Using drugs makes you stupid.

[KitemanSA]

As this particular article was timely

Darwin articles are news everyday.

Here in the DC area, the major "news" radio station has a weekly "dumbest criminal" piece. They mention three idiocies and have folks vote. Too bad it isn't a Darwin Award piece. Guess there just aren't enough of them; despite the drug warrior contention that drugs make one "stupid".

[KitemanSA]

If you think the game is to make a rational argument, you've already lost it. Rational arguments never win anything. ONLY emotion works. This is all for amusement.

Gee, why did I think this of you.

This isn't an issue of personal liberty, this is an issue of whether someone is permitted to drill holes in the ship that we are all riding in, just because it amuses them.

The answer to that is to quite trying to make your ship hull integrity dependant on their hull integrity.
Civilization is a flotilla with each person capitan of their own junk; not a single ship with a single capitan/dictator.

[KitemanSA]

The very idea that someone who has been tampering with their pleasure centers through chemical abuse is somehow in a position to make rational decisions about their "pleasure button" is ridiculous.

This argument seems to be based on something you(?) mentioned a while ago, that experiment wherein rats where given a choice between pressing a button for food and a button hooked to an eletrical stimuation of their brain "pleasure center"; they chose to starve to death.
Hey dude, people aren't rats.
Data with people show that they don't do that. Women hooked up to an "orgasmitron" (a very similar thing) increase their sexual pleasure, but don't let it overrun their lives. It is the same with drugs, for most people.

[KitemanSA]

That's a metaphor for the war on drugs sinking faster than people can help?

It's a metaphor for sinking if you DON'T bail. Fighting the war on drugs is the same thing as trying to bail water. If you stop, you are going to sink. I personally worry we are going to sink anyways, but from the much bigger holes caused by financial mismanagement from Washington. That doesn't mean that the smaller social holes caused by the drug scourge isn't significant. .

Carrying this rather absurd metaphor to its conclusion; the problem with drug warriors is that while they are bailing so frenetically (and forcing others to bail at gunpoint) they never notice that the hull is self healing, and that they are knocking holes into the hull with their elbows while bailing and at a rate so high the self-healing hull can't keep up. Quit bailing, the situation will go away. Will idiots on occasion still put holes in your hull? Yes, but it won't be a problem. The hull is self healing if you let it be.

[KitemanSA]

How can you argue what the dangers are? Have you been an addict of every single drug to the point of absolute bottom out and everything in between (stealing relatives' property to buy more drugs etc)? If not, you "truly don't understand".

We can find out the response to various chemicals by testing them on rats. The same information can be had by observing the test results on the volunteer human subjects. They end up "F*cked up like a test rat!"
(A friend of mine's favorite saying. Former Cocaine\Heroin user. Now he just drinks a lot. )

Here is the truth of the matter. D here thinks that people are rats and should be treated like them.
I doubt this will do any good against his impervium skull, but:

Dude, people AREN'T rats!

Well, YOU may be, but people in general aren't.

[taniwha]

Dude, people AREN'T rats!

Well, YOU may be, but people in general aren't.

I think I saw a rat walk off in disgust .

[JLawson]

It's true that using drugs does make you stupid, and that stupid people are often more inclined to use drugs. It's not true that all stupid people use drugs or that all drug users are stupid people.

Caffiene, an addictive drug, has a measurable "positive" effect on intellegence. Indeed, modern technological civilization started in the country that stopped each afternoon for their "cuppa".

I blame nicotine along with caffiene for that - it basically humpstarted the industrial revolution. Without them... who knows what might have happened?

Hmmm. That should have been 'jumpstarted', but I think you get my drift.

As far as other drug use goes - I occasionally have a beer or mixed drink - but I've always found life confusing enough without adding in stuff that had a significant chance of scrambling my synapses... and the fact that the good stuff was illegal didn't hurt matters as far as I was concerned, I simply didn't want the hassle.

No, I spent my money on video games in the '70s and '80s... and an expensive addiction it was, too! Now I've got the internet... lol.

[TallDave]

Here's an opposing data point for you: William Stewart Halsted, genius, physician, sometimes called "the father of modern surgery," teacher, astronomer... and a lifelong drug addict.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Stewart_Halsted
http://www.jhasim.com/files/articlefile ... 0short.pdf

Drugs don't make you stupid. Using drugs is often a stupid choice, and stupid people often use drugs, but that's no reason to think drug use reduces intelligence, and even less reason to think making drugs illegal will help them (your own data point certainly seems to indicate otherwise) -- in fact, drugs' illegality may cause up to 90% of the problems addicts experience.

It's a lot easier to function when the thing you really, really, really need isn't overpriced by a factor of 100,000 and doesn't require criminal acts to obtain.

[Diogenes]

Imbeciles might become liberals and conservatives.

Or as we like to say in the libertarian realm: believers in the power of the state to do good. Or in the short hand form statists. Or in the common vernacular fascists.

Here is the place where your logic deviates from the truth.

Conservatives are midway between Statists (liberals) and Anarchists(libertarians)

We do not want total government, as with the Liberals, and we do not want complete absence of government, as with the Libertarians. We want normal and proper government functions. Nothing less, nothing more.

We regard the government interdicting substances that cause a contagious, reckless and irresponsible behavior, as being within the proper role of Government.

All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state. Benito Mussolini

I have always been an enemy of the State. Not totally. But nearly so. In accord with our founding father:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." Geo. Washington

Our founders thought the state should be on a very short leash. Chained to the deck with a VERY short chain. Most of what passes for politics today follows from: "there is no limit to the good that can be done by putting a gun to a man's head" liberals and conservatives alike. As a friend of mine likes to say: "we are doomed".

There are only Progressives in politics these days. In the early days of the Progressive movement Economics and Morality were combined. Now a days the movement has bifurcated. We have Liberal Progressives who want the state to "fix" economics and Conservative Progressives who want the state to "fix" morality.

You repeat this mantra like you repeat the mantra of "It's easier for Children to get illegal drugs than beer." It is also not true. What conservatives want is for the government to QUIT INTERFERING with morality.

The War on poverty has created the UNNATURAL and ARTIFICIAL condition of allowing young girls to disregard the natural consequences of their foolish actions. It made it possible for them to have a slew of fatherless children, who evolved into a substantial criminal class.

Who could have PREDICTED such a thing? Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, among others. Hell, it was obvious to anyone with sense who looked at it.

Then the Government (Wacko Judges caused by Roosevelt.) Declared Abortion to be a Constitutional right, overturning the laws in 46 states. Nowadays, they are trying to force us to accept homosexuality as normal, and of equal value to society as Heterosexual couples.

You have got the shoe on the wrong foot. Conservatives are fighting a DEFENSIVE war, while Liberals have been fighting the offensive war.

In any case the Progressives are now in control of America left and right. Which is why you see Government "Conservatives" working with the left some times on economics and Government "Liberals" sometimes working with the right on morals. It is the common interest in the power of the state keeps them joined at the hip.

Rarely and tenuous. When such does happen, it is for entirely different reasons.

I like the Tea Parties (so far) in that they seem to be more libertarian oriented. And there seems to be an interest growing in libertarian politicians such as Rand Paul.

http://www.libertarianrepublican.net/

What encourages me in my war against the statists is that a little over half the country sees the Tea Party in a favorable light.

You see what you want to see. The Tea Party is composed of conservatives AND libertarians, AND Democrats who never paid much attention to what their party was doing until Obama did things they obviously couldn't stomach.

The Tea Party is simply made up of people who have been paying more attention than the average brain dead voter. They rightly perceive that if we suffer an economic failure, the misery for everyone in the nation will be far worse than that caused by all other issues.

It is priority pragmatism, which is something I wish you would keep in mind when you get so obsessed about the trivial (in the larger scheme of things. ) drug war.

[Diogenes]

"When you get in bed with the government, you're going to get more than just a good night's sleep." RR

When you eliminate government, you won't be able to sleep at all because you will be constantly fearing the Tyranny which replaced it.

Best to make the Government behave in bed and elsewhere.

[Diogenes]

What a lame bunch of arguments.

If you use hallucinogens, odds are excellent you will perform well below your ability. Hallucinogen users have better than a 5,000% chance of developing a psychosis. That doesn't happen with alcohol.

We could go on and on, but truth is it's all futile. The reasons we've allowed certain drugs like nicotine and alcohol, and not others; is that the others screw people's lives up on such a regular basis, that they prove they are not acceptable to general, human society.

If you want to use illegal drugs--go ahead! If you don't hurt or kill anyone, there are almost no real consequences. We don't prosecute druggies, unless and until they injure others. When they do injure others, they deserve to have their balls ripped out and shoved down their throats for their vast selfishness.

And they don't even suffer that. . .so stop the whining.

A perspective that I don't find that much different from my own. The only caveat I make is that using them encourages others to use them, and sucks them into that destructive vortex. THAT is the most significant problem with drugs. They are CONTAGIOUS!

[Diogenes]

There's one very simple reason why Marijuana will not be legalized on any large scale, and that reason is, like it's pseudonym, it smells like s**t, and not just any s**t either, but the worst of the worst, with skunk thrown in on the side.
The majority of people just flat out can't stand the stink, it's so bad people are more than happy to report neighbours that use to the cops. They cheer them on when the neighbourhood stoner gets hauled off to jail, cause the improvement in air quality is such a relief.
The stoner clique are so arrogant, rationalizing and self righteous they flat out don't realize just how badly they smell or the effect it has on non-users. They won't even use inhalalators, they can't contain their enthusiasm to share the stink.
In those areas that legalize, don't be surprised if the non-users start to organize in protest.

Odd, it never smelled bad to me. I actually thought it had a rather pleasant aroma. Of course I like the smell of Cigar smoke, if it's the right type of Cigar. Perhaps my nose just isn't as sensitive as most.

[KitemanSA]

There are only Progressives in politics these days. In the early days of the Progressive movement Economics and Morality were combined. Now a days the movement has bifurcated. We have Liberal Progressives who want the state to "fix" economics and Conservative Progressives who want the state to "fix" morality.

You repeat this mantra like you repeat the mantra of "It's easier for Children to get illegal drugs than beer." It is also not true. What conservatives want is for the government to QUIT INTERFERING with morality.

What a load of crap!
Here you are, a self proclaimed "conservative" demanding the use of government, to the point of widespread executions, to maintain YOUR no drug "morality". Then you say conservatives want government to "quit interfering with morality"??? Can you lie out more sides of your face???

[KitemanSA]

THAT is the most significant problem with drugs. They are CONTAGIOUS!

Only when they are illegal. Illegality breeds expense breeds monetary need breeds PUSHERS breeds more users. It is the illegality, not the drug. You would understand that if you understood Johansen's three laws.

[Diogenes]

What a lame bunch of arguments.

If you use hallucinogens, odds are excellent you will perform well below your ability. Hallucinogen users have better than a 5,000% chance of developing a psychosis. That doesn't happen with alcohol.

We could go on and on, but truth is it's all futile. The reasons we've allowed certain drugs like nicotine and alcohol, and not others; is that the others screw people's lives up on such a regular basis, that they prove they are not acceptable to general, human society.

If you want to use illegal drugs--go ahead! If you don't hurt or kill anyone, there are almost no real consequences. We don't prosecute druggies, unless and until they injure others. When they do injure others, they deserve to have their balls ripped out and shoved down their throats for their vast selfishness.

And they don't even suffer that. . .so stop the whining.

You know I could post a bunch of links refuting your points but why should I bother? You won't read them.

As to your point about injuring others - there are 800,000 arrests for marijuana per year in America. This country must be a much more violent place that I could have ever imagined.

Not only that the DOJ says the only drug statistically associated with violence is alcohol.

An "Injury" does not have to incorporate violence. One of the worst injuries you can do to someone is to turn them into an ambitionless schmuck by exposing them to marijuana. That is what happened to my good friend's nephew, and many other people I know/knew.

A broken arm would be a Godsend in exchange.

Time to bring back alcohol prohibition and shove the alcohol bottles down their throats when the alkys are caught and break it off for those alcohol drinkers getting into violent arguments. And you will love this:

From my experience as a judge dealing with crime, i can say that about 80 % of all violent crime happens with at least one party intoxicated with alcohol. Number of violent crimes under the influence of marijuana i´ve had in the last 7 years: maybe 2 or 3 out of several hundred cases

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/libertaria ... alization/

D*mn alkys. And if they commit domestic violence? Shove the bottle up their a$$es and break it off and then twist. Violently.

Heh. My Aunt Shot my Uncle to death with a shotgun because they were both drunk and arguing. Your Buddie, William S. Burroughs, shot his wife in the head and killed her while he was drunk.

And the drunks that kill with their autos? Death penalty. With sufficiently draconian laws we can end this alcohol scourge. Once and for all.

Well, two of my Uncles got the death penalty from the Drunk Driver that hit them. Why shouldn't he?

And don't give me the malarkey that it was tried. It was never tried hard enough. We did not kill near enough people to make it sufficiently unattractive. Put a million or six alkys to death and the rest will get the message. If we put to death a mere 17,000 alkys a day we can get rid of six million of them in under a year.

I hate alcohol and the damage it does to society. With a passion that knows no bounds.

Am I in the proper spirit of things?

Not really. Your anger is contrived to make God only knows what point. That Alcohol is really really bad, so we need to make another drug legal?

Seems like an odd way to sell it.