The Sad Drug War Is Necessary

[Pandora]

Sure you can smoke both of them, but with cigarettes you're actually addicted to the drug nicotine.

what is the drug in pot and why is that less addictive

 

[foggedinn]

As an ex long term pothead, I feel that pot was de facto legalized over forty years ago.
As soon as our society began using politically protected deep cover confidential informant to sell drugs, it became a fact that agents of the state were selling drugs.
Fully ninety percent of the pot I bought over several decades, I bought directly off of police informents.
I was aware of it. My supplier was aware that I was aware of it. The police were aware that both my supplier and myself were aware that my suppier was an informent.
Personnally. I felt that it was an ideal arrangement. No one ever went to jail, and I had continuous longterm access to the best pot in town at the cheapest prices in town.

As I've said before: What war on drugs?

 

[PLC1]

Let's look at the facts, instead of sarcasm.

You say "look at what a disaster repealing prohibition was" and go on to list a few, very few, gangsters were immediately out of work. First, off, that's false. In case you missed it, the mafia is alive and well, even after repealing prohibition. The Mafia existed before prohibition, and they do to this day.

Let's move on to the facts about alcohol.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ac.htm

One-third of all fatal auto accidents in the US, involve an intoxicated driver.

In 1996 alone, there were over 17,100 auto fatalities related to intoxication.

Over 1.46 Million DUI arrests are made every year.

Of the 5.6 Million convicted offenders in the justice system at all levels, 2 Million of them, about 36%, were drinking at the time of their offense.

One-third of all assults are by people known to have been drinking at the time. Another third of all assaults, are by people the victim believed had been drinking, but the fact could not be established.

Three out of four assaults by spouses, or girl friends and boy friends, claim the attacker had been drinking before hand.

183,000 rapes and sexual assault yearly, are committed by people under the influences of alcohol.

661,000 aggravated assaults, and nearly 1.7 million simple
assaults, yearly, are committed by people under the influence of alcohol.

197,000 robberies yearly, are committed by people under the influence of alcohol.

The government estimates that roughly $408 Billion dollars in medical expenses, property damage/loss/replaced, lost money, lost income from injuries and other causes, are due to alcohol related crimes yearly.

A wide varity of alcohol related illnesses have grown in America, like Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, which devastates roughly 5 thousand children a year.

All this doesn't include the cost of broken families and marriages, as well as devastated children, due to alcoholism.
http://www.alcoholcostcalculator.org/

Entire industries exist around dealing with the problems of alcohol. From AA, to rehab, to Family intervention, to counseling for children who grew up with parents that drank.

So, go ahead, be sarcastic. But to those devastated by the social effects of alcohol, you won't find many snickering on your side.

You make a good case against alcohol.

Do you think we should bring back prohibition?

I'm sure you can make a good case against other drugs as well, as could I, and a lot of others. Does that mean that prohibition is a good idea?

You are aware, I'm sure, that we have more prisoners per capita in this country than anywhere else in the world. Could the war on drugs be a big part of the reason? How much longer can we afford to lock people up because of drug addiction?

 

[Chip]

Here's your original quote..



That suggests that less than 1% of the population HAS EVEN TRIED POT. Now if you had said...'less than 1% of the population uses pot"..it would be different.

As it is, I have proved, complete with documented evidence, that you play fast and loose with the truth. In fact, all of your posts in this thread have continued with several disturbing and telling trends... When you don't like a statistic...you blame it on the messenger..When your ignorance on this subject is exposed, such as your ridiculous claim that interdiction at the Mexican border will somehow have a noticeable effect on pot availability, you ignore it.

To put it bluntly, you sound like an average school child trying to explain string theory...you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. All you can do is repeat, almost verbatim, the same old tired "just say no" arguments.

Erroneous.

And, the drug-addict's litany of psychological projections here are, as always, irrelevant, other than the fact that they truly convict the drug-addict.

And, as usual, not only does the druggie continue to beat a dead horse he's long ago lost, he also continues to make no response to the tons of points previously made that accurately convict pot as being truly a damaging and deadly substance with which to suffer addiction.

Nor can we expect anything else from the oppositional defiant disordered drug addict.

He will continue to spend all his time divertively digressing from the heart of the matter ...

... Because, after all, the only thing he cares about is his next fix ...

... And he does not care how much truth he has to avoid and lie about to get that fix.

The drug-addict simply cannot be trusted to go to the heart of the matter and tell the truth.

Btw, Obama's new drug czar is former Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske. During his time, marijuana arrests were by his own words ..not a priority.

Irrelevant, meaningless.

The drug czar has a job that by definition requires him to actively oppose the spread of dangerous street drugs like pot.

But, once again, the pot addict brings nothing of real substance to the discussion ...

... Merely diverse mantric forms of his only chant: "Gimme My Drug!!!"

That's so unintelligent.

Indeed, that's why they call it dope.

 

[Chip]

You are aware, I'm sure, that we have more prisoners per capita in this country than anywhere else in the world. Could the war on drugs be a big part of the reason? How much longer can we afford to lock people up because of drug addiction?

We can afford to lock them up and protect our children from the list Andy provided of the many damaging and deadly behaviors druggies do ... for as long as it takes.

The truth of the matter is that we can't afford not to ...

... As the price of not doing so astronomically exceeds the cost of locking them up and forcing them into recovery.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yes, the drug war is most certainly necessary.

You're wrong.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Law enforcement continues to crackdown on pot growers, owners, pushers and soldiers, and when these additional agents arrive at the border, even less of the illegal drug trafficing of pot will get through.

That's what they said, in 1937.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Pot is not physically addictive, it can be psychologically addictive though...

....Just like food, with some people.

More-often-than-not, anyone who's gotten addicted....to anything....had personal-problems, loooooooooooooooooong before drugs came-along (for them).​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Indeed, there are plenty of web sites out there that are simply of, by and for the druggies in their attempt to inflict the scourge of deadly damaging pot on the entire world.

You're wrong.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

what is the drug in pot and why is that less addictive

Keep reading..........​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You are aware, I'm sure, that we have more prisoners per capita in this country than anywhere else in the world. Could the war on drugs be a big part of the reason? How much longer can we afford to lock people up because of drug addiction?

"Big Jim" Webb has (recently) addressed that.....and, he's no Librul.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

And, as usual, not only does the druggie continue to beat a dead horse he's long ago lost, he also continues to make no response to the tons of points previously made that accurately convict pot as being truly a damaging and deadly substance with which to suffer addiction.

You're wrong.​

 

[The Scotsman]

.......... is pot the only drug in the States?

 

[Pandora]

.......... is pot the only drug in the States?

Nah, we got crack, crank, coke, mushrooms, heroin, Acid, lots of pills and much much more I am sure.

 

[Chip]

what is the drug in pot

Since by now it's obvious that Popeye nor any of the other pro-pot "sympathisers" are going to answer your question ...

... The primary drug in pot is tetrahydrocannabinol, commonly referred to as THC.

More on pot in general from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)

THC is addictive, as these two links I previously posted present: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15450100 and http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v143/n2/full/0705931a.html

and why is that less addictive

Pot is highly addictive.

As the previous two links attest, the mechanism for addiction is the same method for all substances, whether the substance is THC, nicotene or whatever the substance is that's addictive by nature.

The method that makes a substance addictive is that the substance binds to receptor cells in the body, receptor cells that were, by design, to receive neurochemicals from a more natural systemic process of human neurochemistry in balance, not from an outside artificial source and in extreme imbalance to the rest of normal neurochemical function.

The origin of pot being "less" addictive stems from the fact that the receptor cells to which THC binds were more difficult to find than, say, the receptor cells for nicotene. Scientists have only more recently isolated the THC receptor cells in our body. During the time of their mystery, pot-addicts irrationally concluded there was no such binding and they erroneously stated that pot wasn't addictive.

Then when scientists discovered the THC receptor cells, the pot-addicts compromised, saying that pot was "less" addictive, and there are measuring scales some appeal to that purport to measure the "more or less" addictive nature of a given substance.

There is really no value, however, in the "more or less" ratings as if a substance is addictive, then it is addictive, and those who appeal to the supposed "less" addictive rating of pot only use that as an excuse to continue their pot-addict behavior ... so I question whether it's therefore really less addictive ... .

These THC-binding receptors utilize more complex neurochemicals than the more foundational and famous ones like serotonin, norepinephrine/noradrenaline, dopamine, and acetlcholine (acetlcholine being the neurochemical whose production is extremely stimulated by nicotene which is a primary agonist of acetlcholine.), and so druggies often refer to this fact when attempting to downplay the addictive nature of pot.