Posted on 11/05/2004 1:38:10 PM PST by Ahriman
A decade ago, when Daniele Piomelli went to scientific conferences, he was often the only researcher studying cannabinoids, the class of chemicals that give marijuana users a high. His work often drew sniggers and jokes; but not any more. At the recent annual Society for Neuroscience conference in San Diego last week, scientists delivered almost 200 papers on the subject.
Why all the attention? Many scientists believe marijuana-like drugs might be able to treat a wide range of diseases, far beyond the nausea and chronic pain typically treated with medical marijuana.
Researchers presented tantalising evidence that cannabinoid drugs can help treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis - known as ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease - Parkinson’s disease and obesity. Other researchers are studying whether the compounds can help victims of stroke and multiple sclerosis.
Although the chemicals work on the same area of the nervous system, the new drugs are much more refined and targeted than marijuana, with few of its side effects.
"Cannabinoids have a lot of pharmaceutical potential," says Piomelli, a neuroscientist at the University of California. "A lot of people are very excited."
According to your logic, it would be ok or not ok for society to legalize cocaine?
According to your logic, it would be ok or not ok for society to legalize cocaine?
According to my logic, "we don't need one more substance to dumb down society" is an invalid argument against legalizing cocaine.
Criminalization of cocaine has had no more demonstable success than criminalization of alcohol, marijuana, or any other mind-altering substance. However, proceeding cautiously with change is a conservative principle; so I support legalization of only marijuana as a first step, and taking any next step only after we've assessed the effects of that first step.
In response to the posting, "if pot were legalized, that "casual use" (by teens -rp) would NOT BE the extent of its use." you said, "All equally true of alcohol;"
You're the one who acknowledged that the legalization of alcohol has led to its increased use by teens (ie., beyond casual use).
I'm just asking why we would want to do the same for marijuana.
Why should I?
My post #168 stated, "Marijuana has been illegal for almost 70 years now with no end in sight. Marijuana use dropped over 60% from its high point in 1979."
Actually, my statement is contrary to your claim. If, as you say, I claimed that illegality caused a decline in usage, then how on Earth can marijuana be illegal for 70 years, and have a high point in 1979?
You're the one who attempted to correlate legal status in post #189.
Just go away
What??? Cocaine use is down. That is success.
If cocaine were legal, use would increase. Ergo, criminalization is responsible (in part) for the decrease, which anyone but you would call a success.
You're the one who acknowledged that the legalization of alcohol has led to its increased use by teens
Wrong; "equally true" can mean "both false" as well as "both true."
Why should I?
So that's not your claim? I apologize. What is your point in noting that decline?
What??? Cocaine use is down. That is success.
Sorry, once you acknowledged that factors other than legal status affected substance use, you invalidated the argument 'use is down thus criminalization is a success.'
Are you trying to say that criminalization does not work? That we should junk our entire criminal justice system and just go back to everyone meting out justice as they see fit?
Only the part of it that applies to consensual 'crimes.' Law against violating rights work much better; 63% of murder cases are closed; I'm sure not 1/1000th as many violations of drug laws are even discovered.
It is higher than that. Apparently the seriousness of the LE against the crime relates to the success of th effort. I'm sure not 1/1000th as many violations of drug laws are even discovered.
The dreaded WOD must not be that dreaded, huh?
Problem is that your thought process is void of logic.
Ah, the eternal equivocator. Far be it from me to expect MrLeRoy to actually take a position on something.
Just a wild-a$$ed guess here, but could it be that they're not pursued with as much vigor? As you suggesting that drug crimes are equivalent to murder, and that we should treat them as such?
You want 63% closure on drug crimes? That can be done you know, so watch what you wish for.
Unless, of course, you wish to deny that legalization would increase use. If so, then state it here and now or shut up.
I know of no evidence that enforcement of drug laws is less "serious" than that of murder laws.
I'm sure not 1/1000th as many violations of drug laws are even discovered.
The dreaded WOD must not be that dreaded, huh?
I dread the way it makes drugs highly profitable and places those profits in criminal hands.
Problem is that your thought process is void of logic.
With no argument to back up your statement, it is no more than a schoolyard taunt.
Then you favor legalization of cocaine?
Sorry for not adopting your straw men.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.