Which drugs do you think should be legal for personal use?

[Redefeatbush04]

Mike Keller - not sure what you mean by that.  I didn't say what the legal status of anything should be, simply where one item should be relative to the others.

sbane - you can Youtube that

Yeah crazy stuff....and its legal. F'in expensive though. Overall not worth it.

I've done it 8 or 9 times. Glad I did it but I'd have to agree ...... not really worth it. It is certainly mindblowing but most people find its effects to be predominately negative. This also makes it not all that much of a public threat. They will try it .... go "never again".... and that will be that.

[MK]

Drugs are bad. 

Thats all I can say.

[Lunar]

Drugs are bad. 

Thats all I can say.

What's wrong with me saying a drug you've never heard of should be "more illegal" than 95% of substances out there?  Especially a drug I'd like to see become more illegal than it currently is -- right now Salvia is legal for anyone over 18.

[MK]

Drugs are bad. 

Thats all I can say.

What's wrong with me saying a drug you've never heard of should be "more illegal" than 95% of substances out there?  Especially a drug I'd like to see become more illegal than it currently is -- right now Salvia is legal for anyone over 18.

Friendly fire.
 LOL my mistake Lunar.

[dead0man]

Drugs are bad. 

One of the most ignorant comments I've ever read here.  I know you don't actually mean "drugs" are bad.  You mean "the drugs that have been illegal since I was born and for reasons I don't understand" are bad.  Yes, that's an easy answer to come up with and as a bonus, fits in your world view.  Hopefully with a little growth you can get past this.

[MK]

Drugs are bad. 

One of the most ignorant comments I've ever read here.  I know you don't actually mean "drugs" are bad.  You mean "the drugs that have been illegal since I was born and for reasons I don't understand" are bad.  Yes, that's an easy answer to come up with and as a bonus, fits in your world view.  Hopefully with a little growth you can get past this.

Thats correct.

I have already debated the issue on a serious level a few pages back before you and the other guy started to validate your case by stating the different type of drugs you have experienced.

The "I have did them, so they must be Ok for legal sale" argument is ignorant.

We shouldn't start the name calling because it was a good debate up until now.

[dead0man]

Where did I say "I've done them so they must be ok for legal sale"?  I can't take illegal drugs, I could lose my security clearance and thus, my job.  I don't want drugs to be legal so I can take them, I want drugs to be legal because it's completly un-American for them to be illegal.  The only reason they are illegal now is because of ignorance.

[MK]

Where did I say "I've done them so they must be ok for legal sale"?  I can't take illegal drugs, I could lose my security clearance and thus, my job.  I don't want drugs to be legal so I can take them, I want drugs to be legal because it's completly un-American for them to be illegal.  The only reason they are illegal now is because of ignorance.

[/b]


Not true.

You are being inconsiderate of the facts.  Iam for making Cannabis legal- Ive already said that , but HARD drugs being legal is ridiculous.  There are things you need to consider before saying such a blanklet statement.

[dead0man]

But as this thread has made clear, you have no idea what a "hard drug" is.

[MK]

But as this thread has made clear, you have no idea what a "hard drug" is.

Iam not even going to reply to that silly statement.

Libertarians and there never ending debate for legalization of drugs.

[MK]

What's wrong with asking how you define a "hard drug?"

I have my own personal definition, which involved addictiveness, lack of medical benefits, and harm potential.

Why should you discard anything a libertarian has to say simply because from a libertarian?  I mean, I am without a doubt that you and I (and Deadman) are two ships passing in the night regarding much of policymaking, but the very fact that someone is libertarian is inadequate to disqualify their point of view...

You should elaborate.  There are legitimate disagreements to the libertarian point of view on drugs (I actually bet I could name more of them than you, despite being libertarian myself), but you should focus on those instead of broad stereotypes.

You are kidding me right? 

Iam talking about illegal psychoactive drugs LSD, X, Meth, Mushrooms ... you know the deal.

These drugs shouldn't be legal for sale, and there are many valid reasons for that.

Don't try to box me in on this because I actually do understand the drug issue very well.

[MK]

Do you?

On what merits should a drug be legal for recreational purposes versus prescription only?  Please do distinguish alcohol and tobacco from all those evil others that should be illegal.

I'm pretty open on the subject, actually.  More than my antagonistic rhetoric gives away.

No psychoactive drug should be legal for recreational use.  Now iam willing to give on Cannabis, although that hasn't always been my stance.  Iam not against prescription drugs, I do understand that alot of these "Hard  drugs" can be used for medical use/ prescriptions.   But thats not what iam debating. Iam debating  the ideal that hard drugs/ psychoactives should be made legal for recreational use. 

 - Tobacco is not a mind altering drug.

- Alcohol you have a good point there, but then again I wasn't around in 1933 when it was huge debate against it. 

My question to you is:  Do you really think psychoactive drugs should be made legal?

[MK]

Personally, tobacco is pretty psychoactive.  If you've ever done a rip of it, you'd know what I mean.  You're not yourself for a couple hours.  I've done that for tobacco and it's not fun.  I haven't touched tobacco (or even pot) for two years for that very reason.

I don't see why the 1933 debate is irrelevant today.  Why can't we learn our lessons from that prohibition debate?  In that, although alcohol is a destructive, addictive drug (and Lunar's favorite), it's better to have it legal because it being it reduces gang violence and increases drug quality (insofar as harmful impurities).

Yes you get a Buzz when first time lighting up a cig.. I know, been there.  Its not a psychoactive though.

You can reduce gang violence by doing my ideal of prison reform that I layed out on this forum.

[MK]

Wait, how do you define "psychoactive?"

Because that's not what I'm talking about.

 Alters your brain.

[dead0man]

Wait, how do you define "psychoactive?"

Because that's not what I'm talking about.

 Alters your brain.

That's how you define "psychoactive" and you're claiming tobacco isn't?  How odd.

[MK]

So tobacco and alcohol don't alter your brain?

Alcohol yes

Tobacco not really.

Hell iam addicted to NOS energy drinks, which is like a nicotine addiction in a way.  But I wouldn't compare it to being hooked to Meth or LSD..


Hope all of you know that by making these drugs legal you would pretty much kill any chances of a well ran Gov Healthcare or the system we have now.

[dead0man]

There is a chance well run govt funded health care now?  I'll give you that there is a chance we'll get govt funded health care, but I'll eat my hat if it's in any way "well run".

[MK]

So tobacco and alcohol don't alter your brain?

Alcohol yes

Tobacco not really.

Hell iam addicted to NOS energy drinks, which is like a nicotine addiction in a way.  But I wouldn't compare it to being hooked to Meth or LSD..


Hope all of you know that by making these drugs legal you would pretty much kill any chances of a well ran Gov Healthcare or the system we have now.

what

Natl healthcare and legalization of hard drugs = Train wreck waiting to happen.

[MK]

Neither side in this debate will give up. We would be here all year debating.

[Redefeatbush04]

So tobacco and alcohol don't alter your brain?

Alcohol yes

Tobacco not really.

Hell iam addicted to NOS energy drinks, which is like a nicotine addiction in a way.  But I wouldn't compare it to being hooked to Meth or LSD..


Hope all of you know that by making these drugs legal you would pretty much kill any chances of a well ran Gov Healthcare or the system we have now.

Nicotine, in the doses found in cigarettes, acts as a mild stimulant. It is most certainly psychoactive.

There are NOS energy drinks at my corner store with 343 mg of caffeine! Most have less though.....and those 343 drinks are perfect for a day in the library

Yeah - meth addition pretty much sucks

You can't get hooked on LSD. It is not addictive.

I already responded to your comment on healthcare and you ignored it so I am not going to bother again.

[Earth]

Natl healthcare and legalization of hard drugs = Train wreck waiting to happen.

Well, we won't know if drug legalization is a train wreck or not until it's implemented, and the chances are mighty slim for it to occur.

...
Iam talking about illegal psychoactive drugs LSD, X, Meth, Mushrooms ... you know the deal.

These drugs shouldn't be legal for sale, and there are many valid reasons for that.
...

Since we are trying to have a mature conversation about this, what are these valid reasons? It's easy to simply say drugs are bad, and leave it at that, but it doesn't do your argument any justice.

Drugs being illegal only creates more criminals, by criminalizing the act of buying, selling, and possession. The prisons are full of non violent convicts that under a system of complete legalization wouldn't be in there. By keeping hard drugs, and even soft drugs illegal, the black market booms, and organized crime is making a killing by having a monopoly on the drug trade. Legalizing drugs would take away the power of these cartels, and gangs because if it's legal, prices would drop because of competition.

People, if they were inclined to buy, now could be able to make that choice themselves, without the threat of incarceration. By ending the war on drugs, the government could now tax the business, and possibly use that budget to fund a better rehabilitation program for addicts, or anything else they see fit now that money is not funneled into this pointless war.

If an objection is made that now even kids could buy drugs, well, it only stands to reason that there be a legal age that one must reach to buy, similar to alcohol, or tobacco. It's sad that the situation now, teens have such an easy time buying marijuana or harder drugs (the illegal ones), but have a tougher time buying alcohol. The legal, regulated drug is tougher to acquire.

[Jake]

It's mainstream American sentiment though.  I forgive it.

Ignorance shouldn't be forgiven. It makes the ignorant person feel like they aren't ignorant.

[Horus]

So tobacco and alcohol don't alter your brain?

Alcohol yes

Tobacco not really.

Hell iam addicted to NOS energy drinks, which is like a nicotine addiction in a way.  But I wouldn't compare it to being hooked to Meth or LSD..


Hope all of you know that by making these drugs legal you would pretty much kill any chances of a well ran Gov Healthcare or the system we have now.

Let me clarify this, so there are no further questions. LSD is not addictive. LSD is not addictive. LSD is not addictive. You can not be hooked to LSD. There. Still don't understand?

[© tweed]

Wait, how do you define "psychoactive?"

Because that's not what I'm talking about.

 Alters your brain.

nicotine addiction permanently alters your brain structure

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Wait, how do you define "psychoactive?"

Because that's not what I'm talking about.

 Alters your brain.

nicotine addiction permanently alters your brain structure

Life permanently alters your brain structure.