Is it time to legalize pot and reduce the death rate of tobacco and alcohol?

[Stone]

What is more destabilizing?
Drugs or the prohibition of them?
I say the prohibition of them.

https://mises.org/media/3510/4-The-Drug-Pusher

https://mises.org/media/3511/5-The-Drug-Addict

Regards
DL

Again with the fallacies.
Prohibition is legislation that criminalizes.

And presenting a libertarian source that proclaims as a motto:
"do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it."
makes no sense.

You argue to accept it.

The gov't shouldn't be telling competent adults what they can and can't put in their bodies. Information, not legislation.

This response is a telling contradiction.
Your position isn't just to legalize pot for recreational use.....it's general acceptance and pops up in your response to Accountable:

I agree.

Regards
DL

This is an issue of increasing acceptance by arguing if a little bit doesn't hurt, why not a little bit more......until the goal of full acceptance is achieved.

That makes your entire thread one of deception.
It's not to reduce usage of the more harmful drugs, it's to build a bridge to legal acceptance.

 

[Stone]

The literature says that pot is one of the least addictive and harmful drugs out here.

Under a legal medical system, chances are it would be sold by pharmacies and drug stores. Not the 7/11.

Whatever drug anyone uses should be between them and their doctors. Not them and the police unless they are breaking some other law.

Regards
DL

When it comes to the medical usage of marijuana.....imo....there are logical and reasonable arguments for it to be used by prescription.

 

[Stone]

Sorry to hear about that Stone

Thanks.

Her doctors are removing a tumor on her hip this afternoon and adding pins and rods to give it some additional strength. Then start radioactive treatments.
Apparently her age is against her for chemo and she doesn't want to go that route.
She's 84.

What worries me most right now is that cancer has reappeared in the same lung that was operated on last year.

 

[Stone]

I agree. I must have misunderstood, I thought this was about legalizing it completely (making it available as alcohol) and not just about medical use ... or are you suggesting it be completely legalized and available only through pharmacies? Like over the counter without prescription or only with prescription?

With prescription only.

With all the drug mixing we do now, legal and illegal, the pharmacist and or doctor are the only ones who can tell if one is acting against, negating of changing the mix in our bodies to what might hurt us. We should also insure that big brother is not pushing to underaged siblings or that kids are not stealing from parents the way they are today for their pit parties.

It is getting quite complicated and will get worse and safety for all means supervision.

Multi drug use is now the norm and not the exception.
Ask any doctor after a rave concert where people have no clue as to what mix put them in the hospital.

Regards
DL

This thread is getting quite complicated.

Is your argument now one of legalizing prescription recreation?

no doctor worth their salt will risk their license to prescribe it

that concept makes no sense

No shit
The medical liability and added costs would be incredible, anyway.


Hi Bill .....gotta admit, I haven't seen an argument like this before :24:

 

[Stone]

This thread is getting quite complicated.

Is your argument now one of legalizing prescription recreation?

In regard to your morality thread......do you think that the concept of prescription recreation is a wise concept to teach children that it's acceptable behavior?

And since your position is that the government hasn't the right to restrict what we put in our bodies, how do you expect to differentiate the difference in a child's mind that there is a distinction between less harmful and more harmful when you rationalize it's moral ( OK ) to use both?

 

[Accountable]

The least addictive is abstinence.

Yup. I know I've never been hooked on that!

Sure they can...and do.

:confused I didn't say they can't. I said they shouldn't. We shouldn't allow them to.

This response is a telling contradiction.
Your position isn't just to legalize pot for recreational use.....it's general acceptance and pops up in your response to Accountable:

My position has never been to legalize only pot. You must be thinking of someone else.

 

[Greatest I am]

I've said it a number of times.

I'd be all for legalisation of all drugs. But for starters, it has to be marijuana. It's such a harmless, gentle and fun drug, I'd actively suggest people to at least try it; I don't think I could say that for anything else.

If part of the logic of legalization is the protection of children then just legalizing pot will not do it. All drugs need to be legalized and put under the same medical system of controls.

Like it or not, multi drug use is with us.

We presently cannot prevent criminal access to our children due to the black market.
Legalization of all drugs under medical control is the only thing that we can do to help us protect our children.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Marijuana Un-Fun Fact

Did you know that a substantial amount of antimarijuana campaign funding comes from alcohol companies? You see, alcohol companies are afraid that if you smoke pot you won’t want to drink. After all, how many times have you witnessed the following scenario?

Dude at Party: Hey, you want a beer?
Other Dude at Party: No thanks, I just got high.​

List all who profit from prohibition.
Alcohol companies, tobacco, police, lawyers, arms manufacturers----the list is quite long and all these jobs are costing us is dead Mexicans.

Cheap price unless you happen to be a Mexican.

The government is the biggest drug kingpin in the world.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

no doctor worth their salt will risk their license to prescribe it

that concept makes no sense

They are doing it now fool although at a lower level.

You are saying that doctors will not do their job. Think again for the first time.

Regards
DL

 

[Accountable]

A doctor's job is not to waste his time interviewing healthy patients and writing prescriptions for recreational drugs. His job is to treat and heal.

eta: What would a doctor be looking for when deciding whether to prescribe recreational drugs anyway?

 

[Greatest I am]

The least addictive is abstinence.

A fool's paradise.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Sure they can...and do.
Even yourself has presented the solution.
Either change society's decision, or leave and enter a society that accepts drug abuse as an acceptable form of recreation.
Your libertarian view is uncannily un-democratic

You are sounding quite pathetic.

You are phobic as demonstrated by thinking that all drug use is abuse.

If not, state it.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

In regard to your morality thread......do you think that the concept of prescription recreation is a wise concept to teach children that it's acceptable behavior?

And since your position is that the government hasn't the right to restrict what we put in our bodies, how do you expect to differentiate the difference in a child's mind that there is a distinction between less harmful and more harmful when you rationalize it's moral ( OK ) to use both?

No need to till they get of age where they are given access.
Were you thinking that I was advocating drug use of any kind for children? How droll. No wonder your phobia bone came to life.

If part of the logic oflegalization is the protection of children then just legalizing pot will not doit. All drugs need to be legalized and put under the same medical system ofcontrols.
Like it or not, multi drug use iswith us.

We presently cannot preventcriminal access to our children due to the black market.
Legalization of all drugs undermedical control is the only thing that we can do to help us protect ourchildren.

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

.....................

My position has never been to legalize only pot. You must be thinking of someone else.

You read my post literally rather than realizing I was using your post as a stepping stone to address Greater Than I's response.

You

The gov't shouldn't be telling competent adults what they can and can't put in their bodies. Information, not legislation.

GTI:

I agree.

Regards
DL

His agreement presents a possible deception of intent.....originally of diverting abuse to a lesser impacting drug but instead using a deceptive argument as a bridge to further legalization.

Your position, while I disagree, has been presented with out such deception and I do applaud you for being honest about it.

 

[Stone]

You are sounding quite pathetic.

You are phobic as demonstrated by thinking that all drug use is abuse.

If not, state it.

Regards
DL

That's the best logic I've seen you post and be assured, that wasn't a compliment

 

[Greatest I am]

A doctor's job is not to waste his time interviewing healthy patients and writing prescriptions for recreational drugs. His job is to treat and heal.

eta: What would a doctor be looking for when deciding whether to prescribe recreational drugs anyway?

The safest combination from a position of knowing everything that the patient is taking.

You will know that at present, some doctors are complaining that they have been turned into script writing machines by the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies and actually want to return to a time where they could take the time to doctor mind and body and not just the bodies in their revolving doors.

They want to do their real job if we only let them.

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

A fool's paradise.

Regards
DL

Now you claim sobriety is a fool's paradise?

Really?



According to the logic I've been seeing from you, the following would be true:
You believe drug abuse to be paradise.

Sincerely.....that is a fool's reality....and it's no paradise.

 

[Stone]

They are doing it now fool although at a lower level.

You are saying that doctors will not do their job. Think again for the first time.

Regards
DL

The issue as you presented it was for a prescription for recreational use.
Can you post a specific example of a Doctor in the US writing a prescription stated for 'recreational use'?

I would like to read of it.

 

[Accountable]

You read my post literally rather than realizing I was using your post as a stepping stone to address Greater Than I's response.

Got it. Here's a little trick I learned a little while back. If you move the second "QUOTE=" box so that it is right next to the first one, it looks like this:

You are sounding quite pathetic.

You are phobic as demonstrated by thinking that all drug use is abuse.

If not, state it.

Regards
DL

That's the best logic I've seen you post and be assured, that wasn't a compliment

That way the whole conversation is in a single box. If you click "Reply with Quote" you'll see what I did.

eta: oops. No you won't because quoted text doesn't appear. :surrender

 

[Greatest I am]

Stone

I see that we are going into the personal and abuse mode while ignoring issues.

We are done here.


Regards
DL