Because we need the rich.

Actually yes I have seen what OVERDOSING on crack does first hand but I've seen what OVERDOSING on cigarettes and alcohol does as well but no one is calling Marlboro or Budweiser immoral. Guess cause the faces who make the money aren't brown.
I also spend a lot of time reading up on the subject and even the almighty crack cocaine isn't devastating until people overdose on it.
Read some stuff from neurobiologist Dr. Ben Carson it'll change your perception.

 

I was referring more to how crack destroys a person over time. The people I knew did not die from it but their lives were surely destroyed. The best thieves are crack heads. How much lower can you go than stealing from your own mom?? You see them working for slave wages, by cutting grass in shit and walking to the store to fetch peoples food like some fool. They even joke that the food is still hot when the crack head gets back. Renting out their own cars to teenagers. I have seen beautiful women start to look like a lump of shit. A white friend of mine had a mom so fine that I wanted to fuck her even when I was in middle school. Guess what by the time I graduated high school she looked like stir fried shit. He no longer speaks to her. Oh yeah his Dad was on crack too and guess what they all hate each other now. Fuck that pass me the corn syrup.

 

That's an extreme case I feel like if it were regulated you wouldn't see this bs. Besides crack isn't the only illegal drug. What about selling weed? Is that immoral? What about mushrooms?

 

Crack and heroin are extreme drugs. Weed does not compare.

 

But according to you illegal drugs are immoral. Weed is illegal in most states

 

I would vote for weed to become legal. I just think legalizing crack, meth, and heroin would be a mistake.

 

Would a good cutoff be perhaps at any drug that is physically addictive?

 

When crack users start spending all their waking time thinking of ways to get their next fix and chase that high, they're done. From what I've seen a cocaine habit particularly freebasing is not manageable long term.

It fucks of the brain chemistry long term and alters a person's priorities until crack is THE most important thing above all else.

I was told a long time ago that eventually cocaine and heroin kick everyone's ass if you get into that habit.

It's like clockwork.

You watch someone develop a heroin or crack habit and in five years or less their lives will be falling apart.

All drugs are prone to abuse. We all know about people who sniff paint and household cleaning products to catch a buzz.:smt100


But weed is much closer to alcohol in that a lot of people can live healthy, productive lives while still partaking.

I don't know of anyone who's got their shit mostly together who gets high on crack or heroin 2+ times a week.


It's like the speed limit. Most drivers can handle driving safely going 55-65 mph.

Raise the speed limit to 120 mph on the highway and the vehicular accident rate would increase exponentially.

If weed becomes mostly non-criminalized across the country, I hope they put a much weaker strain of it on the market and not just have it be that glow-in-the-dark Indo shit that makes some folks trip out.

Beer versus whiskey in a sense.

 

I think that there are other points of consideration, because drugs such as LSD and PCP may not be very addictive but are still very dangerous and harmful to a persons health and mental state. Don't think it is ok to just give the green light on recreational drug use, but I do value freedoms of modern society. It is just hard to write a cutoff in stone, however; lets start with allowing recreational use of what we know is less harmful than alcohol: Marijuana. Then perhaps we could consider codeine and promethazine (without prescription), but I would leave that up to a board of people who finished med school ideally. Anyway all offers of recreational drugs via media should remain illegal.

lmao! I agree with this post except for the bolded portion.

 

*Ideally people that finished med school that work in an area of the med field that does not require or allow them to write prescriptions.* In order to eliminate the conflict of interest.

 

I heard an excellent discussion on a science blog that argued that LSD does none of the things that are regularly attributed to it in the popular mythology, i.e. horrifying flashbacks, long-term metabolism, etc. I think there's a good argument to ban PCP altogether. Marijuana would definitely be a good start for legalization. Assess its impact before considering adding anything else to the schedule of legal substances.

 

All I can say is please do the research before you guys take what you're told about "drugs"
Dr Ben Carson is a great start, he has impeccable credentials and teaches at Columbia. He's not some drug counselor or even a doctor who only sees OD patients but he's a neurobiologist who has spend years studying the effects drugs have on the body and nearly all the negative things we attribute to drugs is purely a focus on those who over do it. Recently I've been doing so research into pyschadelics such as mushrooms, DMT and ayahuasca. There's nothing I can really say to change your minds but read some of the research with an open logical mind, it'll change your perspective.

 

That's what the science news show I listened to discussed. And beyond the study of overuse, there is also a lot of hyperbole and unsubstantiated statements about negative effects that don't withstand scientific scrutiny. But the entire discussion has become bound up in a morality debate.

Also, just realized that sloppy typing on my part in my previous comment left an impression I was saying something I wasn't, with regard to effects of drugs. Sorry, gang.

 

Which is ridiculous since most of those arguing support companies like big tobacco and alcohol which do far more damage.
Personally I'm not a fan of man made "drugs" but I think truth should be applied as often as possible not to misinform because when you do that it causes far more harm than good. Telling the public that weed is bad while supporting and allowing something as harmful as cigarettes which guarantees a 50% death toll over long term use creates distrust. If the motive is purely money and not the public well being then at least invest in something like weed that does next to no harm yet produces similar positive reactions that cigarettes do. Everyone wins.

 

Because they haven't figured out how to control production in the hands of Big Pharma. The only downside to marijuana use is the damage smoking does to the respiratory system, but that's only really an issue in instances of major abuse, must as you said in your earlier comment.

 

And the great thing about it is you can use it in tea or eat in food no smoke damage but still great effects.
I don't get why I can't just grow my own in my home. It's not hurting a soul, but I guess someone needs to make their billions at our expense.

 

You mean Pfizer? Lol

 

I actually applied for a job with them when I was in undergrad and ended working for one of their competitors just cleaning. At the time it was an awesome job with great pay but my mom made me quit. She thought cleaning chemicals would get me sick. What the heck did she know.... hold on my third is itching lol

 

Is it glowing too? lol

 

I took a very eye opening class on the brain in college and a big portion of the class was focused on the affects that drugs have on the brain. Also health biology was my favorite subject in hs because my school had nothing on my other interests which was always was electronics/electron physics and business. Considering that and my background of seeing the first hand affects of crack cocaine, I am not exactly following the crowd of public opinion.