Author Topic: What's good for the gooseses....  (Read 13303 times)

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,657
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2006, 04:32:58 PM »
fistful,
Sorry I rained on your parade.  Considering this subject has been discussed a number of times on this forum, I figured you'd have seen a pattern.

Rabbi,
Why does the presence or lack of "connoiseurs" and "afficianados" for a given drug, or the relative average intelligence of its users matter when it comes to legislating their legality?

If it could be demonstrated that there are a number of "connoiseurs" and "afficianados" of, for instance, cocaine or LSD, or that the average intelligence of the users is not so incomparable to those who use tobacco and alcohol, would that in any way impact your position?

It seems to me that an awful lot more folks of shall we say average intelligence drink Bud Light and MGD in large quantities and smoke Marlboros and Kamels than sample fine bourbon or old wine and enjoy the subtle nuances of a good bowl of tobacco or cigar. I imagine the same would hold true with almost all recreational drugs - most of the recreational users aren't going to be the cream of the crop whether their drug of choice is alcohol or cocaine.

Lee

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,181
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2006, 05:31:42 PM »
I saw this thread today while at work, so I was hesitant to add to my first post.  I tried many types of drugs 25 or so years ago.  Overall, I enjoyed the experiences, but I haven't done them in decades and don't miss them.  Pot was fun at times, and made my small-town, boring, life seem more interesting than it was.  But it really is a demotivator and short term memory killer.  

If it was legal, I'd probably cultivate a few plants for occasional use, i.e. sit around the fire, sip some beer/wine, eat lots of munchies, and go soundly to sleep.  I had several sports injuries when I was younger, and believe me, pot has a way of relieving physical and mental pain in many ways. Medical Mary Jane is the real deal, without the addictive qualites of opiates.      

The introduction of crack cocaine and meth are what really created the severe drug problem, the anti-drug fervor, and the resulting War on Some Drugs.  Just as the War on Terrorism lost focus by worrying about mouthwash carrying little old ladies, the War on Drugs lost focus by diverting resources to pot and such.

Standing Wolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,978
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #27 on: September 28, 2006, 05:58:31 PM »
I bought some Primatine pills for my cough this afternoon. I had to show my driver's license and wait while the nitwit behind the pharmacy counter wrote down my name, address, driver's license number, et cetera. The "explanation" given was that people use the pills to make methamphetamine.

Stalin surely would have understood: some people break laws, so everyone needs to be punished.

The fundamental flaw is the presumption that Smith has a right to tell Jones what he may and may not do, whether his behavior is injurious to others or not. Once we sacrifice the first freedom, the rest will inevitably be lost. The only questions are how many and how quickly.
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.

Strings

  • Guest
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #28 on: September 28, 2006, 06:11:45 PM »
>How many "connoiseurs" of crack cocaine do you know?  How many afficionados of methamphetamine have you met?
Again, I get back to a basic observation: the greater intelligence recognizes subtler distinctions.
A person can be a drinker and never get drunk in his life.  But I have yet to see someone use drugs who didnt get high.<

 Ok... so, if the only people using .22s are ingorant redneck hicks, then we can outlaw them? By your concept here, then the only guns that should be allowed are high-end sporting rifles and shotguns...

Third_Rail

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #29 on: September 28, 2006, 06:13:20 PM »
Re: grandparents, so on...

My late grandmother (died just last month) was an opium addict. By this, I mean that she habitually made tea from the pods and stems of Papaver somniferum (opium poppy), harvested and ingested opium latex, grew poppies, so on and so forth.

She had quite a bit of pain due to many things, and was what many here define as an addict. She was also a wonderful woman, and a productive member of society for many years.


Just thought I'd share.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2006, 06:27:33 PM »
Quote from: Hunter Rose
>How many "connoiseurs" of crack cocaine do you know?  How many afficionados of methamphetamine have you met?
Again, I get back to a basic observation: the greater intelligence recognizes subtler distinctions.
A person can be a drinker and never get drunk in his life.  But I have yet to see someone use drugs who didnt get high.<

 Ok... so, if the only people using .22s are ingorant redneck hicks, then we can outlaw them? By your concept here, then the only guns that should be allowed are high-end sporting rifles and shotguns...
Huh?
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2006, 06:35:45 PM »
I will admit to being a "legalize it & let Darwin sort it out," type, as the WoSD has not only caused a huge amount of harm, but it has failed.

But, I think folks are too quick to discount tradition and custom.  Alcohol has a long tradition in out country, as does tobacco.  I think tradition favoring alcohol and disgust at other drugs & the cultures that indulge them to be pretty legitimate in a system of self-government.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Sindawe

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,938
  • Vashneesht
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #32 on: September 28, 2006, 07:24:38 PM »
Quote
Did you discover that your grandparents were recreational drug users?  No, I didnt think so either.
Actually, yes they are/were.  Their drugs of choice happened to be ethyl alcohol and nicotine.  Legal and accepted in our culture at the moment, but recreational drugs none the less.

The point I was making which either you did not get (which would be my failing), or chose to ignore (more likely in my opinion given the cognitive abilities you have demonstrated with other topics) was that you made a statement about peoples activities when you have zero knowledge of the persons in question or their habits.

Quote
If it was legal, I'd probably cultivate a few plants...
Same here, though not for personal use.  I saw a photograph several years ago of a Cannabis sport that was lacking in chlorophyll on one half of each leaf, with the division down the centerline of each leaf.  Quite striking and attractive, would make a lovely garden or house plant.

Third_Rail: Thank you for sharing about your Grandmother.
I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.

Monkeyleg

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,589
  • Tattaglia is a pimp.
    • http://www.gunshopfinder.com
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #33 on: September 28, 2006, 07:40:28 PM »
Ever since Rich founded TFL, I've been reading these debates with great interest. I usually don't chime in, since I was on the "drug warrior" side years ago. Now I find myself giving the small "l" libertarian side more thought.

I've done pretty much every drug around, from alcohol to pot to amphetamines to LSD to anything else. I even did arsenic (now, that is sick, stupid, or both). I've done drugs that most people have never even heard of.

The only thing I never touched was narcotics. Even today, after surgery, I'd rather take the pain. I know I could become addicted, as it's in my personality. I won't take anything that's even remotely addictive, not even Tylonal 3.

In August of 1976, I quit all illegal drugs, after a really bad LSD experience. A week or two after, there was no pot or anything else in my apartment.

It was easier to quit all that stuff than it was to give up drinking coffee, which I did about eight years later.

Problem is, I have a couple of close and young relatives who are crack and/or coke addicts. One in particular has been "trying" to clean up for over ten years.

And I look at him and say, "if we legalized all the drugs, the FDA could approve them, they'd be available at pharmacies, the .gov could tax them, and we could use those taxes for more rehab centers." After all, my BIL has been through so many two-day rehab centers that I've lost count.

The problem is that no addict--whether his drug is alcohol, or cocaine, or heroin, or even cigarettes--is going to quit until he or she really wants to.

I've forgotten the number of times my BIL has done six to nine month stretches in the county lockup for drugs. And, each time, he says he's coming out clean.

Next day, he's back on the stuff.

Same with my older brother, who has multiple DUI convictions. No amount of jail has deterred him, and no two or three day stays in a rehab center did any good.

Both are going to die from their addictions, and die earlier than they would otherwise.

So, I look at the idea of legalizing drugs and say, "ok, maybe there's a small percentage of users out there who would actually get that monkey off their backs if they had more than two or three days in a rehab center."

And, then I look at the real addicts I know, and question whether the cost of new rehab centers would be justifiable.

All of that said, taking the billions of dollars from the major drug dealers would effectively end the War on Drugs, which has only fueled a police-style state.

But, do I want my government in the business of dealing drugs? The state governments have already taken over the gambling business. Nevada years ago took over the business of prostitution. How many more vices can our governments sell?

For all of you who advocate or oppose drug legalization, you have with me a very open mind.

Make your best case.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,444
  • My prepositions are on/in
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #34 on: September 28, 2006, 07:48:54 PM »
Quote from: In another thread, fistful
Drugs and guns are a very poor analogy.  Guns have a positive effect on society that drugs cannot match.  Take all guns away tomorrow, and the weak would be helpless against the strong.  Take all illegal drugs away tomorrow, and even booze and tobacco...what negative consequences might there be?
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Monkeyleg

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,589
  • Tattaglia is a pimp.
    • http://www.gunshopfinder.com
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #35 on: September 28, 2006, 08:40:24 PM »
OK, Fistful. You've made your point about not wanting to jump to conclusions.

You're a smart person: convince me, one way or the other.

Guest

  • Guest
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #36 on: September 28, 2006, 08:43:11 PM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
How many "connoiseurs" of crack cocaine do you know?  How many afficionados of methamphetamine have you met?...
  They occupy a socially acceptable place (less so now for tobacco) in society and the cost to ban them would outweigh any social benefit.
I think with that mindset your really overlooking a sizeable portion of people who qualify.  Think big firm lawyers.  Cocaine is expensive, luckily they have the 6 figure incomes.  

While personally against drug use (I do look down on users) I do view it as a matter of personal freedom.  

I did alot of research on the subject during my undergrad days (academic, not emperical).  Was the topic of my senoir thesis.  I spent alot of time visiting drug rehab centers and whatnot.  One of the things that amazed me was just how many drug users are hidden in the woodwork.  That someone is a drug user usually only becomes apparent when they are in full blown addiction and or social failure.  Just like there are functional alchoholics, there are apparently alot of functional (perhaps more so from the drugs) illicit drug users.  

Why arn't we aware? Cause its illegal and has a high social stigma.  

I really believe in the gateway theory offered a number of posts ago.  Its a gateway as it puts people in contact with criminals.  It should be illegal cause its illegal Wink

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #37 on: September 29, 2006, 02:39:01 AM »
Quote from: Sindawe
Quote
Did you discover that your grandparents were recreational drug users?  No, I didnt think so either.
Actually, yes they are/were.  Their drugs of choice happened to be ethyl alcohol and nicotine.  Legal and accepted in our culture at the moment, but recreational drugs none the less.

The point I was making which either you did not get (which would be my failing), or chose to ignore (more likely in my opinion given the cognitive abilities you have demonstrated with other topics) was that you made a statement about peoples activities when you have zero knowledge of the persons in question or their habits.
Thanks.  You proved my point that 1) illegal drug use for recreational purposes was pretty much unknown, 2) when confronted with contradictory evidence or detrimental questions you waffle out of it and call names.  This is consistent with your behavior here.  If anyone is making statements about people's activities it is you.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,444
  • My prepositions are on/in
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #38 on: September 29, 2006, 03:15:30 AM »
Quote from: Monkeyleg
OK, Fistful. You've made your point about not wanting to jump to conclusions.

You're a smart person: convince me, one way or the other.
Monkeyleg, do you think I'm being clever, here?
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

client32

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 537
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #39 on: September 29, 2006, 04:10:27 AM »
Quote
Kill someone while driving stoned/drunk/high?  Oops, that's premeditation, that is, mate.  You knew the risk before you toked/drank/snorted.
This is something I agree with.  Doesn't matter if the drug is legal/illegal in my mind.  How many people here would have to be physically restrained if their loved one was kill by someone by a stoned/drunk/high driver?

As to should we legalize, I'm with you fistful.  I really don't know, or maybe I don't care.
Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations - APS homepage 3/4/05 - 5/20/05

Never ask a man where he is from. If he is from Texas he will tell you. If he isn't there's no need to embarass him.

Third_Rail

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #40 on: September 29, 2006, 06:02:40 AM »
Rabbi, you missed my post about my grandmother, I believe.

Quote
...when confronted with contradictory evidence or detrimental questions you waffle out of it...

Lee

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,181
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #41 on: September 29, 2006, 06:03:30 AM »
Unfortunately, all political discussions these days seem to to fall back to the "all or nothing" mentality,e.g. -If you like guns you support wholesale murder; if you support the decrininalization of pot, you support heroin shooting parlors for preschoolers, if you criticize the President's policies, you're a liberal coward, and so on and so on.
There are reasonable uses for many things and reasonable limits that could be imposed on them.  It's too bad that reason is left out of most discussions these days...it's always us vs. them, black and white.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #42 on: September 29, 2006, 06:06:28 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
Quote from: Sindawe
Quote
Did you discover that your grandparents were recreational drug users?  No, I didnt think so either.
Actually, yes they are/were.  Their drugs of choice happened to be ethyl alcohol and nicotine.  Legal and accepted in our culture at the moment, but recreational drugs none the less.

The point I was making which either you did not get (which would be my failing), or chose to ignore (more likely in my opinion given the cognitive abilities you have demonstrated with other topics) was that you made a statement about peoples activities when you have zero knowledge of the persons in question or their habits.
Thanks.  You proved my point that 1) illegal drug use for recreational purposes was pretty much unknown, 2) when confronted with contradictory evidence or detrimental questions you waffle out of it and call names.  This is consistent with your behavior here.  If anyone is making statements about people's activities it is you.
Marijuana was quite popular in the 1920's.  So I imagine that someones grandparents toked a little reefer in the roaring 20's. Plus booze was illegal then so you might have more granparents doign illegal substances that you think.

-C
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #43 on: September 29, 2006, 07:15:43 AM »
There was a surge in opiate use after the Civil War from veterans.  There was a vogue among the Jazz-Age set for mostly marijuana.  I had a great aunt who I think smoked it some when she lived in Greenwich Village in the 1920s.  Picasso famously used some hallucinogens.  But these were restricted to the avant-garde.  The average American did not use drugs, mostly was ignorant of them.  Completely different situation from today.
Third Rail, there are people whose ancestors were horse thieves and prostitutes.  They usually find ways to overcome their past.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Third_Rail

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #44 on: September 29, 2006, 07:57:36 AM »
And what of alcohol being illegal and the widespread use thereof during prohibition? You haven't addressed that.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #45 on: September 29, 2006, 08:58:52 AM »
Quote from: Third_Rail
And what of alcohol being illegal and the widespread use thereof during prohibition? You haven't addressed that.
It was widely popular and used long before Prohibition.  Its use and manufacture are cornerstones of American culture.  Trying to stamp out something so deeply imbedded in American life was a mistake.  My grandfather a'h was a prominent, well-regarded lawyer on Savannah GA.  I asked my grandmother what he did during Prohibition.  She said "he drank."  He bought liquor from bootleggers.  He used the same bootlegger his fellow lawyers and judges did.  When lawyers and judges in a small town resort to illegal activity to continue their lifestyles then something is wrong.  But he never used marijuana or morphine or cocaine.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,444
  • My prepositions are on/in
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #46 on: September 29, 2006, 09:06:00 AM »
There's a lot of talking past each other here.  Rabbi's position (I think) is that the downside of banning alco and tobacco is worse than the damage these drugs cause, and this is due to widespread acceptance and use of these products and their historical importance in the economy.  

So he's not claiming that our grandparents never drank or smoke.  Nor is he saying that no one ever used hard drugs in the past.  I think what he's saying is that these drugs ought to be illegal and they can be banned much more easily than alco and tobacco.  

I think.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,657
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #47 on: September 29, 2006, 09:56:41 AM »
Quote
When lawyers and judges in a small town resort to illegal activity to continue their lifestyles then something is wrong.
So, if it were discovered that small-town judges and lawyers currently use or have used marijuana when it was illegal it might impact your view on the issue?

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,444
  • My prepositions are on/in
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #48 on: September 30, 2006, 06:23:28 AM »
Cordex, I think he's made that clear.

Quote from: The Rabbi
Quote from: fistful
Thanks, Rabbi.  You are of course the connoiseur to which I referred.  What about milder drugs like marijuana?
I have less objection to marijuana for all the reasons that have already been given.
But there's still the "history and importance" part of his argument.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,657
What's good for the gooseses....
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2006, 07:31:14 PM »
Quote
But there's still the "history and importance" part of his argument.
The "history and importance" argument isn't an argument for continued acceptance of alcohol, it is an argument against the practicality of immediate prohibition.

Anyone who advocates the War on Drugs because they feel that all recreational drug use is bad should - at the very least - agree to and support incrementally increasing restrictions on alcohol with the view that it should be eventually eliminated from our society.  Anything less is a tacit admission of hypocrisy.

Drinking alcohol is a form of recreational drug use.
If recreational drug use is a bad thing, then drinking alcohol is a bad thing.  
If drinking alcohol is not a bad thing, then recreational drug use is not in and of itself a bad thing.
If recreational drug use is not in and of itself a bad thing, then I'd say that people who promote usage or prohibition of a given drug or group of drugs should have objective standards for evaluating them.  Booze vs. Pot is where those objective standards usually break down.

Rabbi, I have three questions.
1. Do you believe that recreational drug use is a bad thing?
2. Would you support an effort to slowly work towards the eventual total elimination of alcohol in America, very much like the campaign against tobacco?
3. Do you have any objective standards to judge drugs and drug dosages that you would apply before judging a chemical fit for recreational use?