Here's a touchy one but I cant help myself I'm curious....

Drugs/Alcohol-experiences and observations

It's been discussed before.

okay... I'm still curious tho

put it to you this way I'm 19 and 85 percent of the people I know have experimented with drugs (100 percent with alchohol) and about 50 percent are regular uses.... Most of them young people and they are all super blase about it... Is this a good attitude? and why is ti this double edged sword, hip to take, but ilegal?

I wouldn't want my response to come across as condescending, Tagged, but it is going to include an element of... I think the government should limit its involvement with recreational drugs to three specific areas:

One -- information: If there are dangers -- the dangers should be well publicized. The should NOT be magnified nor minimized -- but most especially they (the dangers) should not be magnified.

Two -- limititations: Obviously there are huge dangers to using drugs (both recreational and medicative) and operating vehicles on public highways/streets or operating machinery in factories. The government not only has a right to make laws regarding drug use that impact on these areas -- they have an obligation to do so.

And (here is the area I hope is not considered condescending) -- the government certainly has the obligation to limit the sale or distribution of substances like this to young people -- wherever they determine the minority/majority age to be. The age of 21 seems to be the age people are using these days -- which I am sure can seem unfair to someone 19 -- and I'm not entirely sure I don't agree with 19 year olders on this.

But the other kind of majority will rule on this -- and I think it appropriate for government to involve itself to that point.

Three: Help in the rehabilitation of people who end up addicted -- whether to alcohol or any other drug.

Most of the other governmental involvement sucks as far as I am concerned.

If their intention is to enforce morality -- they are barking up the wrong tree -- and they might just as well flush the money being used this way down the toilet.

People use drugs because they cause pleasurable sensations. For example, you can dream, become relaxed, lose your inhibition, be able to party for a long time... But these are short term pleasures

In the long term...
There is no "higher plane," that's the sensation of your brain connections getting snipped. I don't use drugs because I spend a lot of time and money making my brain cells retain more information. Smoking hurts the lungs, acid the brain, alchohol the liver etc. I have enough problems with my body as it is, and I want it to get better, not worse. (Especially with some drugs that are addictive - oy vey, how I hate seeing people get sucked up by those things.)

Young people are experimental, getting used to their new bodies, and they rebel as part of growing up and becoming their own people. It's okay to experiment (and I'm not only talking about drugs here) - but make sure you're not forgetting about the long term.

Agreeing with Apisa, I think the government is too involved in legal prevention of drugs (the law or stick side), especially in the case of marijuana. This is probably stemming out of the Victorian social temperance movements. This is to their benefit of our economy, because people who do drugs are less motivated to work and more likely to do crime. However, it is probably a violation of privacy or personal rights to prevent drug use in your own home... The home is the American fortress of privacy. I don't know where it would fall under the constitution but I'm pretty sure they shouldn't be regulating it the way they do - at least not the federal gov't.

I was a heavy pot smoker for about ten years. I consider that pretty much of a lost decade... I can't ever get that back.

My beliefs are the the ancient cultures did not understand human physiology, and therefore ascribed the sensations in a spiritual way. I have reached a "higher plane" simply by doing a certain form of breathing.

I believe that recreational drugs have their place, as a relaxant, and a social lubricant, by adults. Like alcohol, I believe that their use can be abused. I think that the government needs to butt out of these issues, except where other people are affected. (Like driving stoned)

I agree with Frank, Portal, and Phoenix.

The regulation of private drug use is no more a violation of a person's privacy than the regulation of one's private counterfeiting operation, or one's private video pirating, or one's private child porn downloading. You are not free to disregard the laws merely because the outside world is on the other side of your front door. It only makes it less likely that you'll be caught.

Joe makes a very important point.

Many people argue against certain laws along the lines of it being a "private" issue being infringed on.

But there are plenty of perfectly valid laws that impede one's "private" act.

The arguments should, as always, be about the validity of the law on a cost/benefit basis to society.

Laws that regulate "private" acts are not news and will not go away.

I don't use drugs because they can screw with your life, but as far as a legal stance anyone should be able to do them and do want they want with their life.

well, we make laws on the basis of protecting others - I do not think the government has a responsibility to protect people from themselves.

Child pornography hurts the child, counterfeiting hurts the economy, as does video pirating. Drug use in your own home hurts... You. Therein lies the diference.

Drug use outside of the home results in bad driving and other reckless behavior, which can kill other people so the government can/should get involved in public regulation.

okay guys thanks for the input...

Pheonix you say you reach higher planes through breathing, and infact you are altering your brain waves, so what is the drieffence between lets say breathing exersises and a drug like psyclocybin amazonian mushrooms which have no long term effects (I have read the sciencetifc research on this). I know it's possible to have a bad expericne while on them (been there) but there is no build up of this chemical in your boody, no memeory loss or insanity. And why make alchohol legal? a drug very much more addictve and harmful then most phsyceldelics? alchol is addictive, destructive to the body (same as another legal drug Tabacco) and linked to most women abuse, what makes this drug so much more socially acceptabel. perhaps it makes you accepting less thoughtful and blind to the faults of those in ciontrol? (just a thought)

sorry spelling bad I know hope above makes sense to lazy to correct

Just an aside, if I may:

If you want people to take your arguments seriously -- you really have to take them seriously yourself.

Everyone makes typos -- and spelling errors.

But you are going beyond that and simply not showing your own posts the respect they deserve. You have a reasonable message -- and you are getting it hopelessly garbled because of laziness????

Makes no sense.

Keep a blank Word path open so that you can cut and past your responses and check spelling, grammar and syntax before posting.

It only takes a second.

okay but i feel it's a little anal as I'm no doing a treatment or an essy here, I'm simply having a converation although it be in th written (or typed) word.

I mean I never knew that that would earn me brownie poitns besides I'm being dead honest about the laziness, not over the argument but over the spelling.

tagged_lyricist -

Caring what writing not wasn't spelling attitude your arguments with drugs composed meaning that brain points laziness didn't conversation higher.

And that's exactly why.

You took the words right out of my mouth -- and I don't appreciate you having your hands in my mouth. :wink:


(Any chance I can get a taste?)

Yup, lol!