Obama has released more prisoners than the last 10 presidents combined

[Saintsfan6]

No. But they should be allowed to grow whatever plants they want in their backyard because freedom. And they should be allowed to consume those plants (and derivatives) because freedom. The argument isn't totally about medicine. It's about what I'm allowed to do as free man in my own home. Provided nobody else gets hurt, what's the problem with that? Don't knock 'freedom'. Don't you believe that people should be able to own any guns they want and only get punished when those guns are misused (AND NOT BEFORE) 'because freedom'? It's the same argument. See the parallel, make the connection. It is essentially an 'assault chemicals ban'. Only the chemicals can only hurt the people who choose to take them. Special care needs to be taken regarding access by children obviously.

The chemicals don't only hurt the people who take them. Users of these drugs have altered states of consciousness and make irrational, dangerous decision that can endanger everyone around them. Difference between guns and drugs is that a gun doesn't alter the psychological state of the user making them dangerous to everyone around them.

Whether you have a FA rifle or a semi auto handgun, it doesn't make you more or less likely to commit a mass shooting. If you are high on PCP, meth, LSD, you are more likely to harm someone else than if you had a few drinks. Don't mistake what I said, I am not saying a drunk person cannot be dangerous or a drug user is always dangerous. I am simply stating there is an obvious difference in danger involved majority of the time.

 

[sliguns]

You believe someone drinking alcohol to be equally destructive as a PCP user in terms of behavior? Seriously?

My point is, it does not matter which is more destructive, just b/c I don’t like it, doesn’t mean I have the Right to tell others what to do. I do not in any way like alcohol, I don’t like that people under the influence of alcohol kill themselves and others, but that does not give me the right to advocate that the gov’t throw these people into a cage if they've literally hurt know one or their property.

If you truly believe drug related deaths would decrease once legalized, then you have little understanding of pharmacodynamics and pathophysiologic effect of these substances.

Perhaps I have “little understanding of pharmacodynamics” but perhaps you have little understanding of the free-market economic factors that would be triggered to naturally decrease the deaths associated with drug use. I think there is more to contemplate in the grand scheme of legalization. There's a lot of reading material out there that explains the economics behind this, they explain it better than I ever could that's for sure.

Drug usage will almost certainly increase once legalized in my opinion, do you really want to find out? Think of the impact of tens of thousands of new, worthless drug addicts will have on our society.

It’s not my job, your job, or the gov’ts job to make sure people live a life we approve of….end of story. It’s the gov’ts job to protect our Rights/Property. If I don’t have the Right to ingest what I want, then the logical conclusions to that, is that I do not even own myself. The same goes for the legalization or Prostitution.

The article you linked seems to focus on what happens to only the user, ignoring the societal implications. Ignoring those implications and simplifying it to "if you want to ruin your life, then do it!" And "all the drug dealers will be out of business and the war on drugs will be over, yay!" Is fool hearted in my opinion.

Continuing the failure that is the war on drugs is truly fool hearty. You do agree it's a failure, right?

Users of these drugs have altered states of consciousness and make irrational, dangerous decision that can endanger everyone around them.

Users of alcohol have altered states of consciousness and make irrational, dangerous decision that can endanger everyone around them.

Why continue to allow such a dangerous product as Alcohol to be sold?

 

[Saintsfan6]

Agree to disagree I guess, I just don't think our country would be better off with PCP and crack being sold at the local gas station. I guess in some people's minds, someone who consumes alcohol is just as dangerous as someone's who has consumed PCP, that's just not my opinion.

 

[sliguns]

It's ironic that the same reasoning used to ban alcohol is being used to ban drugs - History truly does repeat itself

Richmond P. Hobson, a Representative from Alabama, voiced his support for a prohibition amendment on the floor of the House of Representatives on December 22, 1914 - https://prohibition.osu.edu/hobson

Chicago: Felix Mendelsohn, 1915 - https://prohibition.osu.edu/glimpse-behind-mask-prohibition

Medicinal Alcohol Permit - https://prohibition.osu.edu/american-prohibition-1920/medicinal-alcohol

 

[JoeLiberty]

Agree to disagree I guess, I just don't think our country would be better off with PCP and crack being sold at the local gas station. I guess in some people's minds, someone who consumes alcohol is just as dangerous as someone's who has consumed PCP, that's just not my opinion.

Is our country 'better off' with hard liquor being sold at the gas station?? I'd say yes. Philosophically they are no different. That 'opinion' is being based on years of biased propaganda and lies. 'Ingesting a given drug turns you into a force of destruction with superhuman strength.' It's a fantasy, bro. Also when you say "pharmacodynamics and pathophysiologic " it sounds alot like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0

It’s not my job, your job, or the gov’ts job to make sure people live a life we approve of….end of story. It’s the gov’ts job to protect our Rights/Property. If I don’t have the Right to ingest what I want, then the logical conclusions to that, is that I do not even own myself. The same goes for the legalization or Prostitution.

^^^This x 1billion

The chemicals don't only hurt the people who take them. Users of these drugs ...

^^^Exactly. You see the swap in subject there?? So subtle you probably missed it even as you typed. You can hold the users responsible for their actions. The chemical is inanimate and ultimately not responsible. Just like a what? You guessed it, a gun. If someone has an accident while driving on LSD, string them up.

If you are high on PCP, meth, LSD, you are more likely to harm someone else than if you had a few drinks. Don't mistake what I said, I am not saying a drunk person cannot be dangerous or a drug user is always dangerous. I am simply stating there is an obvious difference in danger involved majority of the time.

[citation needed], but even if that were true, if a drug user is not always dangerous, that's a pretty good reason to let them roam free rather than sit in a jail cell that I have to pay for.

 

[Saintsfan6]

Right, I'm just a victim of brainwashing. Drugs aren't that bad. I never said people get superhuman strength, just that their mental state is severely impaired and they become irrational and unpredictable. Because I used words that you don't understand, you compare me to a politician that knows nothing that he was talking about? I practice medicine for a living and have the education based in pharmaceuticals and biological science. Sorry if I went over your head bud.

According to your logic, all drugs and pharmaceuticals should be available for anyone to take as they wish. They should be able to look up a disease on Google, diagnose themselves, and prescribe themselves whatever they want. I mean, what right do doctors have telling us what medicine we should/shouldn't use?

 

[sliguns]

They should be able to look up a disease on Google, diagnose themselves, and prescribe themselves whatever they want.

Absolutely, it's my life isn't it? It's my own well-being isn't it? It's my own body isn't it?

 

[sliguns]

edit

 

[JoeLiberty]

Well Dr. Saintsfan, drop some knowledge on us then. Share some of the education that helped shape this opinion. Don't just claim that there would be unknowable and unspecified 'societal implications'. Also: "How do you synthesize a methylated alkaloid?" lol

That is the logical extension of my argument, yes. However I'm less interested in letting people have recreational access to pharmaceuticals than to natural drugs. The doctors have a right to say whatever they want. It should be up to me to decide though. When medicine that works just as good or better than what they have grows right out of the ground, and they say you shouldn't use that, I'm skeptical.

 

[JoeLiberty]

Absolutely, it's my life isn't it? It's my own well-being isn't it? It's my own body isn't it?

Nope. Lol

 

[sliguns]

Nope. Lol

lololol

 

[sliguns]