Are we Free?

[DrGlass]

penn and teller's bullshit: war on drugs

I live in a "free country" right? America, land of the free. Wait... I can't get equal rights if I happen to fall in love with someone of the same sex? I can't possess, inhale smoke, or eat a certain plant? Why can't I put certain things in my body? caffeine is ok, but heroin isn't? I'm not allowed to take my OWN life? Whats so special about my 21st year on earth? A woman can't have control over an interdependent part of her body?

Sounds like land of the kinda-free.

Why do you think some things are ok, and others aren't? (alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)
Should a "free country" allow its citizens full control of their bodies? if so should there be a minimum age when you gain this self-freedom?

if not, why do you think the government should/has the right to restrict some activities?

*optional* If you agree that citizens should have full control of their bodies and what goes on in and around it how do you think government could facilitate this?

[Caste]

True freedom is impossible in a structured society
There must be certain regulations put in place to keep society from collapsing.
Sometimes the definition of these restrictions are stretched to meet an agenda of some kind.

The fact is, many of the banned things are banned because not of your personnal freedom, but because of the freedom of others. Pump yourself with a shitload of LSD and you'll either die or become a danger to others and their freedom of living.


As I see it, people who push for this whole 'It's my body I want to do whatever!' ideal, libertins I believe, are really just poking at a mute subject. If they get what they want, they'll most likely find their lives are hardly any different. They'll still do the things they do now.

(alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)

That is very arguable.

[Dead-Inside]

Yes, restriction is and should continue to be allowed.

This prevents idiots from being idiots.

[slayera]

Quote:
(alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)

That is very arguable.

Not very.

And most of what glass is talking about is moral choices, it is a known fact you can't legislate morality. So long as you don't infringe no someone else then the choice should be yours. If you get high, fine, fine let your baby starve or hurt someone while high, then have infringed on someone else, and that happens whether not are stoned. If one person want to pay for sex and other accepts, the that is there choice, if you have aids or something other, then you again infrige on someone else.

[DrGlass]

(alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)

That is very arguable.

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/dea ... elated.htm

According to the National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependency, 105,000 Americans die annually from alcohol-related causes which could include everything from falls to drunk driving accidents to cirrhosis of the liver. For comparison sake, there are 365,000 tobacco-related deaths in the U.S. each year.

Every year in the United States, alcohol-related deaths total 100,000 and tobacco-related fatalities total 450,000. And, according to the Feds, all illicit drugs are linked to under 10,000 deaths per year.

http://www.stopaddiction.com/narconon_a ... aths.html#
http://alcoholism.about.com/library/narmort01.htm
Lets try and back up our arguments.

Why can people legally "be idiots" with alchol but not with crack? Should the government start enforcing healthy eating?

EDIT: right slayera, I feel that a "free" person should be allowed to hurt themselves if thats what they want to do. Laws would still apply, you can't hurt OTHER people.
If your opinion differs people say so, but give some more meat to the argument.

[Caste]

(alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)

That is very arguable.

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/dea ... elated.htm

According to the National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependency, 105,000 Americans die annually from alcohol-related causes which could include everything from falls to drunk driving accidents to cirrhosis of the liver. For comparison sake, there are 365,000 tobacco-related deaths in the U.S. each year.

Every year in the United States, alcohol-related deaths total 100,000 and tobacco-related fatalities total 450,000. And, according to the Feds, all illicit drugs are linked to under 10,000 deaths per year.

http://www.stopaddiction.com/narconon_a ... aths.html#
http://alcoholism.about.com/library/narmort01.htm
Lets try and back up our arguments.

Why can people legally "be idiots" with alchol but not with crack? Should the government start enforcing healthy eating?

EDIT: right slayera, I feel that a "free" person should be allowed to hurt themselves if thats what they want to do. Laws would still apply, you can't hurt OTHER people.
If your opinion differs people say so, but give some more meat to the argument.

From another forum

Sorry, but that ridiculously obtuse. Alcohol rarely “kills” anyone directly from a pharmacological effect. That does not make it any less dangerous an any number of settings (e.g., driving). A death cause by drinking driving is still a death from alcohol. The same is with the case of cannabis. There are clear studies that being stoned impairs driving, despite your assertion to the contrary. Alcohol with marijuana seems a particularly bad mix: http://vitualis.blogspot.com/2005/12/st ... crash.html

As for “easily overdose”, if you are even vaguely aware of the history of pharmacology, you would realise that SSRIs are extremely safe in overdose compared to previous anti-depressants. If you actually read the meta-analyses on antidepressants rather than cherry-picking small articles (oh, I see that you don’t actually refer to any), you would realise that SSRIs in fact DO NOT increase the rate fatal suicides over placebo. All efficacious anti-depressant therapy are somewhat “risky” initially as the demotivation from the depression often lifts before the mood (i.e., as the depression improves, there is a period when the patient is more likely to “act” on their low mood). All antidepressants do this.

With regards to Mr Smith, I have no idea of his medical therapy but the use of two SSRIs is definitely not standard practice. If fact, it is highly contraindicated.

As for the triggering of psychosis in the use of cannabis, perhaps you should go visit your local psychiatric hospital or emergency department. Your assertion that it does not trigger psychosis is palpably laughable. There is little evidence that cannabis CAUSES psychotic illness (e.g., schizophrenia) but there is plenty of evidence that it is a trigger in some predisposed people. I have personally seen many people working in psychiatry who have psychosis (or drug-induced psychosis or drug intoxication, call it what you want) when then even smoke one joint. Usually, they are stark raving mad for a few days, calm down over a 1-2 weeks and are “okay” after that, as long as they don’t use cannabis. Despite the obviousness of this relationship and their vows that they will “never touch cannabis again”, most bounce back.

And no, many people are not “using” anything else.

If someone was taking an SSRI and they went crazy afterwards, I can almost guarantee that they will never every touch the medication again. The case does not seem to be so with cannabis. Why? Cannabis may not be addictive in the traditional sense but there is a strong psychological dependence with it.

In any case, I believe in harm minimisation and I don’t believe that criminisation of marijuana is an effective means of containing its harm. In that, you and I actually AGREE. However, I do not believe that the efforts of people like yourself who use misleading information to further their own agenda to be helpful. That prescription medications are dangerous when used inappropriately (duh) is absolutely no support for the case of cannabis. Are you truly suggesting that for patients who would benefit from SSRIs it would be preferably that they smoked dope instead? Ludicrous.

Regards,
Michael Tam

EDIT: right slayera, I feel that a "free" person should be allowed to hurt themselves if thats what they want to do. Laws would still apply, you can't hurt OTHER people.
If your opinion differs people say so, but give some more meat to the argument.

But you are free to hurt yourselves. I've known and seen many people cut themselves or do other things. The thing is, hurting yourself is usually link to some mental illness, as it's not exactly what the every day human being does. Look, I just pinched myself, no cop is coming to arrest me.

You're obviously passionate about the subject and are willing to go on a long, ignorant debate about it.
The fact of the matter is there are people out there who would take such new laws a little to far and start hurting others.
And as I said before, if these laws that restrict our 'freedom' were abolished, I'm sure most people would find their lives changing very little.

[Shr3d]

Why do you think some things are ok, and others aren't? (alcohol kills thousands a year, while marijuana has never killed anyone in the history of medicine)

Common sense is not really common sense. It's just what history has shaped it to be. Jesus drank wine but didn't smoke so therefore the christians whine about it. They rule the planet in numbers atm.

Anyway marihuana is bad for you, they should legalise it though because as we've seen before, if it's legal around the world, it's done less. People here in Australia get drunk at 15 etc because it's illegal. In France, they drink moderately as it's not banned.

Should a "free country" allow its citizens full control of their bodies? if so should there be a minimum age when you gain this self-freedom?

No, most people are idiots and are irrational in bad situations. Just because your boyfriend dumped you does not mean you should slice your arm mary-jane!
Minimum age? No, people aren't perfect at any age.

if not, why do you think the government should/has the right to restrict some activities?

Restriction should be done, but within it's limits. It's just that the government is influenced by people and people in a group tend to conform to each others thoughts (sheep along) and not much thought gets put in on the subjects at hand. But I'm sorta generalising on this, as it seems 50-50 on the situations.

I'll refrain from flaming the bush administration.

[bobthehobo]

"Are we free?"

No. DRM is the new dictator.
lol jk. I gotta run, I'll type a real post later.

[mastersmith98]

but that is what this state was found on if you don't deprive anyone of the right of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. but we are turning into a police state were there are laws that restrict us which shouldn't be

[serpent666]

being serious here, Americans pride themselves in calling there country "the land of freedom"

but i have always though that mexico is truly the land of freedom, almost anything & everything goes over at mexico

[Shr3d]

being serious here, Americans pride themselves in calling there country "the land of freedom"

but i have always though that mexico is truly the land of freedom, almost anything & everything goes over at mexico

Heh so true

[The Watcher]

One of these days, America will fall. America is so hated by the rest of the world, it's only a matter of time...

Even though I'm American (and proud of it), I'm starting to think it's a bad thing now...

[Dead-Inside]

One of these days, America will fall. America is so hated by the rest of the world, it's only a matter of time...

Even though I'm American (and proud of it), I'm starting to think it's a bad thing now...

It'll get better when Bush's gone.

Of course, if you manage to elect him a third time you're fucked.

[Shr3d]

One of these days, America will fall. America is so hated by the rest of the world, it's only a matter of time...

Even though I'm American (and proud of it), I'm starting to think it's a bad thing now...

It'll get better when Bush's gone.

Of course, if you manage to elect him a third time you're fucked.

Third time's the charm ^^

[slayera]

US Presidents can only run for 2 terms.

America is the world's county, you can find people from every land and nation here. While our politics and policies sometimes sucks, we set the standards the rest of the world strives to reach. Most nations would love to be us. Look at the EU, it's the only way they could compete with America, now they are a world economic powerhouse.

Even in Iran, there are people who do look up to Americans, but you won't find Americans looking up to Iranians. We are hated by a few and loved by most. We are hated because we are great and that hate is driven by envy. We have what most want.