How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Iraq   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Iraq

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


75 posted 06-30-2011 10:16 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

What is so hard to understand, Bob? I'm talking about drug wars, countless murders, kidnappings, and other forms of bad guy mayhem, talking about thousands of people living in fear, towns without law because everyone who takes the sheriff job dies, smuggling the drugs over the border, killing Americans on this side of the line when they want to cross their property.....and you are talking about tobacco and alcohol being bad, too, and how capitalism is the true culprit.
Not only aren't we on the same page...we are not even in the same library.

the complaints you raise about  illegal drugs are small, including the deaths and kidnappings.

I can think of a few (thousand) people who may disagree with that assessment.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


76 posted 07-01-2011 01:35 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


quote:
And the drugs are capitalism run riot.


While that's patently true Bob the obvious solution, to remove the monopoly of the cartels and lower the cost to users thereby lowering the profitability could, potentially, cause more problems than it solves.

Your argument seems slightly flawed in that respect, you say that the problems associated with the drug trade - kidnappings, murders etc.  - are greater than the problems associated with drug use itself and offer marijuana as an example. That's a little like arguing that all prisoners should be released because tax dodgers aren't really that dangerous to other members of society.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


77 posted 07-01-2011 03:35 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Many of he same medical problems remain, Uncas, as is the case with Alcohol.  But now they can be more readily addressed with regulation.  For example, you can inspect the stills and be sure that the coils are not made out of lead, as they were on occasion during prohibition.  You can force testing for methyl alcohol content in alcohol distilled for human consumption.  You can force testing for purity so that fusel oil and other impurities don't creep in, and you can make sure the various additives are reasonably benign.  Used to be that urea was an additive in beer, for example, and for all I know it may still be in some brands, a hold-over from a process that used to be called "lanting."  If you really want to know about that one, you should look it up, but only long after a meal.

     While the Alcohol was illegal, that sort of thing was not an option, was it?

     Those who will make a profit from the drugs will naturally fight any attempt to regulate their monopoly at all, and will seek to re-establish it  on terms as advantageous to them as possible in its legal form.  Why would they be any different from manufacturers of other legal drugs in that regard?  These folks already try to keep the cost of drugs prohibitively high, like the dealers in illegal drugs, and many of them show a fairly brutal disregard of who may die if they can't afford the prices.  Their self interest seems fully as callous as the various cartels, and one may only speculate what the cost in lives may be.  The deaths may be a bit more sanitary looking, mind you, but they may also be somewhat more protracted and painful as well.

     Yes, sure, you can hear the drug companies say, we have medical miracles available.  You can have them as long as you can pay for them, just like any other junkie.  "You can't afford our miracles, go put the squeeze on your family.  Go rob a bank for all we care."  

     But as long as the process is legal, the public has some possibility of making inroads into this monopoly structure.  People aren't forced to go out and rob their neighbors for a dose of antibiotics, though given the Republican notions about health care, it seems that there may be a large segment of the American public that would rather have things run that way.


quote:


Your argument seems slightly flawed in that respect, you say that the problems associated with the drug trade - kidnappings, murders etc.  - are greater than the problems associated with drug use itself and offer marijuana as an example. That's a little like arguing that all prisoners should be released because tax dodgers aren't really that dangerous to other members of society.



     I don't see your analogy here.  That doesn't mean you're wrong; it means I don't see it and understand it, and I'd like you to take a shot at explaining it to me in some more detail before I take a chance on replying to something you may not actually have said.

     The number of marijuana users out there seems pretty high.  I don't know if it would shoot up to huge numbers or not if marijuana was legalized, but on the whole they don't seem to be a terrible bunch of folks.

     As for the other drugs, you might consider what percentage of the societal ill effects come from the drug itself and what percentage come from the lifestyle they are forced to adopt by the prohibition against the drugs.

     If people cannot care for their children, they should lose their children.  If they cannot hold their jobs, they should lose their jobs.  This has happened to alcoholics for years, just as it's happened to junkies.  But you don't have to pay several hundred dollars a day to be an alcoholic, and that means that we aren't surrounded by drunks who are forced to commit crimes to keep from going into withdrawal.

     Getting addicted to booze can take a long time, though it can happen fairly quickly to somebody with the wrong genetic package.  Getting hooked on crack cocaine can happen in as little as a single experience.

     There's a lot more to be said, of course, but I need to understand what Uncas is saying more clearly, first.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


78 posted 07-01-2011 04:35 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

(Mike quotes Bob, out of context: )
the complaints you raise about  illegal drugs are small, including the deaths and kidnappings.

(Mike replies to his out of context quotation of Bob)
I can think of a few (thousand) people who may disagree with that assessment.




     Just to clear up the smear perpetrated above, I will put the out-of-context quotation Mike has offered as a characterization of my view on the subject into it's proper context.

"Brown & Williamson and just about any other tobacco company you would care to mention are collectively marketing products that significantly raise the mortality rate in this country on a yearly basis.  Next to the mortality rates of these companies generate from the active marketing of their products, historically at least to children as well as to adults, and certainly to minorities, the complaints you raise about  illegal drugs are small, including the deaths and kidnappings."

     The difference being, of course, that my statement was a comparison between two things, and that the comparison was made clear in context.  Mike's quotation gave the mistaken impression that I was not making a comparison but an absolute statement, and one, beyond that, which was absolutely dismissive of the importance of human suffering.

     Should Mike actually have a disagreement with a point that I made, I would be interested in hearing it.  If Mike, for example believes that the number of deaths caused by Tobacco companies on a yearly basis  is smaller than those of the shootouts and kidnappings he is concerned about and would wish to try to make an argument on that basis, I'd be interested in hearing and responding to that approach.  I think that might be an interesting and fruitful discussion.

      The number of deaths attributed to use of Tobacco products is very high.  The deaths that Mike expresses concern about are not attributable to use of "illegal drugs," however, but to the difficulties in the supply chain and distribution of illegal drugs caused by the laws that are supposed to regulate their use.  Many of the deaths attributable to "illegal drugs" may well be attributable to that cause, and many others to the economics of the distribution system and the wish to make extra money from a  resource that is artificially limited in supply.

     Certainly there are problems with many of the illegal drugs.  The pharmacological problems we have with alcohol are probably as bad or worse than the problems most of the others would cause.  Certainly the withdrawal from alcohol is more dangerous than that from heroin or cocaine or any of the opiates.  Alcohol withdrawal, like barbiturate withdrawal, can be lethal.  Valium and librium and the other benzodiazapines have a reasonably low toxicity.

     Enough for now.
    
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


79 posted 07-02-2011 06:03 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


Sorry if I was a little unclear - let me try again.


quote:
drugs are capitalism run riot.


I agree with this, there's a supply element, a demand and a market and because all three elements are illegal means that those involved in the 'drugs business' are inevitably people who have scant regard for the law. It wouldn't matter if the commodity they were dealing in was drugs, tobacco, alcohol or cookies - the associated violence by those involved in the trade would be the same. The prohibition of alcohol, as you've pointed out, is proof of that fact.

My issue is with the idea that legalising all drugs would reduce the associated deaths. I don't think it would all I can see happening is a shift in the incidence of death from one area of the supply chain to another.

Let's look at heroin for instance, I could go and research the actual figures but as this is a hypothetical example I'll use hypothetical figures. Let's say that currently four people die in drug related incidents, one is a drug producer from a big cartel, one is a distributor, one is an end user and one is an innocent bystander accidentally killed by one of the other three. Now imagine a scenario where heroin is legal as you've suggested. If the supply and distribution was done by McDonalds and KFC for instance it's reasonable to expect that the deaths and violence in the areas of supply and distribution would disappear but what would happen when the user end of the equation jumps from 2% of the population to 20 or 30%. Even without the increase of deaths caused by associated medical problems the impact of having a vastly increased number of heroin addicts intent on fuelling their addiction at any cost would be devastating.

That's not to say that your point about legalising marijuana doesn't have merit - personally I think that it's not only a good idea I think it's also inevitable - but legalising marijuana isn't going to reduce drug related deaths on any measurable scale because marijuana related deaths are almost non-existant in the context drug related deaths to start with.

Howard Marks who controlled 10% of the world supply of marijuana wasn't called Mr Nice for no reason.



Finally there's the argument that drug X is only as dangerous alcohol or tobacco yet they're both legal. If that's true why shouldn't drug X be legal too? On the face of it that seems a convincing argument and when the question is raised it's difficult to come up with a definitive and logical answer. That's because it's the wrong question, flip it on it's head - if tobacco and alcohol were illegal would pushing to make them legal make any sense whatsoever?

As a side note there's an interesting element to the legality of drugs question, where do libertarians and the small government lobby stand on the question? Should individuals have the free choice to use drugs without the restrictions forced on them by an interfering 'big' government?

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


80 posted 07-02-2011 04:54 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     What are the causes of the deaths in the population of heroin users, though, Uncas?

     And why would you assume that there would be a tenfold increase in the use of the drug if it were legalized?  It might also be decriminalized, for example, the price stabilized and the quality made consistant.  Why fall prey to either/or thinking in the matter?

     Heroin needs to be made available in this country if only because of its pain relieving abilities in terminal illnesses.  Maybe Walmart could get a great price on it in its Rx department.  It doesn't have to be sold with fried chicken, you know.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


81 posted 07-02-2011 05:54 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

Sudden death by aspiration of vomit is a common among heroin users but the commonest cause of death is respiratory failure.

quote:
And why would you assume that there would be a tenfold increase in the use of the drug if it were legalized?


Because legalisation allowing recreational use would increase availability and remove the perceived stigma that illegality affords it.

quote:
Heroin needs to be made available in this country if only because of its pain relieving abilities in terminal illnesses.


Honestly Bob I didn't know that it wasn't - it's certainly used as such in the UK, its use is closely controlled though, it can only be administered by trained medical staff. My mother was prescribed both morphine and diamorphine (heroin) in the latter stages of terminal cancer.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


82 posted 07-03-2011 01:45 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

Sudden death by aspiration of vomit is a common among heroin users but the commonest cause of death is respiratory failure.



     This is absolutely true.

     Had you given any thoughts as to exactly why this is the case?

     My understanding is this:  In an illegal market, doses cannot be standardized.  What twenty dollars will buy you on any one day may be quantity x, which an addict has grown used to using as their standard dose.  Every now and again, however, they will run across a dose that has not be "stepped on" or diluted by their accustomed amount, and they will get more than they thought they were getting, or a dosage diluted with poison or some sort of bacterial contaminant.  The most dangerous of these most immediately is the less diluted dose, which will result  in respiratory arrest or cardiac failure, sometimes before the needle can be taken out of the arm.

     The culprit there, in my opinion, is the law as much as anything else.

quote:
:
And why would you assume that there would be a tenfold increase in the use of the drug if it were legalized?


Because legalization allowing recreational use would increase availability and remove the perceived stigma that illegality affords it.
[quote]

     There was no tenfold increase in the use of alcohol when the prohibition against its use was lifted after the repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933.  

     Nothing says that drug use cannot be regulated in some fashion short of total prohibition.  My objection is to creating a situation where the black market creates a crime wave and a deluge of unintended consequences, such as the various overdose situations you mentioned earlier that are a direct result of people not knowing exactly what they are getting.  

     Did I mention the crime?


[quote]:
Heroin needs to be made available in this country if only because of its pain relieving abilities in terminal illnesses.


Honestly Bob I didn't know that it wasn't - it's certainly used as such in the UK, its use is closely controlled though, it can only be administered by trained medical staff. My mother was prescribed both morphine and diamorphine (heroin) in the latter stages of terminal cancer.



     And in Great Britain it's available for other uses as well.  
Cough medicine for example that really works, comes to mind, though in very low doses.  If it's abused, it's not very abused; heroin's simply very well regulated there.

     In the United States, even people with terminal illnesses and intractable pain can't get it.  I had an aunt who died screaming for weeks, and there are others who've had the same experience when there's a perfectly good treatment for it.  Apparently there are idiots over here who are nervous about addicting the dead.  You never know what lengths people like that will go to to get their medicine, do you, when they're strong enough to get out of bed.?  People with enough money go to places where the drug is legal if they don't want to end up like my aunt.

     If they can't afford it, let em scream.  It's better than letting them get hooked on one of them there drugs.  Freaking junkies.

     That was sarcasm, by the way.  People sometimes take me out of context, and I need to make sure that I'm as clear as possible.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


83 posted 07-03-2011 04:40 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

Bob,

I get your point about the unknown volume of heroin relative to the 'filler' material with which it's cut - it's a valid argument but not the major cause of overdose. Acquired tolerance in heroin addiction is the main cause, specifically the fluctuations of a users tolerance. For instance there's an odd phenomenon recognised in all the literature I've read that indicates that tolerance is even effected by the location in which that heroin is used. Addicts may take exactly the same amount of heroin from the same batch in the comfort of their own home one day without a problem yet the exact same dose in another location could result in an overdose. From the brief research I've done my guess is that this is probably due to fact that heroin is highly reactive with other chemicals including, it seems, chemicals produced within the body itself. Any drug where tolerance and the fatal dosage is dependent on whether you drank alcohol in the last 24 hours, took an anti-depressant or are in an agitated or imbalanced state wouldn't be at the top of my list of things to let a heroin addict self-administer.

quote:
There was no tenfold increase in the use of alcohol when the prohibition against its use was lifted after the repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933.


That's because the vast majority of people never  really stopped drinking alcohol during prohibition - that's why the ban didn't work.



A clearer indication of the impact of legalising heroin would be to look at how quickly and how readily alcohol and tobacco use spread when those drugs were first made readily available. Or you could look at the new chemical formulations that appear on a regular basis such as Ecstasy where the widespread use grows exponentially and is only slowed by adding them to the banned substances list.

quote:
Cough medicine for example that really works, comes to mind, though in very low doses. If it's abused, it's not very abused.


Oh, it is definitely abused  Bob, by those too young to get their hands on anything stronger. So much so that buying some 'over the counter' medication in the UK requires the same standards of identification and proof of age that buying alcohol or tobacco requires. The same goes for lighter fuel, glue and some household cleaning materials not to mention BBQ sauce (apparently it contains alcohol)!

quote:
In the United States, even people with terminal illnesses and intractable pain can't get it.


Now that is dumb. At least it sounds dumb. Off the top of my head the only argument for not using it hat I can think of is that there's a readily available substitute that's not as attractive to the drug using community.

BBQ sauce perhaps (ditto on the sarcasm).

  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


84 posted 07-03-2011 06:44 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:


I get your point about the unknown volume of heroin relative to the 'filler' material with which it's cut - it's a valid argument but not the major cause of overdose. Acquired tolerance in heroin addiction is the main cause, specifically the fluctuations of a users tolerance. For instance there's an odd phenomenon recognised in all the literature I've read that indicates that tolerance is even effected by the location in which that heroin is used. Addicts may take exactly the same amount of heroin from the same batch in the comfort of their own home one day without a problem yet the exact same dose in another location could result in an overdose. From the brief research I've done my guess is that this is probably due to fact that heroin is highly reactive with other chemicals including, it seems, chemicals produced within the body itself. Any drug where tolerance and the fatal dosage is dependent on whether you drank alcohol in the last 24 hours, took an anti-depressant or are in an agitated or imbalanced state wouldn't be at the top of my list of things to let a heroin addict self-administer.



     This is a bunch of stuff to deal with at once, Uncas.  The body produces its own opiate in response to many different stimulii.  Heroin locks onto the same receptor site.  A lot of things can precipitate an overdose, but the main thing is too much heroin.  Alcohol may also lock onto the opiate receptor site; there's a lot of competition there.

     The assertion that addicts may take the same amount from the same batch and be fine one day and overdose the next without intervening variables seems like junk science to me.  What you have are annecdotes by people who are stoned out of their gourds in the first place reported retrospectively.  Usually their concern to to talk about how it wasn't their fault.  By "their" I mean junkies.  This doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth, mind you; it simply means that as science the reports seem less than compelling, don't they?

     Not to mention that even if they say that the junk came from the same batch, and it was lavbled from the same batch, if the source was illegal, that doesn't mean that the two injections were in fact from the same batch, or that they weren't cut differently, even if the junkie did rotate injection sites.  Many of them do that to preserve veins and are careful about the practice.
[/quote]

     I'll try getting to the below later.

quote:
There was no tenfold increase in the use of alcohol when the prohibition against its use was lifted after the repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933.


That's because the vast majority of people never  really stopped drinking alcohol during prohibition - that's why the ban didn't work.
A clearer indication of the impact of legalising heroin would be to look at how quickly and how readily alcohol and tobacco use spread when those drugs were first made readily available. Or you could look at the new chemical formulations that appear on a regular basis such as Ecstasy where the widespread use grows exponentially and is only slowed by adding them to the banned substances list.

quote:
Cough medicine for example that really works, comes to mind, though in very low doses. If it's abused, it's not very abused.


Oh, it is definitely abused  Bob, by those too young to get their hands on anything stronger. So much so that buying some 'over the counter' medication in the UK requires the same standards of identification and proof of age that buying alcohol or tobacco requires. The same goes for lighter fuel, glue and some household cleaning materials not to mention BBQ sauce (apparently it contains alcohol)!

quote:
In the United States, even people with terminal illnesses and intractable pain can't get it.


Now that is dumb. At least it sounds dumb. Off the top of my head the only argument for not using it hat I can think of is that there's a readily available substitute that's not as attractive to the drug using community.

BBQ sauce perhaps (ditto on the sarcasm).

  
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


85 posted 07-04-2011 01:37 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.
End the drug war, save black America

http://www.creators.com/opinion/john-stossel/end-the-drug-war-save-black-america.html


.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


86 posted 07-04-2011 03:46 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The drug wars have hit the black community disproprotionately, and some of the things said in the article may to be true.  That racism is a fantasy is itself a fantasy, I believe, though I have hopes that it is not so virulent as it was in my generation now; and that it will continue to fade if, in fact, it has faded at all.

     I would be thrilled if the quality of schools in the ghettos was as high as the quality of the schools in the suburbs, for example, for the most part.  I don't know what proportion of our legislators are minority, but I have some doubts as to whether they reflect the proportion of the minorities in the population, which would reflect the interests of those communities in the legislatures involved.  Many attemts to organize minority communities and to elect minority politicians have run into brisk opposition seeking to exclude new voters on a variety of reasons, many of them dubious at best.  One, the videos showing a man tarted up in a pimp suit allegedly trying to get money for illegal purposes involving prostitution from various Acorn offices, was highly deceptive and in violation of the laws of several states yet got the acclamation of the Republican Congress.

     I would have to say that Racism remains alive and well.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


87 posted 07-04-2011 05:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

...and ACORN isn't...a comforting thought!

Happy  4th, Bob!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


88 posted 07-04-2011 06:07 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Happy 4th, Mike.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


89 posted 07-05-2011 08:08 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

Finally there's the argument that drug X is only as dangerous alcohol or tobacco yet they're both legal. If that's true why shouldn't drug X be legal too? On the face of it that seems a convincing argument and when the question is raised it's difficult to come up with a definitive and logical answer. That's because it's the wrong question, flip it on it's head - if tobacco and alcohol were illegal would pushing to make them legal make any sense whatsoever?



     You could ask the same thing about coal, given the atmospheric and respiratory effects, couldn't you?  Perhaps if things began in a state of prohibition and had to be justified, things would be different.  If gravity went the other way, would you pass laws to change it?  How about eating meat?

     Given the likelihood that your notion of turning the question on its head in this case asks for a reversal of 500 years of history at a minimum in one case and several thousand years worth of history on the other hand on a rhetorical whim to gain tactical advantage in a blog discussion under the guise of a reasonable thing to do, I will in fact try to give you an answer that is in fact my best answer for such a question.

     For alcohol, we have experience with the drug being illegal in this country.  We had to have a constitutional amendment to make it illegal, which was quite a trick.  It took about a hundred years of campaigning to accomplish on the part of a diverse group of mostly religious folk.

     What happened was that it turned a group of perfectly law abiding people into criminals overnight by legal fiat.  These were folks who did not agree with the law in the first place, and were not willing to abide by it after its passage for cultural or personal reasons, and turned to black market suppliers en masse.

     You do not change cultural habits overnight by law.

     Legally, it is wise not to pass laws you know will the public will refuse to follow and the responsible authorities will refuse to enforce with minimal inducements.  Just as in the military it is suggested one avoid issuing orders that will not be followed.

     It was a stupid amendment and it produced an enormous crime wave that undermined the law in this country for many years.  

     It was illegal, and it a smart to make it legal again, where it could be taxed and regulated and where some degree of control could be exerted.  It took many years before people were able to look at alcohol related behavior, such as drunk driving, with clear eyes and impose appropriate sanctions.  My opinion is that this is because alcohol-induced behavior was dealt with too tolerantly because of the prohibition which made almost everything to do with alcohol criminal.  It took close to 50 years before even the legal system could see that some alcohol related behavior was in fact worthy of sanction, and to begin to impose those sanctions.

     I believe many people are afraid that a prohibition against tobacco would lead to the same sort of thing there as well.  The situation there is more complex.

    Iíve struggled with tobacco myself, cigarettes, cigars and a pipe.  I managed to get free of a three pack a day cigarette habit after ten years.  I managed to quit pipe smoking and cigars about ten years ago.  I loved almost everything about them.  I think that tobacco companies are some of the most evil things on earth, and that they are responsible for more deaths than the wars of the last century.  I also think that they are being forced to retrench and do other things slowly.  And that making tobacco illegal would give them new life.

     Iím sorry to disagree with you here.  If I thought that making tobacco illegal would be effective, I would support it in a split second.  I donít think the question as applied here is anything but a debaterís trick.  It poses a hypothetical question of essentially no merit, since we canít wipe the slate clean.  I worked as an outpatient  drug and alcohol therapist for a number of years in Boston, and I ran across one of those wonderful pieces of folk commentary that you run across every now and again current in the Alcoholics Anonymous meetings there that I used to take in occasionally.  Among other things, they tended to be very funny on occasion.

     ďOnce youíre a pickle,Ē they used to say, on occasion, ďyou can never be a cucumber again.Ē

     They thought they were talking about being alcoholics, and itís probably true about that, too, but there are a whole variety of states that the proverb captures perfectly, for individuals and for groups.  One of them has to do with experience with dangerous pleasures associated with adulthood.  A lot of cultures think of them as rites of passage or initiations and they are often tied with close brushes with life and death.  Substances are often attached to the rituals; and we often forget that consciously.

     Yet try taking these substances out of the culture and  mysterious barriers seem to raise themselves from what seem to be totally irrational places.  I think thatís the case here, as well as the  economic case and perhaps the political case that needs to be dealt with before such banning can even be considered.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Iraq   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors