Lots of qualifiers and language in there to “soften” the impact of the pro-dopers
Then there’s this:
“only about nine percent of users developed dependency to the drug”
Gee, ONLY nine percent? Well that certainly makes it worth it. Even ONLY one percent is enough to avoid this crap. Stay away from it.
Gee, ONLY nine percent? Well that certainly makes it worth it. Even ONLY one percent is enough to avoid this crap. Stay away from it.
I agree - along with alcohol and tobacco, for which "dependence was found among 14 and 24 percent of study participants."
And what percentage of drinkers become alcoholics?
The question of drug legalization turns not on whether drugs are bad for their users — they are — but whether the harms to society created by having the government not treat psychoactive substances as a criminal matter (basically an uptick in the number of people ruining their lives, and indirectly the lives of those around them by using drugs) are greater or less than the harms created by treating use of and trade in psychoactive substances as a matter of criminal law (erosion of civil liberties through increasingly drastic enforcement measures like no-knock raids and asset forfeiture laws, creating a cash-flow for ruthless and often terrorist-linked criminal enterprises, lack of quality control of the the product leading to dangers to users besides those inherent in the use of psychoactive drugs, black-market premium pricing of drugs leading to property crime to support habits, defining users to be criminals thereby preventing them from seeking medical help for their habit,...)
Psychoactive recreational drugs are bad. Keeping them illegal makes them worse, not just for the users, but for society as a whole.
That’s the serious argument — not “pro-dope” just anti-drug-war — not turning at all on the notion that one’s body is one’s own and one can ingest or inhale what one want (that’ a “pro-dope” argument), just that making them illegal rather than treating them the way we treat alcohol and tobacco, creates worse problems than it solves.
Honestly the only bright line I can find between the psychoactive drugs we’ve chosen to keep legal (alcohol, nicotine and caffeine) and those we’ve outlawed is that the former were popular in Europe at the time of the American Founding. None of the dire things drug warriors predict would happen under legalization were true in the 19th century when the government didn’t prevent trade in or use of marijuana, peyote, cocaine or opiates, includ laudanum (tincture of opium) which was suprisingly popular.
It actually surprises me the degree to which conservatives now champion what was originally a left-wing progressive cause: drug prohibition, like the income tax, direct election of Senators, moralizing foreign policy devoid of connection to American national interests and the Federal Reserve is one of the baleful legacies of Woodrow Wilson’s administration.
I live in California and know first hand that the laws here are a joke.
I know of one older guy, who got a medical certificate that enables him to grow up to 6 plants for personal use to deal with old sports and work injuries pain.
His son, who is 20 years old, applied for and got his own certificate, so he is also entitled to grow "... up to 6 plants." As to how and why? Severe headaches.
The further explanation?
There's this doctor in town...
Another personal example is a young woman I met 14 years ago. She is now 35 and on public assistance. Hers is a different path to oblivion. She started using at age 14, and discovered to her chagrin, that genetics plays a major role in the permanent and apparently irreversible damage resulting from marihuana use. Alcohol and other illegal drugs were also a factor.
This woman is one of the most erudite, well educated people I ever met--- when she is not being pursued by the demons of paranoia and the eating disorders, weight problems swinging from becoming skeletal to morbidly obese, resulting from the cocktail of mood altering drugs necessary to control mental issues including chronic depression, suicidal tendencies and the ever present paranoia.
Would she be "normal" had she refrained from illegal drugs?
No one, professional or not, will ever know for sure.