• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Why r some drugs illegal and some not?

I just think they're playing it safe,

I mean there are people who want see marijuana legalized for example, but there is not enough support when it comes to getting legislation changed because the government don't want to be hated by the conservative majority and the voting public are too affraid to make the big mistake of legalizing this "gate way" drug.

Ideally the amount of money made and saved by the legal commercial cultivation and sale of marijuana products could be put to great use by the goverment.

Also there's no question in the marijuana vs alcohol/tobacco debate.

But making it happen means taking big risks and often those who try often get stomped down before they make any real impact.
 
Prometheus said:
Jo Average comes home after a rough day at work and what soothing options does he have open to him? A scotch and a cigar... both drugs which a going to relax and somewhat anaesthetize Jo Average, not make him question why he is stressed, why he hates his job, his boss, the government which is taxing him, so and so forth. Psychotropic substances aren't legal because if they were the government would be opening the proverbial floodgates and creating a potential risk to the power they have worked on consolidating for centuries. It would be suicidal for the state to allow every man and his dog access to mind expanding substances rather than ones which dumb us down.
Click to expand...

excellent quote :D :)
 
Originally posted by Prometheus
Click to expand...
Jo Average comes home after a rough day at work and what soothing options does he have open to him? A scotch and a cigar... both drugs which a going to relax and somewhat anaesthetize Jo Average, not make him question why he is stressed, why he hates his job, his boss, the government which is taxing him, so and so forth. Psychotropic substances aren't legal because if they were the government would be opening the proverbial floodgates and creating a potential risk to the power they have worked on consolidating for centuries. It would be suicidal for the state to allow every man and his dog access to mind expanding substances rather than ones which dumb us down.
Click to expand...

The only problem I have with this statement is if this was the case then why hasn't the Government (of any country or state) ever stated this?

From reading the government material there is no mention of such a deep concept guiding government policy.

I believe the BL active in the drug debate (through their day-jobs) could perhaps desribe whether the people they've encoutered in the drug debate truly believe that legalisation of psychotripic substances would lead to collapse of society?
 
Prometheus said:
Illicit drug deaths only make up about 3.5% of all drug related deaths. Tobacco making up around 63%
Click to expand...

Prometheus said:
Illicit drug deaths only make up about 3.5% of all drug related deaths. Tobacco making up around 63%
Click to expand...


I think youll find a shitload more people smoke then take illicit drugs and tobbaco has been around alot longer.

Im not swinging either way but I think you'll find that you would need to divide your statistics by the number of people who smoke/who take illicit drugs to get a comparable figure.
 
Yep

you gotta have the same sample size or it means shit. Eg sample a group of people where exactly the same amount smoke as do illicit drugs (cant do drugs and smoke)

And then take your deaths from there and compare. Even still it doesnt meant much unless the deaths are 100% caused by drugs/smoking.
 
Some good points have been raised as to why certain drugs are illegal and some are not but I'll give you guys a few more:
Drugs can be seen as a symbol of a particular status group. Ie, scotch or wine (expensive alcohol) can be seen as a symbol of the white middle class and hence the government who is representative and financially and socially asupported by this status group sees this drug (and hence this group of people) acceptable, hence the drug is legal. A case point in history, during the 1850's Australia had a goldrush and many chinese immigrants came to this country looking for a better life. Australians were not welcoming of this new group of people and a look at the newspapers of the time supports this. The drug of choice for the chinese was opium and it can be said that this was a symbol of their culture. As a means of attacking the chinese indirectly as a group opium was made illegal. Ditto can be said about how drugs today represent certain groups, ie. MDMA represents the youth of today.

Also the reason why drugs like tobacco are still legal dispite confirmed serious health risks is that tobacco companies provide governments with serious revenue and supports the Australian economy in many other ways.
Also legalising other drugs would require a complete backflip on decades on a prohibitive stance, and quite frankly it would be political suicide for governments to do this for pretty much all drugs except maybe cannabis (mainly due to cannabis use been much more socially acceptable these days).
Besides if you adhere to the notion governments are instilled as a means of social control of the working class by the capitalist class, psychedelic drugs which may cause people to question the system of production are never going to be legalised.

Sorry for the length of the post, some of the ideas are bit up in the air, but give them some thought and you will see they are feasible
 
illegal drugs are illegal coz there is no definable medical use for them...
 
Last edited:
illegal drugs are illegal coz there is no definable medical use for them...
Click to expand...

Well that's what they tell you.... ;)

The medical use or "suitability" of Heroin was hotly debated when it was initially banned. I've heard it said by a couple of older nurses that heroin containing Bromptons cocktail was often given to patients, long after both heroin and cocaine were banned in such applications. Can't have people dying in dignity now can we.... 8)

The medical use of heroin was phased out in Australia as the 20th century progressed, in response to international conventions and pressure particularly from the United States. In 1949, the PCOB criticised increased heroin use in Finland, Italy, Sweden, New Zealand and Australia. At the time, heroin was used in Australia in cough mixtures and for palliation in childbirth and terminal cancer. The issue was raised again by the PCOB and the United Nations in the early 1950s. In 1953 the Commonwealth Government introduced an absolute prohibition on the importation of heroin and urged the States to prohibit its manufacture. This they did-despite opposition from the medical profession.
Click to expand...

From Background paper on illicit drugs, their use, and the law in Australia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top