Time to legalise some drugs?

Sam Vimes

dublindude wrote: »

Can you back that up with stats?

/Just kidding
/Not replying to any more drug posts as I'll be here forever!

ah go on. you can just shoot up to make the time pass easier

Piste

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Sticking to what I said in my earlier post, and leaving Cocaine and Heroin out of this, what is so dangerous/addictive about Cannabis, MDMA or LSD/similar psychedelics?

I was talking about people having that attitude to ALL drugs, not picking and choosing.

Cannabis makes you go stupid. No I wont quote any sources, but from personal experiences, friends of friends etc. stoners are dumb. Of course most people only have the odd joint here and there and that's grand, but it's still dangerous as it's often mixed with tobacco which is addictive and carcinogenic. Cannabis itself is also carcinogenic.

Yeah sure it can be eaten, but tbh that vast majority of cannabis is smoked. In all the houseparties I have been at where there has been cannabis I have only ever seen it smoked.

LSD can cause flashbacks, not the most pleasant of experiences if you happen to be driving. You can do dangerous things on psychadelics, no everyone is going to be responsible and have a babysitter with them.

I honestly don't know enough about MDMA to say what's so dangerous about it, afaik it's not addictive. Atm while it's illegal I know its cut with all sorts of nasties so a lot of the dangers lie there. It's a bit of a moot point though because those dangers from the additives wouldn't exist were it made legal.

At the moment while illegal drugs remain so people tend to be a bit wary of them and educate themselves of the dangers, what to avoid etc. Giving drugs the green llight takes away people's need to be a bit more savvy and so they're more likely to go overboard/misuse the drugs.

I think the entire legalisation of drugs debate comes down to the freedom of the individual -v- the freedom of society.

A person might decide they have the freedom to take E at a club, I should have the freedom to go to a club without a loved-up stranger on pills humping my leg.

A person might say "it's my body, i'll put heroin into it if I like". Well likewise I feel I have the freedom to walk down the street without a junkie robbing me blind.

I would be ok with legalising cannabis as I've found the only effect it has on other people is passive smoking and sure they can just sit somewhere else.

Basically I feel that as long as your actions have no negative impact on others then go for it. Of course I don't always practice it, but it's a general guideline I like to follow.

Standman

Piste wrote: »

Basically I feel that as long as your actions have no negative impact on others then go for it. Of course I don't always practice it, but it's a general guideline I like to follow.

Completely agree! Although I would argue that just because a minority of people misbehave as a result of drug use does not mean that anyone who does drugs should be criminalised.

JC 2K3

Piste wrote: »

Cannabis makes you go stupid. No I wont quote any sources, but from personal experiences, friends of friends etc. stoners are dumb. Of course most people only have the odd joint here and there and that's grand, but it's still dangerous as it's often mixed with tobacco which is addictive and carcinogenic. Cannabis itself is also carcinogenic.

Yeah sure it can be eaten, but tbh that vast majority of cannabis is smoked. In all the houseparties I have been at where there has been cannabis I have only ever seen it smoked.

You're right, a lot of stoners are dumb, but I'd argue that it's not the fault of cannabis, but the fact that those who smoke it regularly happen to be quite stupid.

The whole smoking it thing is a bit moot, since in the vast majority of cases it takes years of cigarette smoking to develop cancer, and if smoked with cannabis it's only going to be a fraction of the amount that a smoker would smoke.

Piste wrote: »

LSD can cause flashbacks, not the most pleasant of experiences if you happen to be driving. You can do dangerous things on psychadelics, no everyone is going to be responsible and have a babysitter with them.

Thing about psychedelics is they're not really all that popular, which immediately lessens the chance of irresponsible people doing them, and see my post a few posts back on a possible way of regulating them.

And flashbacks are rare enough, are not medically defined and are generally misunderstood as a much bigger deal than they actually are anyway. They're one of those things that have been blown immensly out of proportion by the anti-drugs brigade.

Piste wrote: »

I think the entire legalisation of drugs debate comes down to the freedom of the individual -v- the freedom of society.

A person might decide they have the freedom to take E at a club, I should have the freedom to go to a club without a loved-up stranger on pills humping my leg.

Bah, I've always hated this argument as much as its polar opposite: "well life just isn't fair". Mainly because they reduce an argument down to far too simplistic terms and generally make a load of assumptions to do it. Also, I see people using one for one argument and the other for another.

And anyway, once again, see my post on possible regulatory solutions a few posts back. What about clubs specifically for MDMA consumption? Then all you'd have to do would be avoid these clubs to avoid friendly strangers.

As an aside, it should be noted that MDMA generally distracts one from their sex drive and causes them to become more outgoing and empathogenic, so the liklihood of some random stranger humping you're leg would be quite low.

rubadub

meditraitor wrote: »

I would start by pointing out the effects of the so called safe drug.
Cannabis

This is for the benefit of the ill informed so they can make an informed decision on whether Cannabis should be legalised!

Acute health effects of cannabis use
The acute effects of cannabis use has been recognized for many years, and recent studies have confirmed and extended earlier findings. These may be summarized as follows:

Cannabis impairs cognitive development (capabilities of learning), including associative processes; free recall of previously learned items is often impaired when cannabi is used both during learning and recall periods;
Cannabis impairs psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as motor coordination, divided attention, and operative tasks of many types; human performance on complex machinery can be impaired for as long as 24 hours after smoking as little as 20 mg of THC in cannabis; there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among persons who drive when intoxicated by cannabis.
Chronic health effects of cannabis use
selective impairment of cognitive functioning which include the organization and integration of complex information involving various mechanisms of attention and memory processes;
prolonged use may lead to greater impairment, which may not recover with cessation of use, and which could affect daily life functions;
development of a cannabis dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use is likely in chronic users;
cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals;
epithetial injury of the trachea and major bronchi is caused by long-term cannabis smoking;
airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired pulmonary defence against infection from persistent cannabis consumption over prolonged periods;
heavy cannabis consumption is associated with a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and a higher incidence of acute bronchitis than in the non-smoking cohort;
cannabis used during pregnancy is associated with impairment in fetal development leading to a reduction in birth weight;
cannabis use during pregnancy may lead to postnatal risk of rare forms of cancer although more research is needed in this area.
The health consequences of cannabis use in developing countries are largely unknown beacuse of limited and non-systematic research, but there is no reason a priori to expect that biological effects on individuals in these populations would be substantially different to what has been observed in developed countries. However, other consequences might be different given the cultural and social differences between countries.

World Health Organisation

I read all that and just think, yes, it is a relatively safe drug compared to the other commonly used recreational legal & illegal drugs.

You missed this bit from the very same page

Therapeutic uses of cannabinoids

Several studies have demonstrated the therapeutic effects of cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting in the advanced stages of illnesses such as cancer and AIDS. Dronabinol (tetrahydrocannabinol) has been available by prescription for more than a decade in the USA. Other therapeutic uses of cannabinoids are being demonstrated by controlled studies, including treatment of asthma and glaucoma, as an antidepressant, appetite stimulant, anticonvulsant and anti-spasmodic, research in this area should continue. For example, more basic research on the central and peripheral mechanisms of the effects of cannabinoids on gastrointestinal function may improve the ability to alleviate nausea and emesis. More research is needed on the basic neuropharmacology of THC and other cannabinoids so that better therapeutic agents can be found.

Alcohol

Although alcohol consumption has occurred for thousands of years, many of the varied health effects have been discovered fairly recently. Alcohol consumption has health and social consequences via intoxication (drunkenness), dependence (habitual, compulsive and long-term drinking), and other biochemical effects. In addition to chronic diseases that may affect drinkers after many years of heavy use, alcohol contributes to traumatic outcomes that kill or disable at a relatively young age, resulting in the loss of many years of life to death or disability. There is increasing evidence that besides volume of alcohol, the pattern of the drinking is relevant for the health outcomes. Overall there is a causal relationship between alcohol consumption and more than 60 types of disease and injury. Alcohol is estimated to cause about 20-30% worldwide of oesophageal cancer, liver cancer, cirrhosis of the liver, homicide, epilepsy, and motor vehicle accidents.

Worldwide alcohol causes 1.8 million deaths (3.2% of total) and 58.3 million (4% of total) of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). Unintentional injuries alone account for about one third of the 1.8 million deaths, while neuro-psychiatric conditions account for close to 40% of the 58.3 million DALYs.

Globally alcohol consumption has increased in recent decades, with all or most of that increase in developing countries. This increase is often occurring in countries with little tradition of alcohol use on population level and few methods of prevention, control or treatment. The rise in alcohol consumption in developing countries provides ample cause for concern over the possible advent of a matching rise in alcohol-related problems in those regions of the world most at risk.

Tobacco

Tobacco continues to be the substance causing the maximum health damage globally. According to WHO estimates, there are around 1.1 thousand million smokers in the world, about one-third of the global population aged 15 and over. While consumption is levelling off and even decreasing in some countries, worldwide more people are smoking, and smokers are smoking more cigarettes. Substantially fewer cigarettes are smoked per day per smoker in developing countries than in developed countries. However, this gap is fast narrowing and unless effective tobacco control measures take place, daily cigarette consumption in developing countries is expected to increase as economic development results in increased real disposable income.

According to the World Health Report 2002, among industrialized countries where smoking has been common, smoking is estimated to cause over 90% of lung cancer in men and about 70% of lung cancer among women. In addition, in these countries, the attributable fractions are 56-80% for chronic respiratory disease and 22% for cardiovascular disease. Worldwide, it is estimated that tobacco causes about 8.8% of deaths (4.9 million) and 4.1% of DALYs (59.1 million). Unless current trends are not reversed, that figure is expected to rise to 10 million deaths per year by the 2020s or early 2030s, with 70% of those deaths occurring in developing countries.

Unsurprisingly the WHO do not start listing the minimal theraputic effects of alcohol & tobacco that some might trot out to justify their hypocritical legality.

Boggle

Can you back that up with stats?

/Just kidding
/Not replying to any more drug posts as I'll be here forever!

Touche:D But seriously.. you'd like me locked up cos I enjoy the odd smoke despite the fact that there is no justifiable reason for making it illegal. At least expand on your reasoning. If anything I have said is incorrect in my previous posts please discuss but the whole head in the sand approach is quite annoying

pclancy

Down here (New Zealand) its extremly popular with all age groups and backgrounds but the cops still take a pretty heavy hand if you're caught with any. They've got a serious problem here with "P" which is basically meths and causes serious damage to everyone around you much like heroin. Sadly theres no sign at all of legalistation or even the hope towards society agreeing it should be legal but there are some good efforst towards it namely a political party and a big group of activists! Some good reading here if anyones interested... http://norml.org.nz/index.php

Anyway I always get annoyed with these "should it be legalised" theads because they always go the same way, people that smoke say it should, people that think its a gateway drug or dangerously mind altering say it shouldnt, my view is if you wanna drink your pint or smoke you fag do so....i'll queitly smoke my spliff in the background and you'll be damn sure i wont attack a cop, give my kids lungcancer, drive dangerously or beat my wife when i get home, i'll just marvel at the beauty of the world and listen to some Doors

meditraitor

rubadub wrote: »

I read all that and just think, yes, it is a relatively safe drug compared to the other commonly used recreational legal & illegal drugs..

OK this is your opinion but I beleive it is more harmful than good for the individual and I just posted some recognised ill effects to offset the cannabis is great lovefest that this thread had become.

rubadub wrote: »

You missed this bit from the very same page.

No I didnt, It was on the link I supplied if anyone bothered to open it,it was staring them straight in the face.
Normally I avoid these threads like the plague but sometimes I get sick of morons implying that people who dont think the legalisation of drugs is a positive thing are ignornat and uninformed.Look at the post again in the context it was posted Rub. I only posted one of the reasons that put me off such a change in legislation. I could say that I smoked for 10-15 years and I know how it effects Me. I could also say that I gave up cannabis a long time before I gave up LSD/Speed/MDMA and coke because generally it had a worse effect on me. I could say that the fact I still do drugs and dont believe that increasing the availability of them through legalisation would not contribute to a better society. I could also say that I know many good friends that have lost their lives or had them ruined through drug use. But then the morons who imply that people who think drugs should stay illegal are uninformed and ignorant or shout "Prove what you say to be true because we dont believe you, your experience is a minority" (which it is not in my social circle and in my age bracket)
Just like drink in this country the majority of people will not use in moderation,apparently over 5 units is bing drinking(about 2 1/2 pints) but over indulge leading to some of the ill effects listed

rubadub wrote: »

Unsurprisingly the WHO do not start listing the minimal theraputic effects of alcohol & tobacco that some might trot out to justify their hypocritical legality.

Are you implying the WHO have an agenda. Can you prove this?

Bit of a mothful:)

Sherifu

Boring thread is boring. Anyone got any gear?

Piste

JC 2K3 wrote: »

You're right, a lot of stoners are dumb, but I'd argue that it's not the fault of cannabis, but the fact that those who smoke it regularly happen to be quite stupid.

Well from experience I would argue otherwise, I've seen people made dumb because of hash. But fair enough, maybe the people you know who've become total stoners were already a bit thick to begin with.

JC2K3 wrote:

Thing about psychedelics is they're not really all that popular, which immediately lessens the chance of irresponsible people doing them, and see my post a few posts back on a possible way of regulating them.

True, but that's just now, because they're illegal. I'd imagine they'd become much more popular if legalised and commercially available.

JC2K3 wrote:

As an aside, it should be noted that MDMA generally distracts one from their sex drive

Sounds like a crap drug then

But yeah the idea of MDMA-only clubs is a good one. Though of course they'd find their way into other clubs eventually.

We already had our chance to show that we could handle a mind-altering drug (alcohol) and guess what, we failed. We've shown as a nation that we just can't handle these substances, well done us

But fair enough, drugs that don't turn you into pricks like cannabis and MDMA (in special clubs though) I would have no problem with being made legal (as long as they were heavily regulated).

Prof.Badass

If drugs were legal it wouldn't be long untill almost completely safe drugs are developed (from a medical point of view).

Almost every negative consequence of drug use would be eliminated except for addiction.

But even this could be lessened drastically.

Education is the key.Most people (drug users included) don't have a clue when it comes to the real facts about drugs;

1.Drugs that directly affect the brains reward system are more addictive than those that don't.

2. The faster the come-up, the more addictive the drug. Basically,

with oral use, addiction is not really that prevalent, and when it does appear it's not as severe.

when "reward system" drugs are snorted,addiction is a strong factor, but most people will avoid it, many of them being compulsive users but not fully addicted.

when "reward system" drugs are inhaled/injected addiction is almost guaranteed, you'd have to be the most joyless boring fun-hater not to.

This explains why crack is so much more addictive than cocaine (even though they're the same drug) and why when inhaled tobacco is much more addictive than cannabis (tobacco directly affects the brains reward system (even though the effect isn't that great))

With legalisation (and education) i see the vast majority of drug users taking their drugs orally, and thus addiction will be less of a problem.

It's absurd to think that of all the drugs out there,none of them are safer than alcohol.(Alcohol IS quite toxic compared to most other recreational drugs)

I'd rather have some loved-up weirdo hug me than a drunken weirdo start a fight with me any day.

JC 2K3

Piste wrote: »

We already had our chance to show that we could handle a mind-altering drug (alcohol) and guess what, we failed. We've shown as a nation that we just can't handle these substances, well done us

What happened to not lumping all drugs together as the same thing??

Piste

I think in this case it's something you can apply to drugs that change your behaviour dramatically (we can discount cannabis, I've found that people don't change *that* much under the influence of it incidentally I've found I'm a brilliant liar when high >_>). They might be safe enough in small doses, but given with how we deal with alcohol, we as a nation would probably go overboard.

Fanny Cradock

vinylmesh wrote: »

If drugs were legal it wouldn't be long untill almost completely safe drugs are developed (from a medical point of view).

Almost every negative consequence of drug use would be eliminated except for addiction.

But even this could be lessened drastically.

Education is the key.Most people (drug users included) don't have a clue when it comes to the real facts about drugs;

1.Drugs that directly affect the brains reward system are more addictive than those that don't.

2. The faster the come-up, the more addictive the drug. Basically,

with oral use, addiction is not really that prevalent, and when it does appear it's not as severe.

when "reward system" drugs are snorted,addiction is a strong factor, but most people will avoid it, many of them being compulsive users but not fully addicted.

when "reward system" drugs are inhaled/injected addiction is almost guaranteed, you'd have to be the most joyless boring fun-hater not to.

This explains why crack is so much more addictive than cocaine (even though they're the same drug) and why when inhaled tobacco is much more addictive than cannabis (tobacco directly affects the brains reward system (even though the effect isn't that great))

With legalisation (and education) i see the vast majority of drug users taking their drugs orally, and thus addiction will be less of a problem.

It's absurd to think that of all the drugs out there,none of them are safer than alcohol.(Alcohol IS quite toxic compared to most other recreational drugs)

I'd rather have some loved-up weirdo hug me than a drunken weirdo start a fight with me any day.

Where do you get this stuff from? Tell me, how many drugs have been developed that are completely safe (from a medical point of view)? All drugs - from aspirin to heroin - have inherent risks.

JC 2K3

Well anything we consume probably has some inherent risks....

Fanny Cradock

Probably. But it wasn't my contention that we could somehow make the current list of illegal drugs (or any drugs for that matter) harmless.

Prof.Badass

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Where do you get this stuff from? Tell me, how many drugs have been developed that are completely safe (from a medical point of view)? All drugs - from aspirin to heroin - have inherent risks.

you're such a pedant!

Obviously i meant apart from the obvious overdose risks.

And even this could be avoided (e.g a drug that needs to be converted by an enzyme to become active.Included with the drug is a certain percentage of enzyme inhibitors and also possibly a certain percentage of extra enzymes to break down the drug once created. If this was developed it COULD make overdose impossible.This is in the far, far future though.

Also, note my use of the word "almost"

Fanny Cradock

vinylmesh wrote: »

And even this could be avoided (e.g a drug that needs to be converted by an enzyme to become active.Included with the drug is a certain percentage of enzyme inhibitors and also possibly a certain percentage of extra enzymes to break down the drug once created. If this was developed it COULD make overdose impossible.This is in the far, far future though.

Possibly just in your head