[Ibon]

We had a guest here who left us a vial of liquid morphine that he was prescribed by a doctor in Europe because he has this condition were his back seizes up and he becomes immobilized. At the end of his visit he left us the bottle and it sits in our fridge here since a year as an emergency if I have to bring a guest down our 4WD road who breaks a leg or has some painful trauma. There is no reason that we shouldn't all be able to have powerful pain killers like this available for emergency use without first having to go to doctors.

This got me thinking that the pharmaceutical and medical industry will be creating very powerful lobbies against any attempt to legalize opiates in the future as this will cut deeply into their profits. This is different than pot.

[Tanada]

We had a guest here who left us a vial of liquid morphine that he was prescribed by a doctor in Europe because he has this condition were his back seizes up and he becomes immobilized. At the end of his visit he left us the bottle and it sits in our fridge here since a year as an emergency if I have to bring a guest down our 4WD road who breaks a leg or has some painful trauma. There is no reason that we shouldn't all be able to have powerful pain killers like this available for emergency use without first having to go to doctors.

This got me thinking that the pharmaceutical and medical industry will be creating very powerful lobbies against any attempt to legalize opiates in the future as this will cut deeply into their profits. This is different than pot.

During World War II the US Army issued field medics Morphine ampules in single use injectors to help the wounded. Other than counting them they were treated like any other needed equipment. Somehow between then and Viet Nam the US Federal government lost all faith in the common American having the ability to use what was needed and not become an addict. IMO most drugs are no different than alcohol and a great many of them have been in use as long or longer than alcohol has been.

When the Prohibition movement really got rolling in the late 1800's into the early 1900's it demonized everything people did for recreation. Their first big victory was drug laws and that process was made much stronger by the Pure Food And Drug Act of 1906. The law was sold to the public as a way of combating 'patent medicines' and 'snake oil salesmen' but it went much further becoming the FDA that has such a tangled mess of rules and regulations no small company can enter the market with a medication.

The final culmination was the constitutional amendment 18,

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all the territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

After prohibition was passed doctors had to deal with treating many people poisoned by wood alcohol, which causes blindness and sometimes death. They also could administer alcohol only for 'medicinal purposes' which is where that phrase comes from. It also created a huge network of very wealthy gangs who were in business smuggling alcohol into the USA and distributing it. Does any of this sound familiar? It should when alcohol returned to legal status they just switched products and started importing recreational drugs instead.

[onlooker]

"This is different than pot." Well, actually Ibon, Marijuana is also applicable for pain control and not only that is widely regarded as a "miracle" plant in fact used extensively by both North and South American Indians for centuries for it's marvelous healing properties. Finally, chemotherapy in my opinion from personal experience and anecdotes is not a adequate treatment for cancer, I believe marijuana would be more effective yet only now is the ban being slowly lifted. So pot really is part of this irrational, corrupt and counter-productive "War on Drugs"

[careinke]

Thanks for the elaborate iteration summation Tanada. 6 wants more war on drugs because he believes doing something isn't working follows do more of the same thing til it works. The WaD is an abysmal failure all grown ups can admit.

It is my fundamental philosophy, adults are allowed to do with themselves what they wish unless it physically harms other persons. That includes free climbing mountains, skydiving or any other risky behavior where all participants are willing.

Amen Sir.

You could certainly add my name to this list. But then, I'm a Minarchist.

[Sixstrings]

This article says 5% of all Americans have tried meth:

No sane person would argue that methamphetamine is natural or safe. It is neither. It was first synthesized in the 19th century, and has created nothing short of a plague in the U.S., especially in America’s “heartland.” Almost five percent of Americans have tried the drug, which is highly addictive.
http://www.science20.com/american_council_on_science_and_health/the_agony_of_the_ecstasy-156780

If I had to pick a number for the counties around me, I'd say 15%, that's a random guess but it sure seems that way and there's one county near me that's known to be "infested with meth."

Maybe I should just move. To Vermont or something, where there is no problem and then I can be a Libertarian or socialist and have esoteric theories that are not actually practical.

Not trying to pick an argument with libertarians. There's nothing to argue about. Maybe drugs are not a problem where you live, so what can we argue about then?

It's like two people standing in a house that's a mess and the house needs cleaned up. And maybe the libertarian or the socialist just doesn't think it's a mess, so how can you argue about that. I guess it's a matter of opinion, is it a good thing or bad thing or acceptable or not, if heroin and meth are running rampant in a town.

Tried to find some articles, a lot comes up about Australia:

Australia’s ice crisis: Crime fighters and hospitals prepare for a cheaper, high-purity form of the drug

CRIME authorities and hospitals are bracing for a new wave of cheap high-purity ice, fearing drug syndicates want to deepen the drug’s national grip by lowering prices.

Australian Crime Commission chief executive Chris Dawson believes high prices paid for methamphetamine in this country are unsustainable and the cost of the cheaply-made drug will soon fall in line with Asia and Europe.

“Globally, per capita, we’re paying a very high price for crystal meth,” said Mr Dawson, who leads the national fight against ice.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/australias-ice-crisis-crime-fighters-and-hospitals-prepare-for-a-cheaper-high-purity-form-of-the-drug/story-fntzoymg-1227494797502

From the Mr Bigs to drug-hazed young mums, this is how the warped ice economy ruins lives for profit

SHE was skinny and pretty, with hair sometimes dyed platinum and face heavy in make-up after long hours staring at herself in drug trances.

Everyone could see Kader Sakir coming.

That was the idea. She was on ice, and selling it.

In a two-year “meth spree” she lost all feelings for her baby son and went on a wild crime rampage that prompted a judge to label her a menace.

“I felt untouchable,’’ Kader, 24, said. “I didn’t care if I died.’’

Her story opens a personal window on the warped ice economy — a boom business that sees profits soar as the core product’s quality is cut again, again and again.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/id-always-make-a-lot-more-from-the-mr-bigs-to-drug-hazed-young-mums-this-is-how-the-warped-ice-economy-ruins-lives-for-profit/story-e6frg6n6-1227500068519

Guys, there's theory, and then there's the real world where teenagers and twentysomethings don't exactly have the best judgement and the last thing they need is crystal meth.

In the real world, as a voter I'm gonna vote for the candidate for sheriff that would do the most to crack down on the drugs problem.

*It's starting to push me to voting Republican nationally too*, even though none of the R candidates are talking about more drug enforcement but I just assume that a Republican president would have a tougher DEA.

Look, I know most weed smokers are cool and it's not a problem, but I'm talking about crack and meth and heroin and ecstasy etc.

So there's the reality for me, where I live locally and admittedly that's anecdotal if I'm talking to a poster that lives in Vermont or somewhere and maybe they don't see any drugs problem so they think there is no problem and you can just legalize it all.

In the real world, look, I don't want to get mugged by a junkie or my house broken into or to have to see a bunch of junkies out on the streets and see the whole town go downhill. Am I wrong to think that way? If nothing else, I have my property value to be concerned about. I'd rather it go up, not down.

[davep]

I'm talking about crack and meth and heroin and ecstasy etc

All very different drugs with differing levels of problems. Ecstacy is basically harmless and is not addictive. Crack is moreish coke (and has more problems, but nowhere near the scale as was made out in the media when it first came to the fore). Heroin is a great painkiller but the problem is the lifestyle of people addicted to it. If they can't pay for it from their job, a lot of people go out stealing every day (I know this, because as a teenager all my friends were heroin addicts - nice people, but penniless addicts). Meth is a different ballgame IMO, but I don't know enough about it to say much.

[onlooker]

First 6, I am glad like me you are empathetic to the victims of the drug business. I am also happy to know that Bernie Sanders also thinks the War on Drugs has been a failure. Everyone wants a solution but for how many years have we been fighting this sham of a war with little to show for it. Phased legalization along with universal treatment seems to me would be the answer for short and long term. Legalization would immediately take the criminal element out of the picture as prices would fall drastically and the whole narcotics underground trading model would fall by the wayside. Then addicts would be instructed and encouraged to visit hospitals and other clinics where they would be registered and become inpatients so they could be treated for their addiction. Now some would say oh that cost alot of money. Okay we spend alot of money on military and also on keeping people alive who would otherwise die, those are two areas where we could re-prioritize out spending. Finally we would maintain the legality of these narcotics but they would be strictly controlled in terms of their sale and distribution mostly they would be on a prescription basis. Now 6 I do not have all the answers but I do know this would be a heck of alot better then what we have now.

[onlooker]

Meth is a different ballgame IMO, but I don't know enough about it to say much.

From what I have heard from documentaries. Methane is the worse of the worse. First, it is reported to be even more addictive then cocaine. Second, it has both the effects of the high of cocaine along with the hallucinogenic effects of heroin or LSD. Finally third, the price is quite low relative to other strong narcotics because of the ease and cheapness of making it. It can be done by most anyone and involves common off the shelf ingredients among which one key one is also found in certain cold medicines. That is why increasingly addicts have sought to obtain these cold medicines so they can be incorporated into the manufacturing process.

[Sixstrings]

Meth is a different ballgame IMO, but I don't know enough about it to say much.

From what I have heard from documentaries. Methane is the worse of the worse. First, it is reported to be even more addictive then cocaine. Second, it has both the effects of the high of cocaine along with the hallucinogenic effects of heroin or LSD.

Maybe everyone can agree that meth is a different ballgame.

* highly addictive
* People on meth will literally not sleep, at all, for like 7 days a time. They just run around like high on speed 24/7 for seven days straight, no rest, no sleep. Then crash and sleep 48 hours. Then do it over again.
* It rapidly ruins teeth. They have to get dentures, or implants.
* The way it works is it gives a massive dopamine rush. For young people, they simply cannot handle that -- they are not even adults yet, even with no drugs they do stupid things as it is.
* Meth, the bath salts, crack but maybe crack actually isn't quite as bad -- they make people CRAZY. Bad stuff.
* There is no "personal liberty choice" about something like meth, or crack for that matter, or heroine. It can't be managed. There is no "casual use" possible, unlike with alcohol or marijuana. If someone starts using meth for just a week then boom they are hooked and CAN'T stop.
* It fries the brain's natural dopamine production ability, fries out the neurotransmitters.
* It rapidly ages people; meth is a truly freakish drug, turning a twenty year old or teenager into a forty or fifty year old in just a couple years.

If we're talking about "ending the war on drugs," then honestly that needs to be refined.

There NEEDS to be a "war" on "meth labs" and dealers, no? The stuff is a plague, if left unchecked.

People in this thread are talking about "choices of free adults" and liberty and such, but bottom line, what if somebody is a parent of a teenager or 20 year old -- do you want them to have MORE friends that are using meth, or do you want them to have LESS exposure to friends on meth?

I mentioned the dental issue in the other thread, here's an article on it:

Enlisting dentists to fight meth

METHAMPHETAMINE ADDICTION is the new crack epidemic—a scourge that rips up communities, especially rural ones, and has frustrated many attempts to slow it down. Now a new project from the Tufts School of Dental Medicine suggests that an important weapon in the fight could be dentists.

The idea, as explained in a recent issue of the Tufts Dental Medicine Magazine, was developed by Jennifer Towers after a vacation trip to the small Idaho town of Coeur d’Alene. Towers, the dental school’s director of research affairs, saw lots of young Idahoans with really bad teeth, a side effect of rampant addiction to methamphetamine. The drug can cause teeth gnashing so intense it leads to cracked enamel and, eventually, a grotesque state of tooth decay known as “meth mouth.”

“Meth mouth” is often the most overt sign of addiction, and to Towers that suggests dentists and hygienists should play a frontline role in combatting it. “Meth mouth really dovetails well with drug prevention efforts because it’s so startling,” she says.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/05/02/enlisting-dentists-fight-meth/FMMx70e8PHiLs7rjdiODmN/story.html

edit: I have a lot of respect for libertarians and constitutional rights but libertarians go too far. They're not even for the FDA and food an drug safety and inspections and regulations, etc.

[onlooker]

Yes Hawk I by no means was referring to those who really are entitled because of being disabled or such. In fact, I was somewhat outraged by apparently a new legislation I forgot which state, which wishes to make drug testing a requirement to receive things like food stamps. Hey, just because these people are addicted to some substance should not disqualify them from receiving this help. In fact precisely because of their situation they should be helped, in fact by helping them you may be reducing to some degree the drug problem so people do not resort to drug dealing to survive. I just am appalled how drug addicts are being treated in this country. They are sick but we treat them like the worst of criminals. So sad.

[Sixstrings]

@onlooker
I would agree that there should be free of charge rehabs, in the red states, which they do not have. So there's no way to get off the drugs, and the problem just spreads.

And then poverty and joblessness and hopelessness should be addressed too, which is at the root of the "crack heads" and "meth heads" problem.

So okay, but what I don't understand is 30,000 people at a Sanders rally and all they want to hear is "we must end the war on drugs!"

The best thing I can figure out is that people just want marijuana to be legal, well okay then let's do that, but one can't forget about the hard drugs and just accept it like it's ok.

Or, if it stayed at a certain low level low boil then okay people accept it, but when it gets to "crisis" and "scourge" proportions then yeah you need the po-po cracking down on the meth labs because if you don't then you just have a bunch of methheads all over town and that is not good for a community, at all.

[onlooker]

Yes 6, that is the whole point of this radical proposal of legalization. Nobody wants crazed drug addicts near them or all the corresponding criminal activity. So I do not think anyone in this country is happy about the drug situation which is really what those rallies you describe are about. Those people are NOT saying do not do nothing about drugs just stop this ineffective sham and do things that really will make the whole situation better. As it is nobody is winning except maybe the high up criminals and their accessories or accomplices (politicians, drug enforcement agencies, banks, CIA etc.) Yes I have read about the whole corrupt network made possible by the huge amounts of money. At some point one would have thought smart people in government would have found out how best to deal with the drug problem, but they "really" do not want to, too much money involved.

[SeaGypsy]

Onlooker, Shabu is a Japanese word for quick. The term is used for ice (nothing to do with methane except sharing two elements) crystal methamphetamine, throughout SE Asia, where it has been common for at least 20 years.

I have tried almost every illicit drug. Ice included, 5 times in 25 years. At no point was I at risk of becoming a long term user of any hard drug, I don't have that constitution.

I have had friends lives ruined by ice. One friend is in her early 30's, an emergency medical doctor, ultra high functioning. She was 2 years into her addiction when a raid on her share house swept her up. Charged, she was put on a strict testing regime, weekly urine & random blood. She failed by cheating once then by random blood test again. She has since been 2 years out of work, on a testing regime, awaiting an appeal to the medical board. She has to resit her final exams for each subject, plus pass character & psychological requirements. I already know she will fail the last part, because spending 15 minutes with her it becomes obvious she is still damaged. I can encourage her to get back on track, she is brilliant & it is a huge waste what has happened to her, but nobody can undo the holes in her brain from sustained ice use.

If ice were legal, this friend of mine would have got help much sooner & would very likely have kept her career, of great benefit to the society & herself.

6, I suggest you go out & have a look how piss easy it is to get hard drugs. With extremely serious sentences for even petty trafficking, you can still score the hardest of hard drugs easily in probably every state capital of the USA. The war is a sham AND the laws don't work. They don't prevent drugs or addiction. It is time to do something completely else.

[Sixstrings]

6, I suggest you go out & have a look how piss easy it is to get hard drugs. With extremely serious sentences for even petty trafficking, you can still score the hardest of hard drugs easily in probably every state capital of the USA. The war is a sham AND the laws don't work. They don't prevent drugs or addiction. It is time to do something completely else.

All I know is, if police take down a drug house then that's one less drug house in town and that's a good thing and very much appreciated by the neighboring homeowners.

I have had friends lives ruined by ice. One friend is in her early 30's, an emergency medical doctor, ultra high functioning. She was 2 years into her addiction when a raid on her share house swept her up. Charged, she was put on a strict testing regime, weekly urine & random blood. She failed by cheating once then by random blood test again. She has since been 2 years out of work, on a testing regime, awaiting an appeal to the medical board. She has to resit her final exams for each subject, plus pass character & psychological requirements. I already know she will fail the last part, because spending 15 minutes with her it becomes obvious she is still damaged. I can encourage her to get back on track, she is brilliant & it is a huge waste what has happened to her, but nobody can undo the holes in her brain from sustained ice use.

If ice were legal, this friend of mine would have got help much sooner & would very likely have kept her career, of great benefit to the society & herself.

Good post SG, about the reality of how damaging this stuff can be.

I had a good friend when I was in my 20s. He was a functioning alcoholic. Weed, alcohol, DUI troubles well okay. Then at some point suddenly he's doing heroin and even crack cocaine. I ended the friendship when I heard about the crack -- it repulses me. That's a bridge too far for me, if someone is going to do crack then that's it there is no helping them.

I met up with him a time or two, to give him thirty bucks or whatever. Because he didn't have food money. And then the rent wasn't paid. Eventually he moved up north and got back with family and got straightened out.

I agree with all you said, except when you say "if ice were legal." SG, my goodness, if there's this much meth out there as it is -- how on earth can you think there would be less meth use, with less law enforcement crack down?

We'll just have to differ, I live in a red state with meth problems and I won't vote for any candidates that would do less enforcement.

It's like, the boat's filling up with water and you're saying to stop bailing out the water.

[yeahbut]

Six, the point with all these drugs, the ones with nasty outcomes for a lot of people included, is that even tho they are illegal, they are still used/abused. The illegality does not stop the use, and the associated problems. It doesn't work. You know what they say about doing the same thing year after year and expecting different results, right? That's drug prohibition. It just doesn't work.

From reading your posts on the subject, it seems that what most concerns you is that drug use needs to stay illegal because 1) lots of people use drugs already and if they were legal consumption would skyrocket, and 2) the nasty drugs that really screw a lot of people up would become an even bigger problem if they were legalised.

I maintain that those postions are not easy to hold if you do much research into the topic. The reason I mentioned the decriminalisation of all drugs in Portugal before is that it shows the things you are concerned about didn't happen when decriminalisation occured. Use did not skyrocket, and the use of shite like 'bath salts' is much lower than in countries with illegal drugs. As far as I can find out, methamphetamine is no more an issue there than anywhere else either.

My question to you then is: why would someone who is concerned about the problems associated with drug abuse wish to continue with a system that does not work, and that costs a fortune and causes immeasurable harm to society by making drug use a criminal, rather than a health issue? Why would you not want to try a different approach, especially when there is ongoing evidence to show that a different approach works better?

nb: the Portugese system is just one way decriminalisation could be approached of course, as SG says it will be far too state controlled and interfering for some tastes, or even not enough for others. It could be implemented in any number of ways.

[SeaGypsy]

6, its because you are brainwashed & so are the neighbourhood. An eagle eye or junkies view would show you & them what really happens- a new drug house opens up, possibly more. A dealer goes down, his dealer needs a new distributer as much as the junkies need their fix. They will find each other. Endless rinse & repeat is the reality.

(If you are going to engage in debate, "all I know is" is not valid rebuttal, try to look beyond your preconceptions. The fact is you are typically naive & ignorant about drugs & you take a shoot from the hip blabbermouth approach to debate. Try learning something.)

[onlooker]

6, I will try one more time to explain what I and Sea are talking about. The point is these people are addicted to a substance forgot for a moment legal or not legal. If you are addicted you are going to try for your next fix that is a given. Once the Gov declares the legalization of these hardcore drug simultaneously clinics will come online which have been prepared before hand. National broadcasts would inform all where to go for treatment. No risk of imprisonment or anything like that, they will be treated as sick people. This legalization will take crime out of the equation. So that in in itself will be a great benefit for society. Then the rehabilitation of these drug addicts will re-introduce productive people into society. Maybe not 100% perfect but again orders of magnitude better then what we have now.

[SeaGypsy]

On Trump thread 1 of 4 he started(?) 6 is suggesting pouring military aid into Mexico to 'defeat' the cartels. He is really that ignorant. There is only one way to defeat the cartels & that is to take a monopoly on their market, remove the profit factor, starve them of funds. The only way that can happen is some form of legalization.

[onlooker]

On Trump thread 1 of 4 he started(?) 6 is suggesting pouring military aid into Mexico to 'defeat' the cartels. He is really that ignorant. There is only one way to defeat the cartels & that is to take a monopoly on their market, remove the profit factor, starve them of funds. The only way that can happen is some form of legalization.

Yeah the funny thing that money would end up in the hands of the cartel. Talk about counter-productive.

[SeaGypsy]

Money & arms. Same as Obamas last attempt. 6 is being an idiot.