. As I said the Chinese were the first to introduce opiates to this country in any mass amounts. Before that as far as I know there were no drugs outside of alcohol and tobacco. Funny though all the liberal hatred directed at whites for introducing alcohol to Indians. As you said the others weren't here in those supposedly prosperous times (if you were rich they were prosperous). I wonder what would have happened if they had been here?
Cocaine in a more natural form came later. Everyone knows why Coke has the name it does. Then it was learned how to make it more pure and the problems started. It became dangerous. Morphine's (again from the Chinese) good effects were recognized and widely prescribed, then the bad also were recognized. I really don't know about pot can't seem to find allot about it's origins in this country except that until the 60's it was mostly confined to Black's.
So tell me a prosperous country "today" where these drugs are legal.
Rusty I'm still waiting for an answer to where in the world dealers are executed and the population still has a drug problem?
I still say when it comes to dealers kill them. Fast and painfully and publicly. And yeah it comes from my own experience(the ex smoker example) and more importantly the desire to protect the kids of this country. Any of you really want to take the chance that your kids will be so supremely mature that they will refuse dangerous drugs? Do any of you care about other peoples kids?
Do any of you care about the homeless, mostly there because of drug abuse?
We all recognise the current drug war a failure. Let's end it by real punishment not a huge turn over of power to the government.
I would encourage you all to read a couple of posts of mine at http://www.ivorydome.us/ also. It's not my blog I just write there. Look up "Whatever happened to real democrats" part 1 and 2.
The balloon festival was awesome by the way. Rain and wind messed it up allot for me but still Sat. morn I got to see a mass ascension. About 200 hot air balloons left the ground at about the same time. Quite a site.
ct,
Good post, a little bit to much self importance and lack of accepting of others opinion, IMHO, but other than that pretty good.
First off, YOUR NOT the only one who has lived and seen the horrors of drugs UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL!
I was 13 when I watched the biggest baddest man I knew shoot black tar heroin. His head hit the table and mucus ran out his nose! I thought he was DEAD! Scared the crap out of me, being 13 I didn't know if I should run, call the police for an ambulance or what. Then I noticed he was still breathing! About 15 minutes later he came back to, his first words were "" man one day your going to have to try this stuff"" ! I looked at him and screamed ARE YOU STUPID??? I could have did anything I wanted to you, ANYTHING! And you paid to do that to yourself, HOW STUPID! At 13 I knew hard drugs were exactly what they are JUNK!
But see this is were you and I part ways. After fighting this war and seeing that we are doing more harm than the drugs are, I WOKE UP! The realities are, those that want to do drugs WILL AND ARE, FACT!!! The other reality is who is to say they can't or shouldn't?? Who own your body, the government??? That is why I believe we should hold people accountable for their "" ACTIONS "" not their personal and private choices in life, PERIOD! And offer help to those who let their choices get the better of them! Not kick in doors destroy whole families and terrorize and kill INNOCENT MEN, WOMEN and BABIES, and then say nobody is accountable BECAUSE WE ARE FIGHTING THE WAR ON DRUGS, and mistakes happen, OOPS BS!!!!!!!!
Not to mention the damage we have done to the Constitution and Civil Liberties and the lost respect and lost honor of those in law enforcement!!!!
Look in the Middle East and Asia for countries THAT USED TO AND SOME STILL ARE KILLING DRUG DEALERS! AND THEY ALL STILL HAVE DRUG PROBLEMS, FACT!
Look at Sweden and their heroin program. Before they started it, they were losing an average of 112 a year to overdoses and disease was ramped, and the crime rate from heroin related was 38%. Today since starting the program the death rate is almost NON EXSISTANT, the crime rate fell to 6%, and due to clean needles the disease rate has dropped tremendously, FACT!
You support a situation that is driving our kids away from pot, to drugs that are killing them, FACT!!
None of us want our kids to do anything, BUT JUST LIKE "" US "" that is not a realistic goal! And with our zeal and IGNORANCE we are driving them and ADULTS to hard drugs, HOW STUPID IS THAT!!!
In a FREE country people are going to do things YOU AND I don't like nor agree with, FACT! And all the laws and BS will never stop this REALITY, FACT!
Take the profit and control away from the DRUG DEALERS, PERIOD! And if we fail to hold our government accountable to us, THEN WE DESERVE WHAT WE GET!!!
Live and let live, and everybody MIND YOUR OWN DAM* BUSINESS! If a person lets their life choices get the better of them, HELP THEM , don't terrorize and destroy and kill them or their families! When they go to court for letting their choice affect others, THEN THEIR CHOICES ARE """ NOT "" AN EXCUSE OR DEFENSE, PERIOD!
The bottom line is, THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY!
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
Celtic, with regards to China's drug law executions, a little work with Google would have turned up this using just the words "China drug executions". It would seem that the surety of death doesn't deter the dealers one iota, as countries like China, Saudi Arabia, etc. have been executing drug law offenders for decades...with no appreciable dent in the amount of trafficking. That horse has been dead for a long time, it should be buried, not whipped any further.
As far as school-based drug education went, I did get quite a lot of it, and it was unusually good, in that it didn't preach, but it did lay out in very clear terms what you could expect if you used. The side effects listed were enough to keep me from using back then. Tell kids the truth, up front, and you'll see that they appreciate it. Lie to them as they do in DARE classes, and watch them learn cynicism about adult motivations, a cynicism that stays with them the rest of their lives. And for the ones that use after you told them straight-up what could happen, well, the sad fact is that unlike ignorance, stupidity is a disease whose cure is usually quite drastic and often permanent. Mother Nature, red of tooth and claw, will see to that.
As to providing the government with the means of "population control" as you seem to imply, are you aware of Government funded attempts to create a viral infection or fungus that can destroy drug crops in the wild that could cause vastly more damage than the scenario that you offer? Those bioweapons are indiscriminate mutagenics that can change into a form that has in the past destroyed food crops. All in a days work to 'save us from illicit drugs'...and threaten the food supply of the entire world while doing it.
I'd rather have the Gub'mint dispensing dope in licensed stores to licensed addicts than run that risk (I am ex-Army Chemical Corps and know far more than I want to on how easy it is to destroy a nation's ability to feed itself through biowarfare. Bioweapons have no respect for national borders.) The idea that drug (re)legalization will create vast hordes of whacked-out people jonesing for their various fixes fails to take into account the fact we already have a largely laissesz faire market in which anyone can buy anything...and such a situation should have already brought about those hordes. Instead, those few that want the hard stuff, get it anyway, to the enrichment of the cartels and no one else. Cutting out the (criminal) middleman and placing a State agency in charge of production, regulation and licensing will gut organized crime in a way that all of our present efforts have demonstrated they cannot. (As to government power, as a responsible firearms owner, I'd be more concerned about the Gub'mint making noises about rescinding the 2nd Amendment as a step to fascism than be worried about some wretch buying heroin at a store someplace.)
History has shown that we will never be rid of the possibility that some people will behave irresponsibly under the influence of any psychotropic substance. Attempting to eliminate that possibility that those same reckless people would continue to be reckless has led to the alcohol and drug prohibitions we have to day, which arguably cause more harm to society - and particularly to children, as dealers don't 'card' their prospective clients as any reputable store would - than the behaviors they were supposed to stop. We've been playing this losing hand in this card game long enough; it's time for a new game.
Well we can just go in circles for now. I still don't like it. I had no intent of coming off as self important or anything like that.
The links about executions don't really address the effect of use in the general population. As far as China goes I suspect its more for looks as I'll bet that government profits greatly by empowering transport to here.
I don't think the government running it will effect the black market unless its sold even cheaper. That thought reeks of taxpayer subsidies. Nor do I want to be taxed for their medical care and treatment.
I was shocked to find out that prisons here in Amarillo, or should I say tax payers foot the bill for meth users getting their teeth all fixed up. I need some tooth work that I can't afford but have to pay for druggies to get theirs. What irony.
I'm glad to see support for the second amendment. I have a ccl and do work in that area also. If addictive drugs become legal I suspect we will need them even more.
Well y'all push on, I will continue to oppose. In the long run I guess we'll see who is right. Good luck to us all.
celtictexan, I don't see why you're so worried about taxes resulting from legalization. Are you aware that the cost of pursuing, arresting, and caging 'offenders' is over $69 billion per year? Further, are you aware that legalization and taxation would turn that staggering financial drain into an economic boon?
Using the $69B/yr figure, I've determined that, on average, every US citizen pays over $200 per year for this failed policy.
Surely you've begun to realize — having observed the fruits of decriminalization efforts of smarter nations — that a new approach would be a net monetary gain: a gain from which you (as a current nonuser/'straight') would benefit immediately, and in grand fashion.
The infuriating part for we reformers is that — for prohibitionists — the monetary component alone (and there are plenty of social ills that would also be alleviated!) is still not enough to convince some people.
"Running around in circles." The only people who run around in circles are the prohibs.
We present facts...and they are selectively ignored. We post links to study after study after study proving prohibitionists wrong about cannabis...and they either cherry-pick from them, or they are strenuously ignored, even if those studies were paid for by the prohibs, themselves. (The IoM report of 1999 comes to mind, as does the recent Tashkin report proving no correllation between cannabis and cancers, something the prohibs STILL blather on about.)
We point out the enormous costs to the taxpayer involved with prosecuting this DrugWar which even the pols will admit - in private, of course - that it's money flushed down a toilet. But what happens? The DrugWarriors want more and more and more money to flush down that commode; it's a wonder we don't have to call the Roto-Rooter Man, so much has been flushed it ought to be clogged.
This isn't just an intellectual exercise with us; we actually are doing this for our health, both the personally physical, and for the political health of the nation. A return to the kind of sanity that we had before the DrugWar began to rob us of our rights piecemeal would mean increased individual liberties. It would mean that government once more knew its' place...and knew better not to intrude into the lives of the average person in the way it does so with such arrogance now. That's why, in direct opposition to the style of the prohibs, we present facts to back up our assertions, and are willing to debate...whereas they break out in hives and cold sweats and run like scalded dogs when they hear that word.
The only people 'running around in circles' are the ones who benefit greatly from doing so, as they can try to claim we are obfuscating the issues when in fact they are the ones guilty of that. And it becomes evident when they try to pull that ploy that they've run out of ammunition, and want to make a retreat look like they're 'advancing in another direction'. But a retreat is still a retreat, no matter what words are used.
ct,
Here is another bit of information for you to ponder. There is not a prison nor jail drugs have " NOT " been found in, FACT!
With 40' walls, every surveillance capability known to man, no rights. Where anybody can have their cells torn a part at any time day or night. Where people can be stripped searched and tested any time. Yet, drugs are available to those who want them. Most of the violence is drug related. So if we can't keep it out of this controlled environment how realistic is it to think we can keep it out of our free country???
We must face the realities we live with, people should be held accountable for their Actions. Not others biases , bigotry and taught and manipulated fear.
For me the truth is there are 2 drug worlds. 1st being those put here by the " AMIGHTY " , for each to choose how to use. And only answerable TO HIM! Through thousands of years of trial and error our ancestors have given us the knowledge of them and their use. " BUT " how can anybody of faith try and claim ownership of his gifts, much less punish anybody for doing as they choose with them???? Last time I checked he don't make no junk!
2nd, is man made and altered natural drugs. While we all know the benefits of these drugs, few can deny the harm they can cause as well.
Yet how can anybody justify the harm caused by our failed policies? Many times doing far more harm than the substance used as probable cause to terrorize, kill and destroy families???
IMHO, where we as a country and a nation started going wrong, is when we failed to follow the KNOWN practices of those who came before us. That being it was looked down upon to mind others business, or to spy on your neighbor much less your own family and friends. When we let those with self serving agendas and bigoted beliefs pass laws. When the Constitution and Individual freedoms are over ran by others biases, fear, bigotry and beliefs.
There Has To Be A Better Way???
Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc
Celtic, that's great that you joined the military and cleaned up. However, most of us don't need to submit ourselves for control by the State. We do just fine taking care of ourselves. Managing alcohol, fatty foods, caffeine, sleeping, herbs, etc. without help.
Please don't try to impose what worked for you on everyone else.
btw, the military costs money - tax money. Why should we use the same money to pay a bunch of LEO's to sit around & get fat? And occasionally harrass the occasional black or Latino guy with drugs, or the hippie?
Do you think each tax dollar is better spent on the military or domestic LEO? It's an important question, considering that we're in debt, trillions and trillions of dollars of debt. A huge chunk of you tax dollar goes just to pay interest on our national debt.
Post a Comment