• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Still dont understand the War on Drugs

P

Portillo

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
1,924
Location
Sydney
Everyday the war on drugs makes less and less sense. The U.N telling every country that they must have a zero-tolerance policy and prosecute anyone and everyone with drugs. All the while we are allowed to drink and smoke ourselves stupid. This is our lives and if we wish to enhance our lives with drugs, that should be and is our right.
 
The UN primarily serves the western bloc. 29% of the UN budget is contributed by America, and the UN's foundation was built by the U.S.

UN drug policy is American drug policy, for the most part. It will take changing America to change the world at this point.
 
If you want to have more bodily rights then you need to understand where those rights went and who took them. That's what I was trying to explain. The UN is a shield for U.S. social policy. If you want to change the UN you have to change the U.S. Petitioning the UN is a fruitless endeavor as they are just the mouth piece of globalists in the western bloc.
 
Do you think organizations like LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) stand a chance of making any significant chance against such policies? I've heard personal testimonies from former undercover detectives in person, and watched a bit of what they're trying to do to bring attention to the masses of money and lives the drug war is costing us...but is talking to legislators and law enforcement really ever going to reach the ears of U.S. UN officials? It's like the victims of fracking in towns trying to get reimbursement/help from local government..brushed off.

check it out: http://www.leap.cc/
 
Look, I'm as much of a junkie as anybody on this forum, but to be honest, I do understand why drugs are illegal. Drugs are bad, they hurt you physically and mentally. They get you addicted, they make you say yes to sodomy in exchange for a hit. And no, it doesn't happen everytime, but you don't crush into a wall everytime that you drive while being drunk. Still you agree with the fact that drunk driving is illegal, right? Or for another example, you don't necessarily get pregnant or contract STDs if you have unprotected sex, in fact most of the times nothing would happen. Still you use a condom everytime, don't you?
 
to scholars and scientists, the war on drugs is more harmful than helpful. to politicians, it's too hot a potato to handle. until a critical mass of the populations of a critical mass of the main contributors in the u.n. achieve enough momentum to rid these weak politicians of their fear and apprehension, nothing will change.
 
Similar to what L2R said, politicians are to scared to admit they were wrong and make a difference. They've been fighting the war on drugs for so long and enforcing prohibition, in there eyes, would make them look stupid if they took a different approach.

Personally I would be proud if they decided to take a logical and scientific approach to it all.

Plus, some illegal drugs, like cannabis, have medicinal properties which would make a lot of medicines at the moment obsolete. The big pharma company's don't want this...
 
max_ said:
Look, I'm as much of a junkie as anybody on this forum, but to be honest, I do understand why drugs are illegal. Drugs are bad, they hurt you physically and mentally. They get you addicted, they make you say yes to sodomy
Click to expand...

Enriching drug lords, treating regular members of the public like criminals, and neglecting drug abuse victims, far exceeds the damage done if the drugs were legal. Billions of dollars are spent every single year, which fail to make any impact. Many people, just like they have for thousands of years, want to do drugs and criminals are more than willing to sell them. Alcohol and tobacco causes millions of deaths and destroyed lives every year but it would be impossible to make these drugs illegal, enforce it, and expect people to say no. Many people say, but if drugs were legal all our kids would be drug addicts and chaos would rule. Some countries have noted that decriminalization has resulted in a drop in drug abuse, not an increase. The kids already have drugs! We are not protecting them from anything.
 
Enriching drug lords, treating regular members of the public like criminals, and neglecting drug abuse victims, far exceeds the damage done if the drugs were legal.
Click to expand...

This is a point that cannot be overstated nor repeated often enough in contexts such as these. I have found myself facepalming and indexthumbnosebridging more times than during the Star Wars prequel trilogy when participating in or listening to debates re. the merits of drug decriminalization/legalization (D/L) vs those of prohibition for this reason alone. An expected increase in mean per capita usage (which is, of course, dubious to begin with) and volume of consumption are typically offered as deterrents to D/L, but the principle dilemma that is so often neglected is the one summarized above. The issue isn't whether one variable or another is significantly reduced - it's a matter of 1) How well the suggested policy's benefits stack up to its deficiencies and costs; 2) To what extent said policy's sociopolitical justification and implementation is in keeping with collective interests and current social theory; and 3) The actual plausibility of this policy's implementation in the first place, i.e., its relationship to consensus reality. If one considers these criteria to be effective metrics of legislative merit, the issue is unthinkably simple.

As mentioned by L2R above, the WOD is maintained on the behest of dubious historical tradition, rigid sociocultural attitudes, and, most importantly, the political cowardice of our leaders. Who has need for conspiracies when this all-powerful axis of idiocy can be readily cited for blame?
 
P A said:
This is a point that cannot be overstated nor repeated often enough in contexts such as these. I have found myself facepalming and indexthumbnosebridging more times than during the Star Wars prequel trilogy when participating in or listening to debates re. the merits of drug decriminalization/legalization (D/L) vs those of prohibition for this reason alone. An expected increase in mean per capita usage (which is, of course, dubious to begin with) and volume of consumption are typically offered as deterrents to D/L, but the principle dilemma that is so often neglected is the one summarized above. The issue isn't whether one variable or another is significantly reduced - it's a matter of 1) How well the suggested policy's benefits stack up to its deficiencies and costs; 2) To what extent said policy's sociopolitical justification and implementation is in keeping with collective interests and current social theory; and 3) The actual plausibility of this policy's implementation in the first place, i.e., its relationship to consensus reality. If one considers these criteria to be effective metrics of legislative merit, the issue is unthinkably simple.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Portillo said:
Enriching drug lords, treating regular members of the public like criminals, and neglecting drug abuse victims, far exceeds the damage done if the drugs were legal. Billions of dollars are spent every single year, which fail to make any impact. Many people, just like they have for thousands of years, want to do drugs and criminals are more than willing to sell them. Alcohol and tobacco causes millions of deaths and destroyed lives every year but it would be impossible to make these drugs illegal, enforce it, and expect people to say no. Many people say, but if drugs were legal all our kids would be drug addicts and chaos would rule. Some countries have noted that decriminalization has resulted in a drop in drug abuse, not an increase. The kids already have drugs! We are not protecting them from anything.
Click to expand...

I would have agreed with you a couple of years ago, but I've thought alot about this things and now I'm not so sure. I mean, obviously the way things are today is simply wrong. But I'm not so sure about legalization, as much as I love the idea.
Lets see some facts. Drugs are out there. Tobacco and alcohol are legal. Drugs such as hidrocodone or clonazepam are being sold by pharmacies to a huge number of people with prescriptions.
Now, what happened with these stuff? Tobacco kills millions a year. Alcohol is usually involved in car crushes (car crushes being a top cause of death in many countries), so it indirectly kills thousands if not millions each year. There is a real need for medication but a huge amount of the oxy manufactured and sold by pharmacies is for recreational use. This also applies for benzos.
As I said on my earlier post, you PROBABLY wont get an STD or get the girl pregnant if you have unprotected sex. Still you use a condom. I again will state that I am as much of a drug fiend as anybody in this forum, and that's what allows me to say that drugs are a bad thing. Unprotected sex feels great but it is a good thing to use protection and it is a good thing for governments to put money into campaigns that tell people to use protection. Drugs feel great too, and I'm very sorry to say this but I don't think it is so bad for a government to spend money on stopping their people from using them, because they are dangerous. Not inherently dangerous but they could be.
So maybe what should happen is that drugs should be legal but there should be good info out there, and lets not kid ourselves, the best thing to do is to wear a condom and wear it sober. I hate saying this but that's the truth, it doesn't mean that I live by these things, in fact I do not, but that's what I think its right.
 
Its one thing for the government to "protect us from drugs" with harm reduction, education and rehab for drug addicts. Its another thing to spend trillions of dollars "fighting" the war on drugs, without any progress whatsoever.
 
I guess there is progress. The government and CIA are making alot of money on cocaine trafficking. ;)
 
Who says they want to win the War on Drugs? It's extremely profitable and it also creates a scapegoat - if they demonize drugs and drug users it keeps people distracted from other issues. Many groups/industries profit immensely from the W.o.D.: government/govt agencies, big pharma, defense contractors, chemical companies, prisons, law enforcement, lawyers, rehab/treatment centres, medical professionals, etc. Even cotton and paper manufacturers.

Also the W.o.D. supporters probably can't bear the idea of admitting they were wrong, and they've been so busy exaggerating the risks from drugs and justifying the war that it would look bad if they came out and admitted that it was a lie.

And as for rights, do you really think we have rights? I don't remember being asked if I wanted to be governed.

Prohibition of drugs that are relatively harmless, like cannabis and many psychedelics is a form of mind control. How can altering your thinking and your consciousness be illegal?

We are in the age of the Thought Police.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top