Thread: Why are drugs illegal?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I challenge all three of you to find me some information on real world examples of what you speculate would be a problem in regard to salvia divinorum. You sound like the politicians I am talking about. It's a bunch of speculation. Tell me about how the drug has been a menace in the past. Give me some heavy statistics. I want to learn.

Amaze and Howie, please tell me what you think about the idea of banning alcohol. Psychology student has already said he thinks it should be illegal. What do you think? What about tobacco? What about snow skiing? Auto racing? Jet skiing? Football? Gymnastics? Boxing? Cave diving? Hot air ballooning? Recreational/Sunday/country automobile driving? Motorcycling? Three wheeling? BMX biking? Trampoline jumping? Hang gliding? The government better get to work on banning those things that have resulted in a substantial amount of serious injury and death, most of them also for nonparticipating bystanders. But salvia divinorum does not make that list. Why should people go to prison over it?

A user, under his own will, makes the decision to take a mind altering drug.
This in effect was his decision. upon that decision, he makes the mistake of taking a hit of acid on the way to a concert. Now this decision is now capable of effecting others. Others that did not have any say in this decision.
Regardless of what is now legal or what offense it is considered, how I relate to, what I believe is right has no relevance to the consideration of legalizing something else.
Do I believe it should be a felony - no
Is it a waste to put these offenders in jail - yes. All those parallels you insist on bringing up, while pertinent in its own right, do still not justify the reason behind legalization.
Notice: smoking bands, speed limits, drug enforcement, driver's logs, trespassing -these are all things that infringe on another citizens life without their consent.
Jet skiing? Football? Gymnastics? Boxing? Cave diving? Hot air ballooning? Recreational/Sunday/country automobile driving? Motorcycling? Three wheeling? BMX biking? Trampoline jumping? Hang gliding?
These are all done on a persons own will and the effects are on that individual alone.
To argue that a three wheeler ran out of control and hit an innocent bystander would be an rational, grasping for straws, argument.

Do you see this difference?
Becasue I realize that these psychedelics have on occasions been an eye opening experience and at times just fun, I will use reason and forgo my right to use those substances for the sake that I realize the vast majority of decision making of the average individual is flawed.

All the while I can still insist that the government should remain in check.
There have been a vast array of topics towards discussion of an intrusive government.
This still seems to be subjective in nature and I will acknowledge it always will be.

Originally Posted by psychology student

I notice that you use Freudian psychology to justify the supposedly qualitative benefit of the drugs. Specifically that they suppress the Ego and expose "denial". Freudian psychology is not scientific, due to common unfalsifiability and lack of empirical methods, according to modern psychologists. Hence it is a precarious thing to use it as justification in a real, political debate, with implications to society. Moreover, denial is not a serious clinically-recognised psychological conditon. Although I have heard of LSD healing depression from a link posted by 27 on behalf of Howie.

To the best of my ability, I have outlined the reasons to why I have sided on one side of the fence, rather than the other. I understand that I will be viewed as narrow minded, weak and stupid.
Notice too:
Alcohol, tobacco and firearms are all legal. to a degree. < Right or wrong!
Taking away someones right opposed to giving someone a right, is a very loaded quandary.

Originally Posted by psychology student

If they treated an illness but had the same risk, legalisation is plausible, but they don't.

Originally Posted by psychology student

Although I have heard of LSD healing depression from a link posted by 27 on behalf of Howie.

Marijuana is currently used to treat cancer and AIDS patients among many others. You said if illegal drugs could treat diseases they could be legalized. So, Marijuana and psychedelics treat illness, should they be legal?

Medicinal purposes.
An entirely different proposition don't you think?
just like:
Should alcohol be illegal?
Do psychedelics enhance an artist' ability? <-- I would like to argue that one. But it just takes us further away from the issue
Should this should that.

Originally Posted by Howie

A user, under his own will, makes the decision to take a mind altering drug.
This in effect was his decision. upon that decision, he makes the mistake of taking a hit of acid on the way to a concert. Now this decision is now capable of effecting others. Others that did not have any say in this decision.

Something could happen to somebody else. I agree.

Originally Posted by Howie

AJet skiing? Football? Gymnastics? Boxing? Cave diving? Hot air ballooning? Recreational/Sunday/country automobile driving? Motorcycling? Three wheeling? BMX biking? Trampoline jumping? Hang gliding?
These are all done on a persons own will and the effects are on that individual alone.
To argue that a three wheeler ran out of control and hit an innocent bystander would be an rational, grasping for straws, argument.

No, those things do happen. The statistics on death and serious injuries resulting to others from recreational driving are pretty high. All of those other things can and soemtimes do hurt people not participating too.

Think about your hypothetical concert goer. That guy could be hit by somebody out driving recreationally. The person who hits him could be in a car or a motorcycle. It happens all the time, does it not? If he walks through the woods, he could be hit by somebody on a three wheeler, quite possibly a drunk person on a three wheeler. Have you ever seen a football player run out of bounds and run over reporters or others on the sidelines? What if the concert goer takes a hot air balloon to the concert and lands in traffic, causing a multitude of wrecks? Your what if is just like my what ifs.

Originally Posted by Howie

Do you see this difference?
Becasue I realize that these psychedelics have on occasions been an eye opening experience and at times just fun, I will use reason and forgo my right to use those substances for the sake that I realize the vast majority of decision making of the average individual is flawed.

Will you do the same for the activities I listed? You could at least do it with recreational driving. Are you up for that?

Originally Posted by Howie

Notice too:
Alcohol, tobacco and firearms are all legal. to a degree. < Right or wrong!
Taking away someones right opposed to giving someone a right, is a very loaded quandary.

So you don't think salvia divinorum needed to be banned? What do you think of banning morning glory seeds?

Your forgot about this...

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I challenge all three of you to find me some information on real world examples of what you speculate would be a problem in regard to salvia divinorum. You sound like the politicians I am talking about. It's a bunch of speculation. Tell me about how the drug has been a menace in the past. Give me some heavy statistics. I want to learn.

Originally Posted by Howie

Medicinal purposes.
An entirely different proposition don't you think?
just like:
Should alcohol be illegal?
Do psychedelics enhance an artist' ability? <-- I would like to argue that one. But it just takes us further away from the issue
Should this should that.

I didn't bring it up, psychology student did, I want to know what he thinks.

27 said "Marijuana is currently used to treat cancer and AIDS"
I don't imagine that they cure cancer or Aids but probably provide pain relief? Im not sure, what do they do?
The point is they don't cure ilnesses, so they aren't covered by my "plausible" point. And the LSD treating depression is a recent study, i think.
If reliable, multiple empirical evidences emerge showing that an illness can be treated by illegal drugs then in is plausible for legalisation or prescription. Though this need not mean legal for leisurely use!

For example anti-psychotic drugs have a whole list of dangerous side-effects: one being that they lead to Parkinson's-like symptoms in long-term users. Yet they often can treat schizophrenia and psychosis which are serious mental illnesses not only for individuals but for society.

Its ultimately about weighing up the benefits and disadvantages not to the users fancies but to his and societes needs; drug legalisation depends on this.

And to SKA's american indian religious question (sorry i forgot). I don't think that we should legalise potentially dangerous substances on purely religious grounds; although I read that this does occur with mescaline in some states in the USA, correct me if im wrong, whereas it is a Class A drug (the worst kind) here. On this basis, (and im pushing the boat out a little too far, dammit i got my trousers wet ) should we legalise polygamous relationships or consensual murder should some satanic cult ask for it?
Rastafarianism demands the compulsory smoking of marijuana, but it is not legal in Britain or America?

Originally Posted by psychology student

27 said "Marijuana is currently used to treat cancer and AIDS"

I said "cancer and AIDS patients". Pain relief, yes. Anyway, it's a whole lot less addicting and harmful than the pain killers usually used.

Yes, it provides pain relief as well as battles nausea from medication. Also just like 27 said, it's less addicting and less harmful than other painkillers.

Cannibanoids in the bloodstream have also been proven to fight cancer cells.

I want to make sure that everybody understands the horrors of golf and the need to ban this terrible sport that has no beneficial use in society. Some guy was killed by a golf ball. The golf ball hitter thought he was minding his own business, but his dangerous decision to play golf turned out to not be just all about him. It's time to declare WAR on golf!

http://golf.about.com/b/2005/02/27/m...-golf-ball.htm

Okay, get your legislators ready. Off to prison the golfers go. This demands an immediate pissing on freedom!

P.S.- Has anybody found any serious business salvia divinorum stories yet?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I want to make sure that everybody understands the horrors of golf and the need to ban this terrible sport that has no beneficial use in society. Some guy was killed by a golf ball. The golf ball hitter thought he was minding his own business, but his dangerous decision to play golf turned out to not be just all about him. It's time to declare WAR on golf!

http://golf.about.com/b/2005/02/27/m...-golf-ball.htm

Okay, get your legislators ready. Off to prison the golfers go. This demands an immediate pissing on freedom!

P.S.- Has anybody found any serious business salvia divinorum stories yet?

Omg, BAN GOLF!!!!!!!!!! ban video games too, ban schooling, ban freedom of speech (although it's pretty much non existant because pricks with authority say "stfu or i will prison you foo" for saying something), BAN THE INTARNET!

BAN THE INTARNET!

i believe it's called the interblag.

Originally Posted by Pyrofan1

i believe it's called the interblag.

Intarnag...INTARNAG!

Psychology student needs some first hand drug education. It should be a prerequisite for psychology classes or something. Lol!

No, those things do happen. The statistics on death and serious injuries resulting to others from recreational driving are pretty high. All of those other things can and soemtimes do hurt people not participating too.

Like I said -grasping for straws. I can't believe I have to point this out *An accident. Just as it even says -"How afwul the younger Parlin must feel about this terrible accident. Our condolences go out to the family, and we hope that the younger Parlin finds a healthy way to deal with the terrible emotions he must be feeling right now."
Those people you do speak of on the sidelines, are there on their own will too. If they are not, it is still considered an accident. Don't you agree?
Like talking on cell phones. That is a decision not an accident. It is proving to effect others, hence the ban on driving & using them in some areas.
Accident. wow.
This thread was an accident.

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

Omg, BAN GOLF!!!!!!!!!! ban video games too, ban schooling, ban freedom of speech (although it's pretty much non existant because pricks with authority say "stfu or i will prison you foo" for saying something), BAN THE INTARNET!

This is always something to be aware of too. How easy it is to band together and stand behind something that, on the surface looks so obvious and easy to stand for.

Originally Posted by Michael

Psychology student needs some first hand drug education. It should be a prerequisite for psychology classes or something. Lol!

I learned about drugs and their effects in my Psychology 101 class...i assume other people would too?

I also did a summer interning at a medical clinic under the substances branch pretty much doing research. That's where a lot of my knowledge comes from. And, um...experience.

by "first hand" I supose you mean drug-taking, in which case And also I dispute the location of b12.
But no I have not learned directly about drugs first-hand. Im starting uni in september, guess which subject? So hopefully I'll learn more about it then.

Originally Posted by Howie

Like I said -grasping for straws. I can't believe I have to point this out *An accident. Just as it even says -"How afwul the younger Parlin must feel about this terrible accident. Our condolences go out to the family, and we hope that the younger Parlin finds a healthy way to deal with the terrible emotions he must be feeling right now."
Those people you do speak of on the sidelines, are there on their own will too. If they are not, it is still considered an accident. Don't you agree?
Like talking on cell phones. That is a decision not an accident. It is proving to effect others, hence the ban on driving & using them in some areas.
Accident. wow.
This thread was an accident.



This is always something to be aware of too. How easy it is to band together and stand behind something that, on the surface looks so obvious and easy to stand for.

Now tell me what your point is. Then tell me about some salvia accidents.

Well the only case I could find was this one. Apparently this case is the reason salvia has been made illegal in seven states.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Now tell me what your point is. Then tell me about some salvia accidents.

By Now Universal, if you do not get my point, you will never get it.
Salvia, that is now the new diversion aside from alcohol, cigarettes and what ever else you can conjure up.
Let's talk of peyote now.

Originally Posted by 27

Well the only case I could find was this one. Apparently this case is the reason salvia has been made illegal in seven states.

It is interesting that alcohol was also in the suicide committer's blood, yet the politicians that banned salvia because of the suicide did not say one thing about any need to ban alcohol even though 65&#37; of suicides happen under the influence of alcohol. The guy was also thought to have been in a depression, and he was on an acne medication that has strong psychological side-effects? Is there a push to ban that acne medication? That ONE case is what influenced the banning of salvia in Delaware, and other states are being influenced by it too. How could those politicians possibly not know how absurd that is?

Originally Posted by Howie

By Now Universal, if you do not get my point, you will never get it.
Salvia, that is now the new diversion aside from alcohol, cigarettes and what ever else you can conjure up.
Let's talk of peyote now.

Okay, let's talk about peyote. Fill in the blanks... Peyote should be illegal because ___________________________________________, but golf should be legal because _______________________________________. Try to work your bizarre tangent about "accident" into your answer.

I mentioned salvia specifically because I asked you repeatedly in the other thread to tell me some stories about salvia causing death or serious injury. You still have not done that. I think we should compare notes on salvia and golf. But we can compare peyote and golf first. We can get DMT into the discussion after that if you want to.

Posted 12/30/06

'Salvia Divinorum Experience'

I am going to post this as is, unrefined and unedited so it may likely seem abstract and...well outright idiotic to some. To change it would defeat the purpose.

My thoughts on viewing abstract art:

Grace, elegance, Beauty. It it not only defined by the nature of the observer? The mind itself, when by itself can stimulate creation, unfold boundaries and consider.
Can one posses the ability to see beauty from all sides? Is it not a duality? An introspective, interactive alignment of thought perception and awareness. Spacial recognition of fact and fiction. Neither to which it does not matter. The state of existence is illusory in nature. So to is beauty in any given instance. Maybe only recognized for that instance beauty never "is" beauty. Like an experience, it arises and unfolds to any number of given variables.
The painting is....
The painting is what? The painting is nothing, it just is. No attachment, no preconditioned thought of what was or will be. The painting is. The painting is to one what it may not be to another. The painting is not beauty. In form it has a past and an inevitable end. on view it should matter not who the creator was. Experienced one day as a pleasure and the next a trial. That is expression, changing in form always.
The painting is.......


I myself have not read this since the actual experience three days ago.
I find it was a feeble attempt to express how abstract work can be appreciated by all and not labeled.

The above experiment was conducted with Salvia Divnorum extract. Not diluted. Eight drops in two increments.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I mentioned salvia specifically because I asked you repeatedly in the other thread to tell me some stories about salvia causing death or serious injury. You still have not done that. I think we should compare notes on salvia and golf. But we can compare peyote and golf first. We can get DMT into the discussion after that if you want to.

Had Salvia been the issue in this topic until saliva became illegal in Illinois? Where? Somewhere in the latter parts of the sixth page? Prior to that it was in the SKA'a list of non dangerous drugs.

You have shared with us that you have had some laughs about it becoming illegal, or how the effects (whatever you deem those to be) only last ten minutes[i].
Or how it cannot practically (almost; nearly?) be illegal.
Or attach it to your exaggerated list of activities, then ask, "should people go to jail for this?" I do not recall anyone mentioning jail. Do you?
How illegal drug users should be handled is another example of what has NOT been the topic of conversation. Similar to medical usage.
Sure, They could be. You just throw them in where you feel you deem appropriate, where you feel they will make an impact.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It is interesting that alcohol was also in the suicide committer's blood, yet the politicians that banned salvia because of the suicide did not say one thing about any need to ban alcohol even though 65% of suicides happen under the influence of alcohol. The guy was also thought to have been in a depression, and he was on an acne medication that has strong psychological side-effects? Is there a push to ban that acne medication? That ONE case is what influenced the banning of salvia in Delaware, and other states are being influenced by it too. How could those politicians possibly not know how absurd that is?



Okay, let's talk about peyote. Fill in the blanks... Peyote should be illegal because ___________________________________________, but golf should be legal because _______________________________________. Try to work your bizarre tangent about "accident" into your answer

You do not seem to understand the underlying concepts I guess.
As a recreational driver, one does not set out to create an accident. Nor does a salvia user. How is this different?
Taking salvia on your own accord was not an accident was it?
The "hit" lasted only ten minutes. Does that make the difference?
If a driver has an accident and he is proven to be at fault, he is accountable for those actions.
I have made several attempts at pointing out a difference between engaging in an activity that automatically puts you at fault and others at risk, as opposed to the difference of that of an accident. Even though an accident, someone is still accountable for his/her own actions. Is this a pretty bizarre tangent?
Do I have to slowly and deliberately take golf, explain that scenario, then go on to football, so on and so forth?
Do I have to take each drug individually that (I believe we all agree) alters the minds perception. Then laboriously explain why this differentiates from the above?

Exactly, when you are driving a car, you are responsible for your own actions. Shouldn't it be the same way with drugs? If you hurt someone while on drugs, you should be responsible for that. But it shouldn't be illegal to posses or use drugs.

Originally Posted by 27

Exactly, when you are driving a car, you are responsible for your own actions. Shouldn't it be the same way with drugs? If you hurt someone while on drugs, you should be responsible for that. But it shouldn't be illegal to posses or use drugs.

It does take an action in both cases. You have to get behind the wheel.
You do ingest drugs, chemicals or herbs consciously, on your own will and terms. This unfortuantly varies for some who are the responsible user. A car does not alter a person's perception - chemically!!!!!!!!!
Is this that hard to understand?