Research helps dispel marijuana myths

Sober Talk ^ | Thursday, August 1, 2002 | By BECKY CLARK, MSW, CSW

[Behind Liberal Lines]

As we endeavor toward a more lucid and informed discussion of substance abuse, let's deconstruct the mystique of marijuana and recognize it for the dangerous drug that it is.

Marijuana is a substance that's worthy of our concern. It is the most prevalent of all illicit drugs used in the country. The 2000 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported that 34 percent of Americans have used marijuana in their lifetime and 5 percent are current users.

[jayef]

Leaving aside your total misreading and ignorance of libertarian doctrine and approaches to drug legalization, what proof do you have that legalization would lead to increased overdoses? Do you even know how many people die from overdoses? Do you know how many of those people were dealt impure drugs? Do you know why dealers deal impure drugs?

[dcwusmc]

I am NOT a doper, nor a pothead but I do lean toward being libertarian, which stance is far closer to my strict Constitutionalist position than many who post here and call themselves "conservative." So far none have tried to answer the question, if not the Constitution, what are they trying to conserve? On another thread, one of them admitted to having an authoritarian streak in him. I found out thru some posts back and forth that we now have a basis for talking to each other. Which is far more than I can say for SOME posters.

BTW, MY opinion is worth far more than ANY statist's ever could be!

[kidd]

"...libertarian doctrine and approaches to drug legalization..."???

What doctrine? Unless you consider "legalize all drugs and then hope for the best" is a doctrine, then I guess you are right.

No, I'm not an expert in drug overdosage. And I have never heard of an overdose on pot, but I would guess that its possible. However, would legalized drugs lead to an increase an overdoses? Certain drugs - yes.

What proof can I offer?
Economics 101 would tell you that a decrease in price (an artifact of legalization) will result in greater demand. Greater demand will result in more abuse.
History - after Prohibition was repealled there was a marked increase in liver disease and other alcohol-related deaths.

Now - the challenge to you is to provide proof that there will not be an increase in overdosage from legalization. Try not to use the example of a socialist country and its socialized medical system that drug legalization is dependent on.

[4Freedom]

"You know that federal drug laws were started during Woodrow Wilson and FDR...?"

Well, who says a Democrat can never get it right?

Kennedy cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

[4Freedom]

"I'm just a doper; pothead; a libertarian..."

Well, if you think the Founding Fathers would just sit down and light one up with you, you sure are.

[4Freedom]

No and no.

[Texaggie79]

Thank you.

[Texaggie79]

Thomas Jefferson made a great quote:

"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory, as we do persons infected with disease." --Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816. ME 15:28

I think that goes a long way on defending HARD drug prohibitions by states, but subsistence that you just don't favor because you think it makes the users act stupid or goofy aren't legitimate causes for prohibition. When a substance itself causes their users to be violent or to engage in dangerous activity that threatens OTHER PEOPLES' lives, then there is a case to be made.

You show me how your next door neighbor blazing a joint in his living room, in any way threatens you. If you cannot and you still want pot banned then you advocate coercing others to live as you do through laws. We have the right to live as we please as long as we bring no harm, or threat of harm to others.

[Texaggie79]

subsistence = substances

[Texaggie79]

stoopid spell check, it must be on pot....

[4Freedom]

What if my neighbor passes out with something on the stove or forgets to shut off the gas?

What if my neighbor borrows my ladder when he's stoned and then doesn't remember it's mine?

What if the fool lives in the apartment above me and passes out in the bathtub with the water running?

What if the fool is trying to kiss the cute, little, pidgeons out on the window ledge and falls on someone?

Your marijuana isn't so harmless anymore, is it?

It's just like I said to JediGirl, most of those people involved in that list of accidents of hers were probably stoned. ;^)

[jayef]

Since you will not go to the site and read it, I'll post it for you here. This is the Libertaian Party's plank:

The so-called "War on Drugs" is in reality a war on the American people, our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. We deplore the suffering that drug misuse has brought about; however, drug prohibition is more dangerous than drugs themselves. The War on Drugs is a grave threat to individual liberty, to domestic order and to peace in the world; furthermore, it has provided a rationale by which the power of the state has been expanded to restrict greatly our right to privacy and to be secure in our homes.

We specifically condemn the use of "profiles" as sufficient to satisfy the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment, the use of "civil asset forfeiture" to reduce the standard of proof historically borne by government in prosecutions, and the use of military forces for civilian law enforcement as an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act which forbids this practice.

We call for the repeal of all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs and of "anti-crime" measures restricting individual rights to be secure in our persons, homes, and property; limiting our rights to keep and bear arms; or vote.

I challenge you to find any statement that says we should "legalize all drugs and hope for the best".

As for your other facts, I'm not sure that you can apply commodity dynamics to drugs. A simple ECON 101 analysis does not fit the circumstances.

[kidd]

I challenge you to find any statement that says we should "legalize all drugs and hope for the best".

Okey-dokey!

We call for the repeal of all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs...

i.e. "legalize all drugs..."

We deplore the suffering that drug misuse has brought about

Um...the plank admits that drug misuse causes harm, but there's nothing there about what we should do about those who have been harmed. Do nothing? Leave them be? No, thats not there. All that leaves is....

" and hope for the best"!!!

[jayef]

If that's how you want to read that, then fine. Perhaps you can answer a question. How does putting these people in jail help them? If your concern is what happens to the people, then exactly what would you do to help them?

[4Freedom]

Large doses may result in panicky states, fear of death, and illusions. True psychosis [loss of contact with reality, (sound familiar?)] can occur, producing paranoid delusions, confusion, and other symptoms....

A more permanent state of apathy and loss of concern-the amotivational syndrome-has been attributed to prolonged, regular use.

There is evidence that regular users of marijuana can become physically dependent on its effects.

I believe you're splitting hairs.

[jayef]

If you are talking about things that drug users do to cause other people harm, then by all means, those acts should carry sanctions. No libertarian would disagree with that. The point is, if people are using a drug recreationally and have caused no harm, why are they deserving of punnishment?

[jayef]

So what? What does prolonged use of alcohol and tobacco cause? What does prolonged use of prescription medication (i.e Lortab, Prozac, Vicadin, etc.) cause? Do regular users of these government approved drugs become dependent on their use? Are we still splitting hairs, or are you?

[4Freedom]

Now, you're back to comparing apples and oranges.

Prescription medication suggests that there is a trained medical professional, somewhere in the mix, that's responsible for monitoring the patient's condition.

As opposed to a bunch of yahoos self-medicating themselves.

[tacticalogic]

You can post worst-case "what if" strawmen all night. Eventually you can rationalize everyone being under state surveilance 24/7, and eating off of paper plates with plastic utensils so we can't hurt ourselves.

[4Freedom]

Hmmmm, I'll have to give that more thought. ;^)