Peyote is a plant that grows naturally in the southwest. Is it right for the government to ban natural plants like peyote? Why should the indians be the only one's allowed to grow and enjoy it?
Will the peyote laws ever get overturned?
Peyote is a plant that grows naturally in the southwest. Is it right for the government to ban natural plants like peyote? Why should the indians be the only one's allowed to grow and enjoy it?
Will the peyote laws ever get overturned?
...as opposed to unnatural plants?
I do hope our current drug laws are overturned, because they're ridiculous and they're hurting our country. I am not a user myself, but drugs like Marijuana and peyote shouldn't be held in the same regard as heroine and MDMA. To say that they're equally as harmful is beyond ridiculous.
datura is just a flower, no idea why that one is outlawed
letsrun.com wrote:
...as opposed to unnatural plants?
trying to be funny? There are plants that are not natural. Perhaps you should be pick up a dictionary?
Like the corn you eat?
Cocaine and opium / heroine come from natural plants also. Should they be legal?
He meant a power plant. Or a manufacturing plant.
Are you sure he didn't mean a spy or informer, like a CIA plant?
Many of these drugs were criminalized using campaigns that warned of drugged-out, superhuman colored people attacking white women. Easy to grow drugs like pot have stayed illegal because pharmacutecal companies wouldn't like it if you could get your desired affects from a weed that grows in your backyard for free as opposed to buying their product in a store.
Debunker wrote:
Cocaine and opium / heroine come from natural plants also. Should they be legal?
There's a number of chemical processes before cocaine or heroin is produced.
You can make opium from the poppies, but it's not as if any of those drugs are naturally made.
erowid wrote:
datura is just a flower, no idea why that one is outlawed
Maybe you should actually check out the information on the website inwhich you decided to use as a username.
http://www.erowid.org/plants/datura/datura_law.shtmlWhoa! Lookee that! Uncontrolled...
With all of the drug use in the United States, not to mention the world, it hardly seems like we need to care about an undersupply.
Anyone who wants to can grow/make/buy/barter all of the drugs they want.
I think the world has bigger problems than glitches in the distribution of substances to get high from. Perhaps you do too.
people being imprisoned ($$$) for minor offenses, fighting a "war" on drugs ($$$), and excessive violence over control over the industry (see mexico) are just a few reasons for legalization.
oh yeah, tax revenue ($$$). the aforementioned posters argument about pharma (other industries too) that don't want fun drugs legalized will keep them illegal for a very long time.
my only hope is that CA legalizes pot, then NY (and probably oregon and washington) won't be far behind. then we can have drugged out and have gay sex on our wedding nights.
Do We Need Another wrote:
Anyone who wants to can grow/make/buy/barter all of the drugs they want.
No, they can't. That's the whole point of this thread.
CA already has, at least for "medicinal" purposes. Biggest cash crop in the state.
Where does the natural line end? Is drying unnatural? What about fermentation? What about heating(including the burning of the substance)? What about grinding? What about mixing two items that occur seperate from one another? Natural is a load of crap. It tells you nothing about if something is good or bad.You either believe the life is better by taking chemicals that mess around with brain chemistry for recreational purposes or you don't. Society makes the same decisions. Both can be wrong.
Twas A Classic wrote:
Debunker wrote:Cocaine and opium / heroine come from natural plants also. Should they be legal?
There's a number of chemical processes before cocaine or heroin is produced.
You can make opium from the poppies, but it's not as if any of those drugs are naturally made.
duhada wrote:
Where does the natural line end? Is drying unnatural? What about fermentation? What about heating(including the burning of the substance)? What about grinding? What about mixing two items that occur seperate from one another?
Natural is a load of crap. It tells you nothing about if something is good or bad.
You either believe the life is better by taking chemicals that mess around with brain chemistry for recreational purposes or you don't. Society makes the same decisions. Both can be wrong.
ehh, although i see where you're coming from, and i tend to personally think that most if not all drugs should be legal, i think you can distinguish natural vs. unnatural in terms of chemical changes vs. physical changes. the THC in marijuana, for instance, doesn't require extensive processing to change the compound into a drug form, as does heroin or cocaine.
it's a fuzzy distinction to be sure; a better question is why are only certain drug compounds - whether natural or unnatural - illegal? this is the true arbitrary distinction, and has absolutely nothing to do with the inherent dangers of the drug. Vicodin, valium, xanax, ambien, alcohol, tobacco - just to name a few - all legal (albeit controlled) substances with potentially lethal side effects and responsible for billions of dollars in damages to society. but guess who would lose billions if weed was legalized - yep, big pharma, alcohol, and tobacco, and they all have extremely powerful influences on lawmakers. if you look at this issue with even slightly more than a cursory glance there really is no intelligent argument for continuing this arbitrary and destructive failure known as the "war on (certain) drugs". the hypocrisy of people who would condemn harmless weed smokers to prison as the dregs of society and then go chain smoke cigarettes before having a few cocktails and popping an ambien so they can sleep at night is sickening.
Amen
And what does processing have to do with being legal? It might make you feel better but that is a delusion. There are a lot of deadly toxins that are natural.When ever some says there is no intelligent argument, they have a weak argument. It is almost as weak as the "think of the children" argument. Legalizing any drug will have a societal cost and that cost may or may not be less than alcohol/tobacco. Taxing may or may not provide more money than it costs. Heck you aren't willing to legalize a bunch of other drugs suggest you agree with the general argument that people shouldn't be allowed to harm themselves. You just want to draw that line somewhere else so you can have your favorite drug while banning someone elses favorite.And last I checked there are pretty much zero people in prison for smoking weed. They are in for selling drugs, having weed while committing some other crime and so forth.Personally I am not a fan of legalizing just because the weed smokers are some of the most inconsiderate people I have meet. The percentage that smoke indoors in public spaces is incredibly high. I would like to go to a concert without having to smell your shit. I have to feel with legalization it would be worse.
thread killa wrote:
duhada wrote:Where does the natural line end? Is drying unnatural? What about fermentation? What about heating(including the burning of the substance)? What about grinding? What about mixing two items that occur seperate from one another?
Natural is a load of crap. It tells you nothing about if something is good or bad.
You either believe the life is better by taking chemicals that mess around with brain chemistry for recreational purposes or you don't. Society makes the same decisions. Both can be wrong.
ehh, although i see where you're coming from, and i tend to personally think that most if not all drugs should be legal, i think you can distinguish natural vs. unnatural in terms of chemical changes vs. physical changes. the THC in marijuana, for instance, doesn't require extensive processing to change the compound into a drug form, as does heroin or cocaine.
it's a fuzzy distinction to be sure; a better question is why are only certain drug compounds - whether natural or unnatural - illegal? this is the true arbitrary distinction, and has absolutely nothing to do with the inherent dangers of the drug. Vicodin, valium, xanax, ambien, alcohol, tobacco - just to name a few - all legal (albeit controlled) substances with potentially lethal side effects and responsible for billions of dollars in damages to society. but guess who would lose billions if weed was legalized - yep, big pharma, alcohol, and tobacco, and they all have extremely powerful influences on lawmakers. if you look at this issue with even slightly more than a cursory glance there really is no intelligent argument for continuing this arbitrary and destructive failure known as the "war on (certain) drugs". the hypocrisy of people who would condemn harmless weed smokers to prison as the dregs of society and then go chain smoke cigarettes before having a few cocktails and popping an ambien so they can sleep at night is sickening.
Smoke indoors? What kind of backwards state do you live in?