Drugs aren't illegal because they're harmful Watch

Hanvyj
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#101
Report 7 years ago
#101
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
What is 'level of intoxication'?
perhapse badly worked, but i was trying to say drugs have different effects, I would call all of them being intoxicated, but having seen people on acid - they are alot more mental/spaced out/"high" than after drinking. Speed really messes people up lol


I would prefer canabis to be legal over alcohol for example - as it makes people go to sleep more, thus much less likley to shout things at me/be violent etc etc
Last edited by Hanvyj; 7 years ago
0
quote
reply
Hanvyj
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#102
Report 7 years ago
#102
(Original post by djikstra)
Alcohol should be banned it cannabis is banned. Anyone who needs evidence just has to check in to A and E on a Friday night to see the social degradation due to alcohol.
exactly, and its more to do with social degradation than the medical problems cause by the alcohol itself.

Just look how much families suffer when there is an alcoholic parent. Is this because he/she is 60% more likley to suffer liver failure later in life? No! Its because he gets intoxicated every day.
0
quote
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#103
Report 7 years ago
#103
(Original post by Hanvyj)
perhapse badly worked, but i was trying to say drugs have different effects, I would call all of them being intoxicated, but having seen people on acid - they are alot more mental/spaced out/"high" than after drinking. Speed really messes people up lol


I would prefer canabis to be legal over alcohol for example - as it makes people go to sleep more, thus much less likley to shout things at me/be violent etc etc
Well, in my experience, of all the drugs alcohol is the one that's the most prone to making people do stupid/anti-social things. In that sense, I think the 'high' messes you up more than with most other drugs. I mean, I've gotten stupidly high on all kinds of different substances and combinations thereof, but alcohol alone stands out for making me do things I regret the next morning.
0
quote
reply
ch0c0h01ic
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#104
Report 7 years ago
#104
(Original post by Stefan1991)
How is that related to what we're talking about? None of the drugs I mentioned cause anti-social behaviour or are likely to cause hospital related admissions.
Again where is your evidence?

Read the article in the opening post.
Dissuading recreational use was on reason for combining the drugs but it was not the only reason (RE: Multimodal Analgesia).

You've just contradicted yourself. How can they not have been using cannabis but using a concentrated derivative contained in cannabis?
No I haven't. Cannabis is the name of a genera of plants, it is not a single compound but a combination of different compounds of varying amounts. For example, in the Alzheimer's study you mentioned they used a refined version of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Cannabis does not equal THC and it is very unlikely that smoking cannnabis will deliver the same results as those in the study.

Why shouldn't it be acceptable?
Equally why should it?

And the suggestion that prohibition deters the majority of people from taking it is laughable.
Generally it does. The problem is that we're seeing softer sentences and greater social acceptance with your 'softer' drugs which is undermining the process.

Such as? How does one commit a crime against another through drug use? Who is the victim?
Stealing to feed their addiction, committing acts of violence or vandalism because they were 'high', etc.

What anti-social behaviour are you referring to? You seem to be talking about alcohol which is legal, along with "addict" related crime. All the illegal drugs i've mentioned are not addictive, unlike alcohol and nicotine, two legal drugs.
Actually many of the drugs you mention can lead to addiction. Cannabis for example has a string of charities specially set up to support addicts.

The black market and counterfeiting markets would disappear, yes.
As we have seen from other legal drugs that is far from the case and there is nothing to suggest that it would be any different with cannabis.

But alcohol is far more harmful, addictive, and causes more "harm to society" than most illegal drugs.
Like I said, that doesn't legitimise the legalisation of other less harmful or less addictive drugs.

Every chemical in the world can cause death and negative side effects if consumed in excess. Your point is moot.
Here comes the crux of it, despite what you claim you have done very little (if any) background research into what you're preaching.

If you'd read up on ketamine you would know that the side effects are fairly common and are by no means associated with 'excess'. Ironically this issue was highlighted by Professor Nutt, the same person who said that ecstacy was no more dangerous than horse riding.
0
quote
reply
n00
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#105
Report 7 years ago
#105
(Original post by Call me Bob)
Well, some perhaps, but legalising heroin would not eliminate harm, but reduce it. People will always inject to get their hit in the quickest possible way. Clean needles are already widely available through various means, including needle exchange services. This does not prevent people from using dirty needles, it reduces the risk.
I see no reason why we should have anyone using dirty needles if we provided clean heroin with the clean needles.

(Original post by Call me Bob)
Nor does it prevent abscesses, immune system problems, or people using on top, increasing the risk of overdose.
There is no reason why heroin should direclty cause abscesses or immune system problems.

(Original post by Call me Bob)
I think there are some benefits to legalising it, don't get me wrong, but these health issues are not caused purely because it is illegal - some of them will still exist no matter what.
Again I never said it was. I said almost entirely.
0
quote
reply
channy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#106
Report 7 years ago
#106
(Original post by Reflexive)
Are you paranoid from smoking weed?
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you.
0
quote
reply
Hanvyj
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#107
Report 7 years ago
#107
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
Well, in my experience, of all the drugs alcohol is the one that's the most prone to making people do stupid/anti-social things. In that sense, I think the 'high' messes you up more than with most other drugs. I mean, I've gotten stupidly high on all kinds of different substances and combinations thereof, but alcohol alone stands out for making me do things I regret the next morning.
I've seen people do some pretty stupid things on drugs, but I have seen people do even stupider (is that a word?) things after drinking. That said, my sample size for drinking (you see drunk people every day, and I have been in more situations with drunk people than drugged people) this it to be expected.

I do agree somewhat though, alcohol tends to make you more violent and anti-social, when compared to, say canabis (but that doesn't mean its any better). Speed however I would consider worse than alcohol and things like LSD are just completley different more "spaced out" than drunk - but being a strong hallucinogenic when things go bad it can be much wors (I don't know if you have ever seen anyone have a "bad trip" but its not very pretty, or safe).

My girlfriend was a police officer for a while, and the people on drugs (dont know exactly which drugs, certainly not soft ones though) were much more violent, harder to deal with and pretty damn scary from what she told me.
Last edited by Hanvyj; 7 years ago
1
quote
reply
Reflexive
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#108
Report 7 years ago
#108
(Original post by channy)
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you.
0
quote
reply
WeekendOffender
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#109
Report 7 years ago
#109
I'm not bothered about hard drugs, as those are something I'm not really interested in. Cannabis prohibition, however, is an absolute joke.

First of all, it does not work. People can easily access cannabis if they want it (or any other drug for that matter), so to try and make it illegal is futile. In addition, the amount of money that the government spends on jailing people simply for smoking cannabis is ridiculous, when you consider that these people are doing absolutely no harm to anyone. The government could make a ****load of money from the legalisation and taxation of marijuana.

If a grown, consenting adult wants to smoke a spliff after a hard day's work, why should anyone be allowed to stop them? For many people this is the equivalent to having a glass or two of wine at night. Cannabis is less addictive and toxic than alcohol and cigarettes, yet these substances remain legal. I think it's very telling that when the leading figure in charge of drug classification spoke out in favour of legalising cannabis, he was sacked. It is this man's job to advise the government about drugs... I should think he knows what he's talking about. But, due to prejudice against cannabis his decision was dismissed and so was he from his position.

This is an issue that really pisses me off. The fact that a natural plant is illegal in this day and age is an outrage. I have never heard of anyone who was stoned attacking their wife and kids, or fighting in the street... the same cannot be said for alcohol. RAINN, an American sexual assault charity (co-founded by the brilliant musician Tori Amos) does not include marijuana as a substance which causes sexual assault or abuse.

All of this, and there are still more reasons to legalise it. It can be used as fuel as well. It also has no negative effect on society - in the Netherlands where it is legal, less people under 18 have actually tried marijuana than they have in this country. Having marijuana only available on the black market also exposes young people to harder drugs, and funds organised crime overseas.

Mushrooms, ecstasy, speed and all drugs of the same ilk should be legal as well, for similar reasons. Only the hardest drugs which are highly addictive (e.g. heroin and cocaine) should be illegal, simply because their addictive nature would indirectly lead to more crime, perpetrated by an increased number of addicts to fund their habits, should these drugs be made readily available.
Last edited by WeekendOffender; 7 years ago
0
quote
reply
Pindar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#110
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#110
(Original post by Hanvyj)
So having teenage girls stagger out of night-clubs and puke their guts up in the middle of the road is a good thing?
Straw man. Again you are referring to alcohol, a legal drug.

(Original post by Hanvyj)
Having people shout at you and try and get into fights with you because they are p*ss drunk when you are on you way home from work is good to encourage yeeeaahh.
Okay, you are still talking about alcohol, completely irrelevant. Nice how you've completely evaded questions and gone off topic when I proved you wrong :lol:

(Original post by Hanvyj)
Sorry, but I think you have a very naive view of how the world works. Something with close to little no physical harm can still be bad. Just because it makes you feel good sometimes doesn't mean its a good thing to do.
Please explain how.

Something makes you feel good, it doesn't hurt anyone. Please explain what's bad? And try not to be prejudiced.

(Original post by Hanvyj)
If you include all the social/economic/phsycological effects in the getting "high" part of getting drugs, then yes, you are correct that that is the main reason they are illigal!!!
Social/economic/psychological effects such as?..... and how are these negative effects?
0
quote
reply
bacforever3
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#111
Report 7 years ago
#111
(Original post by KingMessi)
Yeah, but if drugs were legal it would completely destroy the black market illegal drug trade, which would surely be positive on society....:confused:
I guess, thinking about it, the black market would always exist offering something or some price not got on the high street (if, to control drug intake, there is a drug-sales-monopoly).... but i dont know, just saying what I heard, havent bothered to make judgment myself!

I can see how it would be detrimental... britain is hardly a productive work force/collective community as it is... throw pot and E and Heroin into the mixture....

I live in a place which actually struggles alot with drugs and hard core ones at that. So many people who come through court have some degree of substance addiciton... I dont know if people would be less likely to get hooked if it were legal or not but it adds a whole new dimension to the group of poverished, non-working, on benifits group of individuals ...theres already a huge problem with alchohol abuse, it seems like britain just cant handle their substances with mature moderation!!!
0
quote
reply
Pindar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#112
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#112
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
What is 'level of intoxication'?
You've just reminded me, he also claimed that illegal drugs cause higher levels of intoxication. Another fallacy. Levels of intoxication depend on the dosage and cause completely different types of effects. Another complete display of ignorance of someone who does not understand drug intoxication one bit.

Though this is someone who thinks ketamine should be class A because it might cause poo and wee problems for people using it every day chronically for many years. Of course this is rare and worse side effects are caused by paracetamol or calpol.

People over using ketamine in this way is rare considering it's non-addictive, i'd say anti-addictive as it is very easy to get bored of. At worse it is a mild anaesthetic with little to no bad side effects.
0
quote
reply
Hanvyj
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#113
Report 7 years ago
#113
(Original post by Stefan1991)
Straw man. Again you are referring to alcohol, a legal drug.
You want to legalise drugs, it makes sense to look at drugs allready legal and see how that went. Pretty sh*t, conclusions we can draw? Don't legalise drugs!

(Original post by Stefan1991)
Okay, you are still talking about alcohol, completely irrelevant. Nice how you've completely evaded questions and gone off topic when I proved you wrong :lol:
you have been mentioning alcohol in your argument every few sentences!

(Original post by Stefan1991)
Please explain how.

Something makes you feel good, it doesn't hurt anyone. Please explain what's bad? And try not to be prejudiced.
You turned the words "little/no physical harm" into "it doesn't hurt anyone". Obviously if it didn't hurt anyone it wouldn't be bad. Fact is most drug users hurt poeple arround them, by stealing or relying on others too much. Obviously there are alot of people that take soft drugs like canabis and see no bad effects, but, like alcohol people get addicted and move onto other, harder substances and f*ck their lives up, this effects other people.

(Original post by Stefan1991)
Social/economic/psychological effects such as?..... and how are these negative effects?
Do you know how much the NHS spends on drug users? Do you know how many people in prison are there because of drug use? Have you seen a hard-drug user, they are in most cases not a very well-functioning part of society. Do you know anyone who has parents who are addicted to drugs? They wont have had a nice childhood.
Last edited by Hanvyj; 7 years ago
0
quote
reply
sherlllll
Badges: 8
#114
Report 7 years ago
#114
(Original post by Stefan1991)
What anti-social behaviour are you referring to? You seem to be talking about alcohol which is legal, along with "addict" related crime. All the illegal drugs i've mentioned are not addictive, unlike alcohol and nicotine, two legal drugs.
These seem to be all the drugs you mentioned should be legalised:

http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/lsd/addiction.htm (LSD)

http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/ketamine/addiction.htm (KETAMINE)

http://www.ecstasyaddiction.com/ (MDMA is Ecstasy...)

http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/mus.../addiction.htm (MUSHROOMS)

http://www.cannabisaddiction.co.uk/

Another on cannabises addictive capacity;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...dalcohol.drugs

You idiotically claimed that none were addictive and that addiction related crime wouldn't really be an issue.

So basically...you're completely wrong and talking utter bull****. Most of what you've argued is simply speculative crap...
Last edited by sherlllll; 7 years ago
3
quote
reply
Pindar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#115
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#115
(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
No I haven't. Cannabis is the name of a genera of plants, it is not a single compound but a combination of different compounds of varying amounts. For example, in the Alzheimer's study you mentioned they used a refined version of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Cannabis does not equal THC and it is very unlikely that smoking cannnabis will deliver the same results as those in the study.
That's like saying cigarettes aren't addictive, it is the nicotine.

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
Equally why should it?
Because there's no reason why it shouldn't. Or do you agree with banning things for no reason?

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
Generally it does. The problem is that we're seeing softer sentences and greater social acceptance with your 'softer' drugs which is undermining the process.
And this is bad how?

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
Stealing to feed their addiction, committing acts of violence or vandalism because they were 'high', etc.
What drug are you talking about? :rolleyes:

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
Actually many of the drugs you mention can lead to addiction. Cannabis for example has a string of charities specially set up to support addicts.
Any pleasurable activity in the world can be psychologically addictive. Are you saying we should ban all forms of pleasure? Your puritan nonsense should be easy to see through by anyone with a brain. None of the drugs I mentioned are physically additive, unlike nicotine and alcohol, two legal drugs.

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
As we have seen from other legal drugs that is far from the case and there is nothing to suggest that it would be any different with cannabis.
:facepalm:

(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
Here comes the crux of it, despite what you claim you have done very little (if any) background research into what you're preaching.

If you'd read up on ketamine you would know that the side effects are fairly common and are by no means associated with 'excess'. Ironically this issue was highlighted by Professor Nutt, the same person who said that ecstacy was no more dangerous than horse riding.
Wow oh no poo and wee problems. I've never heard of anyone experiencing these side effects regardless, where is your proof?
0
quote
reply
Hanvyj
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#116
Report 7 years ago
#116
(Original post by Stefan1991)
You've just reminded me, he also claimed that illegal drugs cause higher levels of intoxication. Another fallacy. Levels of intoxication depend on the dosage and cause completely different types of effects. Another complete display of ignorance of someone who does not understand drug intoxication one bit.

Though this is someone who thinks ketamine should be class A because it might cause poo and wee problems for people using it every day chronically for many years. Of course this is rare and worse side effects are caused by paracetamol or calpol.

People over using ketamine in this way is rare considering it's non-addictive, i'd say anti-addictive as it is very easy to get bored of. At worse it is a mild anaesthetic with little to no bad side effects.
Read my reply to the post you have quoted. I allready said they cause completely different types of effects.

As for "very easy to get bored of", this means people will then seek different drugs to keep getting high. Hence move on to drugs that arn't so safe.
0
quote
reply
Pindar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#117
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#117
(Original post by Hanvyj)
You want to legalise drugs, it makes sense to look at drugs allready legal and see how that went. Pretty sh*t, conclusions we can draw? Don't legalise drugs!

You turned the words "little/no physical harm" into "it doesn't hurt anyone". Obviously if it didn't hurt anyone it wouldn't be bad. Fact is most drug users hurt poeple arround them, by stealing or relying on others too much. Obviously there are alot of people that take soft drugs like canabis and see no bad effects, but, like alcohol people get addicted and move onto other, harder substances and f*ck their lives up, this effects other people.

Do you know how much the NHS spends on drug users? Do you know how many people in prison are there because of drug use? Have you seen a hard-drug user, they are in most cases not a very well-functioning part of society. Do you know anyone who has parents who are addicted to drugs? They wont have had a nice childhood.
Christ, you are so IGNORANT. It actually amazes me you actually think you may be qualified in any respect to have an opinion on this subject. First of all you perpetrate the myth that cannabis is a gateway drug. Well done, another drug myth which is backed up by NO scientific evidence.

You are using alcohol, which is associated with anti-social behaviour, alcoholism and physical harm, to say that drugs which don't cause anti-social behaviour, aren't addictive, and don't cause harm should stay illegal. Yet alcohol is illegal.

If you cannot see the illogicality of your thought processes then there is no point in continuing this argument until you go and educate yourself further.

How on earth are there going to be addicts stealing cars and robbing old ladies when the drugs AREN'T addictive?

How on earth are there going to be fights and violence in the streets with drugs which DON'T cause anti-social behaviour? And in fact decrease it. MDMA makes you friendly and sociable, cannabis makes you friendly and sociable, ketamine, lsd, mushrooms make you enjoy sitting in a room doing nothing just laughing, where does this "theory of violence" come into play?

Now you are saying they should be illegal because people are in prison because of it. Why did you even bother saying that? Can you not see that is completely CIRCULAR? Okay I'm convinced, you are definitely trolling. Nobody is this stupid.
0
quote
reply
ShayCamp
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#118
Report 7 years ago
#118
(Original post by Stefan1991)
They're illegal because people are prejudiced against the idea of being "high".
The goverment would rather let you take dangerous medicines with harmful side effects, rather than let you take a medicine which is more effective but gets you high.

Take cannabis for example, it has been found to be more effective at treating cancer than chemotherapy, whilst at the same time far less harmful and with less side effects.

It's also found to be more effective at preventing Alzheimers than commercial drugs prescribed by doctors, and can treat things like multiple sclerosis.

Believe me cannabis is just one of many many examples (albeit the best known) of medicinally superior drugs which are banned simply because they get you high, not because they are harmful.

For example hydrocone is used for post-surgical pain relief, however they add acetaminophen to prevent people taking enough hydrocone to get high off. However acetaminophen is toxic and causes serious liver damage leading to thousands of emergency room visits and deaths per year and less dangerous than taking just Hydrocone.

If psychoactive drugs are illegal because they're harmful, then why is it legal to take more harmful non-psychoactive drugs?

This leads me to the conclusion that the government would rather kill you or force you to take far more dangerous medicines than let you get high...

Read more here:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...-the-war-drugs
Hmm touché Stephan1991
0
quote
reply
Planar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#119
Report 7 years ago
#119
(Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
If you'd read up on ketamine you would know that the side effects are fairly common and are by no means associated with 'excess'. Ironically this issue was highlighted by Professor Nutt, the same person who said that ecstacy was no more dangerous than horse riding.
Nutt picked a poor example, because few people know that many people have died falling off horses. Horse-riding is more dangerous than you probably think it is.
I've no desire to get into a protracted argument with three unwritten essays weighing down on me, but I will say that I support legalisation for soft drugs, and decriminalisation for harder drugs.
0
quote
reply
hareandhound
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#120
Report 7 years ago
#120
America has the right idea with drugs usable for medicinal reasons. That's as far as I'd go for drug legalisation.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Who is most responsible for your success at university

Mostly me (330)
92.18%
Mostly my university including my lecturers/tutors (28)
7.82%

Watched Threads

View All