Is it time to legalize? - Page 2

That's crazy that there exist such a charge as public intoxication haha..I didn't know alcohol was supposed to be done in private! It amazes me how many things you cannot do in public here. "Loitering' is another thing that amazes me, I thought we all had the right of assembly haha...so loitering is assembly in other words IMO...
I digress...

Actually I was referring to a Dutch friend - I don't know if he's had problems in Holland but he did in Germany.

[quote=strange_wings;2580605
We can all agree we'd rather have someone under the influence on a bike than driving a car. However, depending on the police encountered, if drunk some will still try to get you for public intox. No idea if anyone gets that sort of charge if they're stoned out of their gourd and out on the street, I've never heard of my friends mentioning anything other than being harassed after drinking and trying to go home.[/QUOTE]

Actually as a driver of a vehicle, I would not want an impaired person riding a bicycle on the same streets/roads as I. If that person veered in front of a car and the driver of the car did not have time to stop, the cyclist would most likely be dead and the driver of the car would have nightmares for years.

Impaired is impaired - whether from drugs or alcohol and should be treated as such, i.e., designated driver when partying.

I am a BIG believer in not driving while under the influence - of anything. Since I travel quite a bit for work, and the majority of the events are in the hotel, or walking distance, I am covered when I am out of town, and that's where I do most of my partying. Whenever I go out with my friends, I am the designated driver, as I am not comfortable with them drinking and driving, even if it is a couple of drinks, which is the legal limit.
My friends get pretty annoyed that I don't drink when I am out with them; they keep pushing me to drink, and keep saying that I am no fun when I am with them. I am sure they do appreciate when it is time to go home, and I am completely good to drive.
I am not sure, maybe I am a party pooper, but I don't like to have ANY alcohol when I am going to drive - not a sip.

I don't think that would make you a party pooper - it makes you smart! My daughter doesn't drink so she is the DD in most cases. In fact she has one friend who is a police officer in the area and when he wants to party he calls her to go with him.

I think drugs should be decriminalized, but I do not agree with outright legalization. I dont believe that drug use is best addressed by the criminal justice system, and believe that current drug laws promote a lot of seriously dangerous activities (often gang related) such as home meth labs, exploitation for trafficking etc etc. The danger drugs pose to our society have consistently shown to not be addressed by virtue of the illegality of these drugs. People who want to use drugs, will get and use them regardless of their legal status. I have never seen a study that even suggests that making drugs legal or decriminalizing them will increase the number of users. To all of you out there who aren't meth users (for example)- if it were legalized today, would you start up? For me the answer is a definite no. If if the answer for you was yes, I much prefer you being put through a regulatory system (such as in place for medical marijuana) where we can attempt to intervene and treat you for the troubles in your life vs force you onto the street in the ghetto where you bargain with even your body to get you-dont-know-what from that guy on the corner who follows you home and supplies you into an unstoppable addiction that eventually ends you up in prison tossed aside and ignored....We regulate prescription drugs more harmful than street drugs and this doesnt seem to be a problem for anyone. Really - what would the difference between prescription heroin and prescription oxycodone?? I believe that decriminalization will greatly reduce true drug-related crime (including gang activities, illegal grow-ops and the like), drastically reduce "user-crimes" (that commit crimes to obtain their illegal drugs), and provide intervention and treatment to addicts and potential addicts in need (often people with mental health problems).

I am sorry, but this is IMO, a dangerous thing to do. If you ever had a family member addicted to Meth, you would know that that drug destroys lives, no matter if it is legal, illegal, etc. If it is legal, and more accessible, you will end up on the gutters or prison regardless. This drug brings all the monsters out of you - you literally become a monster while you are addicted to it. You don't care about anybody, anything, but the drug. There is no family, job, or circumstance that can take you out of it. To make it legal, is pretty much the same as giving a suicidal person a loaded gun and telling them to pull the trigger.

I thinks these heavy drugs absolutely can not be legalized - not because of morals, but because they a physically/mentally/psychologically damaging for the users and the people around them.

Well, first of, they are different substances. Oxycodone is a synthetic opiate analgesic, and does not have the same immediate effect as heroin or morphine nor does it last as long. It is far less addictive than Heroine. Another difference is that Oxycodone is prescribed under strict medical supervision, where the patient is very closely monitored for its effects. Lastly, lets not forget the dosage - it is not the same as what an addict would use for recreation purposes. Also, it is not given to everybody; the prescription of it is very closely regulated by the doctors, pharmacists and even some states to prevent the abuse of it.
So, really you are comparing apples to oranges here.

I never argued to make these drugs legal, or more accessible - I argued to decriminalize - the people who reach out to meth need help, not prison and banishment from society. I think that is inhumane of us, and a waste of massive amounts of money IMO. I believe my heroin comparison was valid, as I made it under the premise of it being a prescription: meaning prescribed under strict medical supervision, where the patient is very closely monitored for its effects (amongst other things). Heroin is well enough understood that dosing can be calculated and adjusted. Side effects are well known and can be monitored appropriately. A "safely" manufactured version of the drug would save lives lost to various poisons.As drug addicts develop resistance to their drug, they take higher doses - this is no more true for heroin than oxy. Indeed, even stronger opioids/additional drugs are often prescribed to patients when oxy alone becomes not enough (eg palliative care). Among patients admitted to rehab centres, oxycontin use/abuse is more frequently reported than heroin - so clearly the potential for abuse and effect to society isnt as different as one might assume. And again, my argument is for decriminalization and not legalization, meaning these drugs would NOT be available to everyone, or even available by prescription. I believe that substance abuse should be addressed head-on and treated, not merely punished as that just continues a bad cycle.

Ok, you did say the things I quoted from you, and in there, it says legalized.
As far as heroin goes, it is far more addictive than oxy, so the danger would still be higher, even if prescribed.

Thanks for clarifying.

carolinalima - If you don't mind me asking, have you had a friend or family member that was addicted to meth? I did have a family member who was, a close family member. He tried hard to beat it but always went back. It did change him, a lot. Ultimately though, he was killed in a car wreck when an oncoming driver crossed into his lane after having dozed off behind the wheel - otherwise I suspected he would have eventually OD'ed. I agree these harder drugs do not need to be legalized, but that also those who are addicted to them need more help.

As for prescription meds needing to be prescribed and controlled by a doctor, well ideally this is how it works. In reality just as much of these drugs cross the US borders as do other drugs. They can be bought on the street, online, stolen, etc. Others find doctors who will write out just about any script. This is why there are more strict regulations now... and unfortunately why those who actually need these pain medications must suffer the stigma that they're just another addict.

It makes you wonder what good legalizing anything, but with controls, would do. People would just find a way around it. Either to hide it from those who employ them or out of shame.
I want to say it was last May? There was an Oklahoma lawyer who broke into and held up a pharmacy to get pain killers - if that doesn't show the level that these drugs can addict some, nothing will.

...though I don't understand how. Oxycotin does nothing for pain or affect my mood/mental state at all. All it did was make me How or why anyone would take such a useless drug is beyond me.

doesn't do that most people, tho.

that's the same way that codeine & synthetic codeine affect me - but most people doen't have that reaction.

Actually nausea and vomiting is a common side effect, that can be gotten over/reduced with frequent use. But ugh, if you're in pain badly enough to ever take the medication, vomiting is likely the last thing you want to do.

I think on pretty much any pain med they list nausea/vomitting as a side affect. It doesn't do that to me though....never had a prob with nausea on it.

Anyways, on the topic of addiction differences between street drugs and prescription drugs.... As someone who has been addicted to both, I can safely say there's no difference in the bottom line really. Yes there's different effects/availability/etc. but the withdrawls, the need, the drive to do anything for it was the same on both illegal and "legal" drugs. You can compare heroin to legal meds (I wouldn't say Oxy, more like Ephedra which is the herbal equivalent to speed).

I think they should legalize marijauna. It has been proven to help with cancer patients, eldery, chronic pain, terminal patients etc. I would much rather someone get relief from marijauna than pills that have so many negative affects on your body.

Should they legalize the harder drugs, IMO no. I look at it this way, the main reason for the drug (whether it be marijuana, morphine, oxy) is to ease pain. The main reason for the harder drugs is to get high, not to relieve pain (for the most part...there's always the exception. I for example, do not get pain relief from pot). I do not think they should legalize a drug thats sole purpose is that of getting high rather than a medicinal reasons.

and that is JMHO

That's correct. My research into chronic pain has told me that people in pain don't get high from opioid drugs when the dosage is adjusted to be just enough to treat the pain. The pain sort of "soaks up" the drug and it doesn't cause the effects that people not in pain experience. With respect to dependence, you might say that chronic pain sufferers are dependent on the drug to alleviate their pain, but they're not addicted to it in the sense that if their pain was suddenly gone they'd still need the drug.

From this article: http://www.healthcentral.com/chronic...-279488-5.html

Yes, I had - my sister in law. I say I had because nobody knows where she is, if she is alive, etc. Last thing I know she had left her beautiful 8 yr old daughter, and was prostituting to get $$$ for meth. This, mind you, is a wonderful, sweet girl when she is clean (if she goes to a rehab and 12 step program i.e.); but when she is on drugs - she is the devil. Pure evil.
I do not know what it is about meth, but it is the most scr*wed up drug I have ever seen.

I'm in favour of legalizing marijuana, for two reasons...a)yes okay I use b) it would probably help the economy.

Marijuana in British Columbia brings in something like 4.whatever billion dollars. Imagine if you taxed that.

It probably does less harm to folks than cigarettes since most folks would only use it occasionally, i.e., recreation - similar to going out to the bar Friday night with the boys/girls.

The positive effects are not pain relief, but it can lessen nausea and stimulate your appetite. My friend depended on it heavily when he was going thru his chemo treatments for cancer. He was losing weight until he started to use it, then his weight loss stopped.

I wasn't nessecarily referring to pain relief, but any relieve from say cancer and chemo... whether it be appetite, mood, or pain. I do know alot of people who do get pain relief from marijauna.

But either way, I think alot of "pills" can be damaging to your liver and other aspects of your health, whereas I don't believe as many negative effects occur from marijauna.

That said tho, I am on Oxy for pain, and I've been on different narcotic meds as well. (fentanyl, morphine, etc) I did try marijauna in the beginning of my pain issues and it did absolutely nothing for me. (I did smoke a substantial amount in my younger years) If it did help, I would gladly be on that rather than Oxy's or the fentanyl patch.

It may not be addictive, but it can be dangerous, especially to one's lungs. I smoked pot for about 30 years. I quit cigarettes quite awhile before I quit smoking pot. I know how my lungs felt. IMO, pot was harder on my lungs.
I didn't look far to find this.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0123104017.htm
I'm on the fence about legalization though. On one hand, like others have said, we are being hipocritical because cigarettes and alcohol are legal. On the other hand, is it right to make something more acceptable by legalizing it, knowing the harmful affects? Once it is legalized it is very difficult to make it illegal again. I think it should absolutely be decriminalized though.

There is no question in my mind that medical marijuana should be legalized. I have seen it help people.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009031...08599188495600
Legalizing it should help California with revenue issues The billion dollars or so saved from prosecuting pot busts could be used for drug rehabs instead. And the DUI laws in the books should cover abuse issues, as well as the crime issues.
I'm not in favor of pot by any means. I've known some cancer patients who use the subliminal pot which doesn't get them high. All of our mj-card carrying clients use it to get high; its so easy to get a card. And of course, they show up in our office because they do other crimes , not violent crimes, usu just property crimes, minor theft, etc.

Actually, I believe that legalizing drugs might be the best way to stop them from coming in over the border. If people can get the stuff legally, there would be no reason to buy it on the street. It's like prohibition, when the gangsters moved in to fill the need for booze.

Heck, legalize it and tax it, there's another souce of income for the government.

This is the video of marijuana vending machines in california


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe_6opRXOcg

What surprised me is that it's not just medical marijuana it's dispensing, but other prescription drugs as well. I'm just not sure whether that's wise. Marijuana OK, but prescription drugs?

I agree with you.

I remember when I was a teenager and all my friends moms had "mothers little helpers" in the medicine cabinet. The pep pills that meth has now replaced. I'm sure there were problems with abuse back then but at least the drug was regulated by the FDA. The crap they make meth out of and the dangerous conditions behind the bootleg labs are horrific.

They should have legalized pot many years ago. I don't think it's as bad as alcohol.

I would rather see control over drugs than the crime thats happening all over the Country and at the border from illegal drugs.