/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1781185]

I can understand legalizing marijuana and some drugs for economic reasons and because they're not really bothering anyone, but can you honestly support making extremely addictive and harmful drugs like cocaine and heroin legal? I mean the problem would just go from being dealers to addicts, who are even worse than dealers because they affect everyone. And don't give me that bullshit about how anyone can find drugs so people wouldn't suddenly start taking drugs just because they were made legal, of course they would. And more importantly right now it's difficult for most children to get hold of drugs, if they made them legal (even controlled) kids would be able to get them just like now kids can get alcohol and cigarettes.

[Anonymous No.1781193]

/new/ is that-a-way

<----

[Anonymous No.1781196]

>but can you honestly support making extremely addictive and harmful drugs like cocaine and heroin legal?
So why is alcohol and tobacco legal again?

[Anonymous No.1781211]

>right now it's difficult for most children to get hold of drugs

You had a sheltered childhood, didnt you?

[Anonymous No.1781216]

>>1781196

Almost everyone drinks occasionally, and a lot of people drink regularly. Only very few people end up being alcoholics.

You can't say the same about cocaine. Try snorting some every weekend and see how long you can last before you're a junkie or whatever.

[Anonymous No.1781226]

>>1781211

Personally I could get weed, but that's only because I had a friend who was two years older than me who had another friend who had a dealer.

You could call me sheltered, but then 80% of the country would be. What you call sheltered I call normal. Middle class kids didn't have drug dealers.

[Anonymous No.1781258]

>>1781185
I don't think "hard" drugs like cocaine or heroin should be legal. But marijuana is ok, it doesn't harm anyone, except the few people who easily turn in addicts with any fucking thing. You can't blame marijuana in those cases.

[Anonymous No.1781259]

Why drugs are illegal > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XUWnxc6-GA

[Anonymous No.1781266]

>>1781258

Yeah I agree, and those addicts should be negligible, because people get addicted to anything. I mean look at how many people are obese...

[Anonymous No.1781270]

more harmful than alcohol should be illegal
more addictive than smoking should be illegal

common sense really

[Anonymous No.1781276]

>>1781258
>>1781270
I'm ok with this.

[Anonymous No.1781278]

>>1781216
i do coke sometimes, like every few months on a night out or weekend away. Coke isnt smack like the media and government have you believe by putting it in the same group

[Anonymous No.1781286]

Drugs are good for useless people. I support the rights of useless people to waist there lives as they see fit.

[Anonymous No.1781292]

>>1781286
Useless?

[Anonymous No.1781294]

I think we are missing the most important point. How is religion to blame for the current unjust drug laws?

[Anonymous No.1781297]

Drugs that should definitely be legal

Ritalin, Adderal, Oxycodone, Xanax, Prozac and most other popular medications. Why? Because I don't need a fucking doctor to tell me what I can and can't take.

Hallucinogenics and psychedelics. Why, because they're not addictive.

Drugs that should be illegal

Heroin, MDMA, cocaine, methamphetamines, most strong stimulants. Why? Because they're not addicted.

[Anonymous No.1781303]

>can you honestly support making extremely addictive and harmful drugs like cocaine and heroin legal

>Both still available as a legal prescription in some backwoods counties in the USA.

[Anonymous No.1781314]

>>1781297
>Drugs that should be illegal
>MDMA
Care to explain why?

[Anonymous No.1781315]

Quick question: what would be the point in decriminalizing drugs? We'd be spending just as much on enforcing the law (apart from prison and trials and stuff) but then more people will be dealing because of there being no punishment...

[Anonymous No.1781317]

>>1781297
MDMA is less harmful and less addictive than alcohol.

[Anonymous No.1781320]

I think the majority of them should be legal.

People mainly use cocaine because it lets them think more effectively than they ever have, feeling good is a secondary thing.

Heroin, why not? Sweden or Switzerland has their walk-in clinics for everyday use, and nobodies having issues with it.

I think if long-term amphetamines or the like were made over the counter i.e. Vyvanse, Adderall XR, and maybe even some extended release form of Desoxyn (methamphetamine), people would abuse far less stimulants.

For the painkiller addicts, we already know ketamine can significantly treat depression, as well as pain, it probably would allow heroin addicts to come down.

For me, legalizing it has one huge benefit - there's far less stigma about quitting. What would you do if someone came to you and said they wanted to quit coke or heroin, and they didn't know what to do? Now what if the person said the same about alcohol? There's AA, and tons of shit like that, but nothing for stimulant or painkiller abusers (sure, narcotics anonymous, but that's a joke).

The biggest benefit I can is alternatives, whether they be replacements, or something like that. We know haloperidol can grow dopamine receptors, cutting cocaine use. There's also rapid-detox for heroin. Why not find a drug that CAUSES pain, and causes upregulation of the opiod system, ultimately curing the addiction?

[Anonymous No.1781327]

>>1781314

pretty much like cocaine just slightly less addictive

[Anonymous No.1781329]

>>1781315
people dealing would be taxed like any other bussiness person and i think you dont realise how many people are in prison because of drug laws, it would make a substansial saving

But the "point" is that the government should not be allowed to determine how you lead you life unless you are a danger to yourself or others

[Anonymous No.1781342]

>>1781329

I said decriminalize, not legalize. You wouldn't get taxed because it's not legal, you just wouldn't be charged.

And it's not about freedom, there's a major social aspect (i.e. legalizing = normalizing) that's one of the main disadvantages in cost-benefit analyses on this subject.

[Anonymous No.1781348]

To hard to tax

Hemp is easy as fuck to grow.

How fuck do you put a price on something so cheap to produce that you can make a real profit out of it if its legal?

You don't. Keeping it illegal saves money

[Anonymous No.1781358]

>>1781315
>no punishment for dealers
It could be regulated just like cigarettes would be. Except maybe not $7 a pack for taxes or w/e (god damn jew government).

Even if someone had the chance, how many would buy joints from a guy down the street? How many people do you know by cigarettes from some random guy in the ghetto?

[Anonymous No.1781359]

Dude, I'm not nessasarily pro-legalization of dangerous substances like cocaine and heroin. However, I can certainly tell you it is much easier for kids to attain illegal drugs than it is for kids to attain legal ones. Drug dealers don't give a flying fuck how old you are or if you have an ID, if you have money, they'll sell to you.

[Anonymous No.1781369]

>There's AA, and tons of shit like that, but nothing for stimulant or painkiller abusers (sure, narcotics anonymous, but that's a joke).


Why is NA a joke and AA is not? It's the same exact fucking thing except AA focuses on alcohol period, NA focuses on drugs and alcohol. NA is pretty fucking widespread these days as well. I'm just curious why NA is a joke but AA isn't when they're essentially the exact same thing built on the same steps, sponsorship, traditions, etc.

[Anonymous No.1781370]

let the little fuckers do it. if they kill themselves, then voila. no more world hunger.

[Anonymous No.1781374]

>>1781211

I'm 21 and I still find it hard to buy pretty much everything other than cannabis.

[Anonymous No.1781375]

>>1781369
NA is a joke because AA is much, much larger, and people will accept, and even defend alcoholics far more than they will defend narcotic users.

[Anonymous No.1781383]

>>1781375


Yes AA is much larger but if you can find plenty of NA meetings across the entire country to go to what is the difference? If you have a gallon of water and you only can drink a glass, why have more than the glass? Trust me, NA is extremely available and widespread.

And the point about acceptance of alcoholism vs drug addiction isn't NA/AA's doing, it's society's doing.

So again, why is NA a joke?

[Anonymous No.1781403]

>>1781329

Why the hell should the government be allowed to stop me from harming myself?

I suppose an argument can be made if I owe child support and other debts but how can you justify the government not letting an unattached person from offing themselves. Also kill the homeless if they show no willingness to improve themselves, they failed at life so should we have to deal with there shit?

[Anonymous No.1781411]

>>1781342
i dont live in a country that has to make a product legal. All "legal" products are simply not crimal to possess or sell

Took me abit of googling to understand there could be a distinction

[Anonymous No.1781421]

>>1781403

>Why the hell should the government be allowed to stop me from harming myself?

They don't care about that, they care about drug addicts turning into criminals.

Drug-related crime is a big problem.

[Anonymous No.1781419]

>>1781403
Because if you are "offing" yourself, you aren't working and paying taxes.

[Anonymous No.1781430]

>>1781327
are you retarded? its not addictive at all, period. there is no withdrawal, just a hangover. even alcohol has withdrawl. Also most drugs aren't nearly as addictive as they're made out to be

[Asshole No.1781439]

Guess we have to weigh the two options and see which is better.

I'm not a drug user, but it should be legal if you ask me.

When selling drugs is illegal, you have to be a criminal to sell it. Since the sellers have to take a certain amount of risk, the price of the product goes up significantly. The drug addicts turn to crime when they have no money left to spend.

If drugs were legal, no doubt there will probably be more people who might experiment with it and more idiots turn into addicts, but since the drugs are cheap anyway (because it's legal), there will be lower amount of crime.

Whether it is legal or illegal shouldn't make a difference to those who're smart enough to stay away from them.

[Anonymous No.1781440]

>>1781403
To clarify i mean harming yourself when you do not intend to. Addictive substances interfere with natual decsion making so can influence a person into unintentionally harming themselves and extremely dangerous substances (either dangerous to consume or that make a person dangerous while high) can also cause unintentional harm

ofc if someone wants to comit suicide sober it should be allowed but there are simpler ways to do that than recreational drugs

[Anonymous No.1781446]

>>1781430

yes it is. i'm not talking about doing E pills at da club dude. snorting it will lead to addiction over time.

doing it more than 10 times in a six month period usually leads to addiction

[Anonymous No.1781448]

>>1781327
except without any addictive properties or risk of overdose

[Anonymous No.1781456]

>>1781421
Actually, legalizing drugs is a good way to reduce crime. Legalizing drugs will cause their prices to fall, reducing the pressure to resort to criminal means to get the cash. This also has the effect of destroying criminal syndicates and other drug funded operations. e.g. terrorists Also, making it legal makes it less attractive because it is not taboo anymore.

[Anonymous No.1781461]

>>1781446
MDMA is safer to consume than weed and is not at all addictive

However pills you find in clubs are often mixed with other drugs and that may make them addictive or dangerous

[Anonymous No.1781465]

>>1781421
99.95% of drug related crimes are caused by drugs being illegal. Illegal drugs fund criminals to commit crime like shooting other drug people. Do people steal from relatives to buy tobacco well sometimes but they are more likely to put it on a credit card. Do people kill each other in drunken rages yes. we might have a very slight uptick in crimes like these if you legalese drugs but you will have a drastic reduction in organised crime related crimes. The absolute worst thing you could do to a drug lord is to make there business model obsolete. You really should look at what happened with the legalization of alcohol.

[Anonymous No.1781472]

>>1781461

motherfucker how can you say it's not addictive i was addicted to it for months before moving city

i know the media make it look like you take it once and die but you're acting like those hippies who say weed is good for you

also everyone who's just thinking about the economic aspects of this, you need to take into account these are people we are dealing with, maybe the money being "wasted" is actually being spent on keeping people sober and not fucking up their lives

seriously everyone who had drugs be a big part of their life regretted it

[Anonymous No.1781478]

in mexico the idea of legalizing drugs would kill the business of the narcotraficantes
so any politician who puts forward the idea usually dies within a few days of doing so
pic very related ..the writing on the floor mentions not killing women and inoccents and something about devine justice

[Anonymous No.1781479]

>>1781461
Not true, I used to do pure MDMA powder and I would go into horrible horrible psychological withdrawal on the level of cocaine.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1781481]

I'm surprised this picture hasn't been posted yet.
If it grows in the ground, it's okay. The exception is DMT, but that's made from plants and your brain naturally secretes this as you dream anyway.
And by grows in the ground I meant things like shrooms, salvia, weed, peyote etc

[Anonymous No.1781495]

Legalizing marijuana is logical because it's harmless (inb4 high school health students) and is the cause of hundreds of thousands of stupid arrests each year. In Switzerland they started distributing heroin just because of how much it contributed to crime rates. We don't have THAT big of a problem here.

[Anonymous No.1781499]

>>1781472
Developing a tolerance is not addiction. A substance that is addictive has physical symptoms of withdrawl and dependancy not just an urge to get high again because you liked it

MDMA use causes no withdrawl or dependancy. It is not addictive

[Anonymous No.1781500]

>>1781481
>implying we haven't come up with synthetic drugs that are "safe" but fun
95% of prescription research is on drugs which will quickly turn a profit. Not on safe drugs. Not on long lasting or euphoria-but-not-addiction drugs.

Look at something like Ampakines. They're smart drugs, real drugs that significantly improve long term memory and neural plasticity. Problem with the FDA? Stupidity isn't a disease, so they have to try and get it onto the market by ADHD or depression or alzheimers, except none of those have long term memory as a _standardized_ deficit (i.e. the majority of illness are based on affect and such, positive symptoms, while negative symptoms were hardly recognized at all until like 15 years ago)

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1781510]

>>1781500
I'm saying most illegal synthetic drugs are generally worse than their natural counterparts.

[Anonymous No.1781512]

>>1781495

i think drug laws in sweden and switzerland etc. are pretty much irrelevant

just because it works there doesn't mean anything because it's a completely different culture

look at alcohol, alcohol is legal everywhere. there's a massive problem in the uk with binge drinking, and there's no problem in italy even though you can buy beer at 15 and nobody will care

[Anonymous No.1781517]

>>1781499
Some studies indicate that repeated recreational users of MDMA have increased rates of depression and anxiety, even after quitting the drug.[78][79] Meta-analytic reviews of the published literature on memory show that ecstasy users suffer significant short-term and long-term verbal memory impairment—with 70-80% of ecstasy users displaying significantly impaired memory. Moreover, this research shows that the memory impairment is not proportional to the lifetime number of tablets consumed and so, may occur with relatively low usage.[80]. Other meta analyses have also reported significant impairment of wider aspects of cognitive function, such as executive function.[81] Many factors, including total lifetime MDMA consumption, the duration of abstinence between uses, the environment of use, poly-drug use/abuse, quality of mental health, various lifestyle choices, and predispositions to develop clinical depression and other disorders may contribute to various possible health consequences. MDMA use has been occasionally associated with liver damage,[82] excessive wear of teeth,[83] and (very rarely) hallucinogen persisting perception disorder.[84]

One of the biggest reasons MDMA is illegal is because it blows out serotonin, dopamine, and possibly norepinephrine circuits. Sure, they may "normalize" but there's long lasting brain alteration.

[Anonymous No.1781515]

>>1781481
How the fuck do you measure dependence or physical harm? That graph is absolute garbage.

There is no actually physiological component to "marijuana addiction". It's no more of an "addiction" than the addiction/dependence you have on the internet and your computer and your TV. It's just psychological. A little discipline and you're fine. And there really isn't any physical harm aside from the actual smoke going in your lungs, easily solved by a vaporizer.

[Anonymous No.1781520]

>>1781512
>it's about different culture
>clearly different alcohol laws
Uh, it's not ALL about culture.

[Anonymous No.1781523]

>>1781512
But there's no real reason to legalize heroin. It's incredibly harmful and putting that out there for the general public is just stupid. I'm just giving an example of a situation where legalizing heavy drugs is somewhat logical.

[Anonymous No.1781532]

>>1781523
The heroin is given under doctor supervision, in a medical setting.

People come into the open and get treated instead of abusing and lying in the gutter.

Legalizing drugs isn't about stopping the use. 95% of the time it's about harm reduction, the knowledge that although we can't get rid of drug abusers, we can certainly make it alot less harmful for them, if not us too.

[Anonymous No.1781537]

>>1781479
>psychological withdrawal
withdrawl is a symptom of a chemical dependancy, "psychological withdrawal" is just a fancy was of saying you liked it and want to do it again

[Anonymous No.1781541]

>>1781520

why sage the post and put words in my mouth

[Anonymous No.1781550]

technically the charge of possessing a drug of dependence should cover alcohol and tobacco as well...

also, you're all gay.

[Asshole No.1781551]

>>1781537

I'm psychologically addicted to 4chan. Let's criminalize that too.

[Anonymous No.1781566]

>>1781551
precisely

[Anonymous No.1781568]

>>1781537

tobacco addiction is psychological, are you saying that's not really an addiction either?

[Asshole No.1781578]

>>1781568

It isn't a psychological addiction. Only those who're delusional about their addiction will claim it to be merely psychological and that they can stop anytime.

[Anonymous No.1781579]

>>1781515
>psychological. A little discipline and you're fine
Listen. Stop thinking right now. It's not about a little discipline, psychological withdrawal involves massive chemical imbalances in your brain. Also, pot is not just a little smoke. It is a lipophillic chemical that acts on native endocannibanoid receptors. Most critically it is a retrograde neurosynaptic inhibitor, which means it shuts off parts of the brain (and even PNS circuits as well because it is totally membrane soluble). Look at marijuana FDG18 PET scans, the active regions are much dimmer. Weed is not harmless, but it is not as bad as cocaine and heroin and the like.

[Anonymous No.1781600]

>>1781517
>this research shows that the memory impairment is not proportional to the lifetime number of tablets consumed and so, may occur with relatively low usage
that sentance reminds me of what they used to say about weed
>weed users have a slightly higher than average chance to be diagnosed with a mental illness
>it turns out weed users have a correspondingly higher history of family mental illness
Conclusion:
"Weed can trigger predisposed mental illness"
NOT
"Cannabis use attracts less stable personality types"

tl;dr dont trust studies that arnt double blind with appropiate control groups

[Anonymous No.1781673]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU
Sounds like everyone should be getting yearly doses of some kinda acid...for world peace!

[Anonymous No.1781706]

Portugal.