Kid's Pot Use Up

[MSimon]

We did see something like that during alcohol prohibition. Women - never known as a class to be regular drinkers became so under the influence of prohibition.

[Diogenes]

There are far fewer involved with drugs than with alcohol and yet it isn't working.

So how has it worked? Well quite well. And the better it worked (as trumpeted by the newspapers etc.) the more people began to wonder: what is so good about that stuff that folks are willing to go to jail for it?

The best way to make prohibition work IMO is never to start it in the first place because it is a big advertisement for the very behavior you oppose. You couldn't buy that kind of advertising. And fortunately with prohibition you don't have to.

You keep SAYING it isn't working, but we don't have one of these, do we?


Chests of Opium brought into China:


Converting an exponential growth into a non-growth (pegged at 2% according to you) requires a constant expenditure of effort.

[Diogenes]

That truly is quite a nightmare you are having. Too bad you can't seem to wake up from it cuz none of it is real.

The nightmare is what you inadvertently wish to cause.

Opiates were freely available in America during the same period they worked over China. I'm still waiting for something other than your usual hand waving explanation.

Could it be that Prohibition spread the very "disease" it was meant to prevent?

No, we outlawed it and then enforced it; Something which the Chinese were unable to do. Had we allowed it to remain legal, we would have had the same addiction growth pattern that China had.

[MSimon]

Uh. D. That chart explains nothing.

Opiates were freely available in America during the same time they were outlawed in China. Why didn't America see the spike in use China did?

BTW that free availability was considered something of a scandal because heathens were being punished for things Americans were free to do. So some Americans (the same folks going after alcohol) worked to do something about it. And they did. They Drug corrupted ever country from Columbia to Mexico and help finance the Taliban. An enviable record to be sure.

And according to Wm Colby they have Drug corrupted America.

[MSimon]

No, we outlawed it and then enforced it;

Outlawed yes. Enforced - no. That would require more of a police state that very few countries with the exception of North Korea have been able to maintain for long. Even the police are getting tired of herding junkies.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/200 ... nkies.html

And even the outlawing nationwide was post 1914.

Now let us go over it again:

In the period of your chart opiates were freely available in America and outlawed in China. Please explain the differential results.

[Diogenes]

On the other hand, drugs sometimes DO produce a useful benefit to society.



One of the Thugs Who Attacked Bernie Goetz Died of a Drug OD Today

One of the teens wounded by “subway vigilante” Bernhard Goetz died of an apparent drug overdose in a seedy Bronx motel room Thursday — 27 years to the day after the infamous shooting.

http://www.jammiewf.com/2011/good-karm- ... day-later/

[MSimon]

You seem to be avoiding the question:

In the period of your chart opiates were freely available in America and outlawed in China. Please explain the differential results.

[Diogenes]

You seem to be avoiding the question:

In the period of your chart opiates were freely available in America and outlawed in China. Please explain the differential results.

I'm not avoiding it, I just don't see any urgency in addressing it. It's not like I haven't discussed this with you before. You know very well what my response is going to be.

By 1914, *WE* were just getting started with widespread addiction to opiates. By this time, the Chinese had been dealing with legal opium for over a hundred years. *WE* had the option of outlawing the stuff, while China did not. As a result, *WE* never developed as bad of an addiction problem as the Chinese did at that time. Also, I suspect Judeo-Christian culture probably had a better self defense meme against it, than did Buddhist-Taoist culture. Once something was determined to be intoxicating, the puritan types were all over it.


Fortunately for us, it had never managed to get as far in our culture as had alcohol, which was a long standing cultural tradition for many folk.

[Diogenes]

And Sometimes Not.


Son of ex-NFL QB Kramer died of heroin overdose

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A Los Angeles coroner's office says the cause of death for the 18-year-old son of former NFL quarterback Erik Kramer was a heroin overdose.

Thousand Oaks High School backup quarterback Griffen Kramer was found dead in his Agoura Hills home on Oct. 30.

http://news.yahoo.com/son-ex-nfl-qb-kra ... --spt.html

[MSimon]

You seem to be avoiding the question:

In the period of your chart opiates were freely available in America and outlawed in China. Please explain the differential results.

I'm not avoiding it, I just don't see any urgency in addressing it. It's not like I haven't discussed this with you before. You know very well what my response is going to be.

By 1914, *WE* were just getting started with widespread addiction to opiates. By this time, the Chinese had been dealing with legal opium for over a hundred years. *WE* had the option of outlawing the stuff, while China did not. As a result, *WE* never developed as bad of an addiction problem as the Chinese did at that time. Also, I suspect Judeo-Christian culture probably had a better self defense meme against it, than did Buddhist-Taoist culture. Once something was determined to be intoxicating, the puritan types were all over it. :)

Fortunately for us, it had never managed to get as far in our culture as had alcohol, which was a long standing cultural tradition for many folk.

We were not just getting started with opium addiction in 1914. In fact we were just ending an era where opiate use was quite high. Something like 5% to 10% of the population were regular opiate users post Civil War. Due to two things: its unlabeled use in patent medicine and its widespread use by Northern Soldiers during and after the war. By 1914 IIRC use had declined to 2% or less.

You knowledge of the history seems rather muddled.

You might want to look up the inception of the Methadone Program. We had 20% or 30% soldiers using heroin in 'Nam and yet most of them gave it up without any help at all. Why? Well if you look up what opiates do to the body - it is rather unpleasant. Unless it is relieving a LOT of pain it is not a pleasant drug - despite your imaginings on the subject.

My theory is this: people take the minimum and least strong pain relievers to relieve their pain. Thus we have a LOT of pot users and very few (comparatively) opiate users. Because long term mild pain is more frequent than long term severe pain. As one would expect. BTW the idea - common in medicine and biology is called homeostasis. Balance.

Now why is the law so ineffective? Because the supply/demand curve is rather steep for pain relief - as one would expect.

You don't like seeing so many drug users? Fine. All you need to do is find a cure for PTSD for the roughly 20% of the population susceptible.

So why did use rates go so high in China and not America? China was a much more painful place to live. Just as 'Nam vs the USA back during the war.

Even the NIDA says it is not the drugs.

And the overdose deaths/alcohol deaths? We have no adequate treatment for PTSD and those with the problem are not getting help or even a word of kindness. My cousin was attacked as a child and no one in the family ever (excepting me) had a kind word for her because the manifestation of her pain was drug use. She ODed a few years back. darn shame. I liked her a lot.

Stop looking at the drugs. Start looking at the pain. If you have the heart for it.

[MSimon]

And BTW as is usual: politicians step in with a "solution" once the "problem" has nearly gone away.

And you know how they think "without the 'problem' we are without a job - how can we keep it going while fooling the gullible?"

And for every single government program there are enough gullible to keep the program in place. All it takes is 10% for - 5% against - and 85% don't care.

I'm not so easily fooled - they ALL have to go. I hear Ron Paul is doing good in Iowa. Maybe that idea is catching on.

[Betruger]

Something I meant to but forgot to mention in previous post. When I did get around to drinking (after first trying at ~18yo and finding it mere passing novelty), it wasn't to numb the pain or forget the trouble I was in, but to help me relax my mind so it was unencumbered enough by cumulative stress to remember what I loved. "In hoc signo vinces"