Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Will John Kelly Re-Militarize the Drug War?


Yamato

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Im not trying to say that there are not also possible benifits to things from it as well.

Just a plant that needs a lot of reaserch

There's more anecdotal evidence and knowledge about cannabis than any other drug out there.   Compared to synthetic drugs we have no issues with saturating the marketplace with, like Tylenol (don't even know how it works) or antidepressants (same drill) we know how marijuana works.   We know our bodies have Endocannabinoid systems.   We know our bodies evolved over millions of years with cannabinoid receptors scattered throughout, and we know that cannabis fits those receptors like a key in a lock.   Do doctors even know this?   If not, they should learn.

We know that THC and CBD and other cannabinoids are virtually identical to Progesterone, responsible for the development of a newborn baby inside the womb of a mother.   It'd behoove people to put the fear propaganda down and learn how to take care of their health.   Singling out marijuana as the drug that needs more research is absurd.  We've got thousands of years of research, not the weeks or months of research we get from the pharmaceutical industry every time they cook up another pill to take.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reading an old title from the 50's that you'd probably like since you are into comparisons of diverse drugs and their effects.  I just stumbled across it.  I've never read Aldous Huxley's work before.  

It's a discourse on the use of Mescaline.  He was a real believer in its positives.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doors_of_Perception

He seemed to think it was the perfect drug.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's where the doors of the Jim Morrison 'The Doors' came from ...
 

Quote

 

~

The band took their name from the title of Aldous Huxley's book The Doors of Perception, itself derived from a line in William Blake's The Marriage of Heaven and Hell: "If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is: infinite".[17]

`

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only perfect medicine in my opinion is food.  If man made it, don't eat it.  If you won't eat it, then don't put it on your skin. 

Yeah this renders almost everything found in mainline grocery stores today to be relegated to the trash bin.   All those once great American companies: Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Kellogg's, Campbell's, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Nabisco, Keebler, Little Debbie and a hundred more --> Garbage in cans and boxes, to be put in even bigger garbage cans and boxes.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, aztek said:

nicotine is the most addictive drug, it kills more than any other drug, and it is legal. 

Huh... natural tobacco is quite different from commercial grade tobacco. The government demonised it so that it could be taxed and corporations could control it and what did they do to it? They added chit loads of chemicals and bred stronger varieties and turned it into a narcotic. And if the corporations ever get a chance to exploit hard drugs that are currently illegal they'll do exactly the same thing. 

You have far too much faith in governments and corporations to do the right thing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Alcohol is much worse then pot when it comes to harmful effects. If my Dad would have just been a pot head, my parents probably would still be together to this day. I also wouldn't have spend over a decade coming to terms and over coming the mental and sometimes physical abuse both myself and my sister suffered

Sorry to hear about that. But i doubt that pot is any better when abused. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Yamato said:

Not really.  Like Jesse Ventura said, if potency was a problem then we'd be differentiating 151 proof Bacardi and beer.   The hard liquor is far more potent, the inebriation far more severe per volume.   Nobody's making that distinction with alcohol so why is it even an issue with pot?    Like he said he'd rather go to a pot party than an alcohol party.   Paraphrasing: "The chance of violence is slim to none, at the alcohol party, the chances are 50/50."

The potent pot is healthier than the Mexican imports 10 or 20 years ago because there's less smoke required to get the same buzz.   If you smoke too much pot you don't vomit all over the other party goers.  You don't start fights, cheat on your wife, engage in riskier behaviors, go speed in the car and crash into a minivan full of kids.   You won't even want to leave the house (probably the real social problem with smoking weed).   Keep on smoking it and it'll be nap time.   You'll also probably sleep good and wake up feeling refreshed, no hangover.

Again alcohol is worse than pot with regards to control people have over the dosing.   If someone drinks a beer, they know in 45 minutes or so how that first beer will make them feel.  By then they've already consumed two or three more beers so look out.   Only eating marijuana has the same problem, a time lag in how much one consumes and how they'll ultimately feel.   Smoking pot doesn't have this problem.  You know in 60 seconds the effects it has and if you don't feel more pleasant than you did a minute ago, you won't smoke anymore.  Three hits would be too much for a newbie.   Rick Simpson goes to Amsterdam and smokes their weed which is supposed to be so good, and he doesn't even get high.

Hard drugs are nothing but escapism. I see it as a future commercial disruptive thats meant to keep the masses numb. I see your point that pot can be less harmful in some instances but i still can't bring myself around to approve of it... why should i want to legalise it and reward corporations? Multinationals will step in and make their profits pay minimal tax and wash their hands from the destruction it will wrought. We've all seen what they did to tobacco and they'll do the same to coke, pot or even meth. Now if science ever catches up to the drug problem and can find a way to take the addictive component and body destroying aspect out then OKAY but what are the chances of that? If you're going to legalise something then it should be cause its safer to do so and not so another set of butchers and heartless thugs can make the profits. 

 Trying to ween people off some intoxicates only to introduce them to others is kinda counter productive since they all have aspects that are better than each other. There is no perfect recreational drink/drug. I think we have enough problems around with the current legal intoxicates and don't need anymore. 

 

Edited by Captain Risky
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

But i doubt that pot is any better when abused.

Nothing is better when it is abused. You ever heard of; Too much of a good thing.

Tea is a great to drink health wise, but if you drink gallons of the stuff everyday you're bound to develop some serious kidney problems at some point if you don't stop abusing it like that. So yeah I'd imagine it wouldn't be any better if you smoked MJ like a pack of cigarettes everyday, sooner or later you're bound to develop some lung problems eventually; constant bronchitis, pulmonary diseases, etc.

What's that ol' saying people harp on about, with using anything these days? -  The key is moderation. 
 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And too much water, or carrots, will kill you.   Again, it's not the water or the carrots that's the problem.

If pot was truly "legal" it'd cost $10/kg.  How much would the seeds cost?   You need seeds, dirt, water, and sun.   What do you need a corporation for?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Purifier said:

Nothing is better when it is abused. You ever heard of; Too much of a good thing.

Tea is a great to drink health wise, but if you drink gallons of the stuff everyday you're bound to develop some serious kidney problems at some point if you don't stop abusing it like that. So yeah I'd imagine it wouldn't be any better if you smoked MJ like a pack of cigarettes everyday, sooner or later you're bound to develop some lung problems eventually; constant bronchitis, pulmonary diseases, etc.

What's that ol' saying people harp on about, with using anything these days? -  The key is moderation. 
 

See thats the problem. If people were moderate in their use of alcohol and drugs then we wouldn't be having this discussion and the alcohol and tobacco industries would be a fraction of the size they currently are. The damage to society minimal. But it's just not good business to encourage moderation in any thing. Excess means excess profits. Moderation means less employment and tax. Example: i bought a new car a couple of years ago and the speedometer says my vehicle can reach 240 kilometres an hour. If i do that i will be breaking the law and more than likely kill myself and others. The car industry has convinced the government that its essential for performance and marketing to have a car that can travel 240 kilometre an hour even though its against the law to travel at that speed. Most people never go over the speed limit BUT those that do destroy lives. Similar examples can be found everywhere. 

Are governments legislating against people that are law abiding and mentally capable OR are they making laws to protect us from those that are inclined to break the law. Moderation might be key but how can you convince someone that they should be moderate?

Edited by Captain Risky
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yamato said:

And too much water, or carrots, will kill you.   Again, it's not the water or the carrots that's the problem.

If pot was truly "legal" it'd cost $10/kg.  How much would the seeds cost?   You need seeds, dirt, water, and sun.   What do you need a corporation for?

For the same reason we need a utility to provide "safe" water and corporations to produce safe alcohol and a legal drug industry. The government needs tax and a level of control otherwise they're outta a job. But you see you can't pick and choose which aspects of the law you wanna adhere to and which you don't care for and they know that. Those in power will listen to the powerful and rich was before they care about your ability to grow safe weed with all your clean water and dirt. They will find stupid arguments and throw data around and pledge to do the right thing and the only ones to benefit will be the corporations and the corrupted politicians. Count on it.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

I think its important to make a distinction between abusing over the counter drugs and illegal drugs and not group them together. People don't buy illegal drugs so that they can deposit them in a bank vault like some piece of fine art. And they don't treat aliments with them either. They're used to justify the worst of human excess and mindlessness. I admire your principles of free choice and action BUT unfortunately not everyone holds the same values and sense of right or wrong. And its not a comparison of legal and illegal. Both when abused are wrong. Its about the peripheral effects also... the violence, the loss of free will that you seem to champion is an effect of drug abuse. Loss of dignity, health and the ability to function in society that should convince most that fighting them is important even if its un-winable war.  

Thats just my opinion of course.

 

Sorry man,i see NO difference in abusing one or the other...

In my region of the world i have by far seen far more people become severe addicts and hard core criminals because of prescription meds than "hardcore street drugs"...Though meth is starting to catch up

Cannabis has no place in a conversation like this,yet the sad part is...It still gets brought up in conversations like this!

Love him,hate him,or indifferent...Yam has knocked the drug debate outta the ball park on here many times!

I said my piece on the issue aswell several timesover...

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

See thats the problem. If people were moderate in their use of alcohol and drugs then we wouldn't be having this discussion and the alcohol and tobacco industries would be a fraction of the size they currently are. The damage to society minimal. But it's just not good business to encourage moderation in any thing. Excess means excess profits. Moderation means less employment and tax. Example: i bought a new car a couple of years ago and the speedometer says my vehicle can reach 240 kilometres an hour. If i do that i will be breaking the law and more than likely kill myself and others. The car industry has convinced the government that its essential for performance and marketing to have a car that can travel 240 kilometre an hour even though its against the law to travel at that speed. Most people never go over the speed limit BUT those that do destroy lives. Similar examples can be found everywhere.

Are governments legislating against people that are law abiding and mentally capable OR are they making laws to protect us from those that break the law. Moderation might be key but how can you convince someone that they should be moderate?

I understand where you're coming from. It's like the same with the restaurant industry, especially the hamburger joints, go out of their way to advertise and convince society that we always need more food than what we think with super-sized meals and drinks, which is part of the problem with the obesity epidemic. But educating the public, in not abusing all these things, is the best way to go about it. Trying to impose socialist ideas and laws to keep people from doing it at all, that's a slippery slope into socialism, which is turning this nation into a bunch of control freaks upon one another. And people are going to rebel - they won't tolerate it and they'll keep on and keep on until society gets a clue that the war on drugs is a failure.

So education, education, education. After that, it should be up to them whether they want to abuse or moderate, not you or me or with each other. 
 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Yamato said:

People who think the fedgov should control what people do with their bodies must also think that the people, towns, cities, counties and states need babysitters.

And how do we stop these people from being a burden on OUR pockets when they decide what to do with their bodies?  Not treat their overdoses at the cost of our healthcare?  Not give them unemployment at the cost of our tax dollars when they get fired from their jobs for being high due to the fact that they can't stay away from the highly addictive drugs?  Not give them welfare benefits for their children because they can't pass a p*** test to get a job?  It's not as easy as you think it is to just allow people to do anything they want with THEIR bodies..we all pay for it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

And how do we stop these people from being a burden on OUR pockets when they decide what to do with their bodies?  Not treat their overdoses at the cost of our healthcare?  

If it's not federal healthcare benefits, there's an enormous chance you won't have to pay for it.

Quote

Not give them unemployment at the cost of our tax dollars when they get fired from their jobs for being high due to the fact that they can't stay away from the highly addictive drugs?

If it's not federal unemployment benefits, there's an enormous chance you won't have to pay for it.

Quote

 Not give them welfare benefits for their children because they can't pass a p*** test to get a job?

If it's not federal welfare benefits for their children, there's an enormous chance you won't have to pay for it.

In any of the three above cases, if it's not federal and yet you still do have to pay for it?   How you stop it is you go to your town, city, county, or state that are closer to you than you are to me, and change it.

 

Quote

It's not as easy as you think it is to just allow people to do anything they want with THEIR bodies..we all pay for it.

It's a lot easier than you think.  If it was legal in the first place, they wouldn't be unemployed from not passing a p*** test after they smoked the wrong weed over the weekend.

"Anything they want" has to be the starting point and you can subtract the most outlandish examples from there.   Otherwise it's nothing that other people in charge don't want, and you'll have to try on what it feels like backpedaling from there.  

I'm sorry you can't allow other people to do what they want with their own bodies, and there's a fair chance you're going to learn what it feels like to wear that shoe when Republicans put that wisdom into practice on abortion.  

But you'll still be liking General Kelly and all the silly corporate drug policies apparently, so there's always that.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

For the same reason we need a utility to provide "safe" water and corporations to produce safe alcohol and a legal drug industry. The government needs tax and a level of control otherwise they're outta a job. But you see you can't pick and choose which aspects of the law you wanna adhere to and which you don't care for and they know that. Those in power will listen to the powerful and rich was before they care about your ability to grow safe weed with all your clean water and dirt. They will find stupid arguments and throw data around and pledge to do the right thing and the only ones to benefit will be the corporations and the corrupted politicians. Count on it.  

THAT is a thought provoking post man.  

If power is kept closer to the people, it's easier for us to pick and choose which aspects of the law we want to adhere to.  It's a lot easier for us to influence our own locales than it is the federal govt + all that bureaucracy.   Once they start handling things and "creating all those jobs" it's like pulling teeth out with dental floss to get them to stop.   And when it's not one-size-fits-all from Washington DC, and yet you can't influence your own locale?   You're always free to move to another city, county or state that's more to your liking.

I agree that those in power would love to do the bad things you're mentioning, that's why I start from a position of denying them that power in the first place.  Question it in time, challenge it before they get it.  Or in the worst cases where they somehow grab onto it, make efforts to take the power back.  Once they create jobs, it's a losing proposition to get rid of them. 

And that's why marijuana is still illegal today.  It has nothing to do with science or compassion and everything to do with politics and money.   In the past few years the case for CBD has become so powerful that the politicians would be the ones out of a job if they didn't come to their senses and legalize it.  Even states that have been against "marijuana" in any form of recreational use, they're seeing the light on CBD.  There is no excuse.  And the money is very attractive.   But we should note that process is starting out in the states; which are closer to the people.  And we're in this weird legal limbo right now where it's different degrees of legal in all these different states and still illegal under federal law.   Sometimes they'll come get people, sometimes they won't.   So people have to walk a fine line. 

And even in the most legal states, access is very poor.   People still have to go and buy tiny amounts of high THC weed for ridiculous amounts of money.  State taxation rates were (are still?) 25% or 50% where recreational is legal.  So even the freest cases have precious little to do with compassion and much more to do with money.   If it was truly legal we could grow our own large amounts of low THC high CBD strains, or the most medicinal strains for whatever our health care needs are.  Someone just using it for prevention might save it for weekends.  Someone suffering from pain or seizures might take a sativa in the morning before work so they can keep their jobs (<--agent0range).   Someone suffering from cancer might take an indica every evening, or whatever.  People would have a choice, and access to affordable medicine that grows like a weed!   If I've learned anything about this issue is that it takes a lot of BS to stop something that grows like a weed.  

But noooooo noooooo, the very people we both don't want getting the money are too busy making way too much money.    Where it's illegal, people have no choice.   No hope.  They're suffering and dying and not granted access to a plant that could help them greatly.   I'm an empath man, I have compassion for people.   Why should people ever have to suffer needlessly?   Where should they have to?  What states should keep it illegal?  And why aren't the people who live in those states worth it?

I'm not suggesting anyone here is full-on against marijuana legalization.  Just that it's relevant to the political climate of our country.  Because our politicians now in charge and soon to be in charge don't seem the least bit capable of making exceptions.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that the problems inevitable stems from that magic bullet fallacy, instant cures ... the flick of a switch mentality ... things won't work like that and if it seems to be the case then it never works for long ... if things are to change then it will take time ... if things are to really change ... it will have to take an eternity ~

~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Huh... natural tobacco is quite different from commercial grade tobacco.

i said nicotine, not tobacco, pay attention.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The socalled war on drugs has destroyed whole communities, predominantly of the minority persuasion. Prisons filled to the brim with victimless 'drug abusers', leaving the 'correctional facility' with a higher education in crime as well as a criminal record; when they get free these people have a lifetime of joblessness to look forward to.. and all the opportunity in the world to bring into practice what they have learned while in prison because of it. Whole generations were raised without a fatherfigure, motivating them to seek such a rolemodel in gangs. This besides the excessively plausible scenario ofcourse, thesame minorities were consciously supplied certain highly addictive drugs like crack cocaine by the very government that claims to be warring against it (ie. CIA; Iran Contra).

The war on drugs is the prequel to the socalled war on terror. Both have strong indications of double layered political motivations, social engineering. Honestly I am surprised anyone, anno 2016, would still believe in such a narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, aztek said:

i said nicotine, not tobacco, pay attention.  

You're a rude individual testing my patience. Tobacco has been engineered over the years and to the advantage of the tobacco companies to bring out a higher nicotine level i.e. addicting the consumer to their products.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2016-12-09 at 3:33 PM, Farmer77 said:

and im hooked on it like it was oxygen. I go through damn near violent withdrawals if i go more than an hour or so without a chew. 

Its all psychological in my meaning.. I have used  snus/snuff for over 20 years.. last october I decided it was time to quit because it had gone to the extreme.
I slept with snus. I awoke at 3 each night going to the toilet spitting it out and imediately taking a new portion in my mouth before going back to bed.
When the clock rang at morning I reached out to take a new portion before I turned of the alarm.
I even ate while having it in my mouth.

I quit and began using small teabags under my lips instead.
I havent used Snus for over a year now. And I havent had any withdrawal at all.
I have never felt any draw to take a real snus since I quit.

But now a year later I still use small teabags under my lip..
And I cant quit that.. 
In my case and I think most cases its not the nicotine its the habit..

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 8:01 PM, Captain Risky said:

Sorry to hear about that. But i doubt that pot is any better when abused. 

I would have been more then willing to take the chance. Ive never seen someone become violent and belligerent from smoking pot.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2016 at 7:51 PM, Agent0range said:

And how do we stop these people from being a burden on OUR pockets when they decide what to do with their bodies?  Not treat their overdoses at the cost of our healthcare?  Not give them unemployment at the cost of our tax dollars when they get fired from their jobs for being high due to the fact that they can't stay away from the highly addictive drugs?  Not give them welfare benefits for their children because they can't pass a p*** test to get a job?  It's not as easy as you think it is to just allow people to do anything they want with THEIR bodies..we all pay for it.

Gawd!  I’m about to agree and support Yamato (at least in part).  My stomach can’t take it.  It’s something I don’t recommend.  

People make bad choices.  That shouldn’t be something that everyone else must pay for.  The government should run PSAs making the people aware of how bad drugs are and empower business to test their employees.  That would fall under the General Welfare.  If people are still stupid enough to do drugs irresponsibly then they have no one but themselves to blame.  If they desire to correct their mistake, utilize several layers of help.  The first level would be faith-based charities and half-way houses.  If that doesn’t work and they end up on the street, then organize them into work groups, but basically the poor house doing jobs that most Americans don’t want to do for room and board.  That is far better compassion than enabling their addiction and stop ruining this nation’s precious wealth.  But if that doesn’t help then segregate them into hospice care and let them die as comfortably as possible.  Let nature take her course and cull the weak and sickly to keep society strong and healthy.  Put responsibility back on the individual.  That way they don’t become a burden to our pocket book and their lifestyle and demise can be used for the latest PSA to warn others.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.