Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: War on Drugs.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: War on Drugs. Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 8:54:01 AM   
camille65


Posts: 5746
Joined: 7/11/2007
From: Austin Texas
Status: offline
Come on, everybody sing!
'What a long strange trip it's been.....'

beth I admire your ability to keep spitting into the wind without getting soaked.

_____________________________


~Love your life! (It is the only one you'll get).




(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 221
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 9:26:16 AM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/240561/
wet_weed_the_dangers_of_marijuana_laced.html


Wet Weed: The Dangers of Marijuana Laced With PCPA Killer Combination

"What Happens While 'Wet'"

Just below the first ranking alcohol, and second ranking cigarettes, marijuana comes in at the fourth next highest indulgence for full-time college students and other people equally. Six point three percent of students versus seven point one other individuals are reported to consume hallucinogens. The fifth of the largest consumptions are: any other illicit drugs besides cannabis. We should start to question ourselves: is this figure inclusive of embalming fluid? This substance is perfectly legal, but the latest trend of combining Mary Jane, phencyclidine, and formaldehyde may push law makers and morticians alike to push for tighter control of the latter.

The use of marijuana dipped in PCP-laced embalming fluid was reported firstly around the 70's in and around Trenton, New Jersey. More recently, abuse of the substance was reported in Hartford and other surrounding CT cities. In the Connecticut area the laced marijuana is known as 'illy'. Other areas such as Chicago, IL refer to the mixture as 'happy sticks', which are hollowed out cigar blunts filled with marijuana, PCP and dipped in embalming fluid. The composition is referred to in Cleveland as: 'sherm', 'wet', or 'sheba'. Kansas City, MO famed nomenclatures: 'dank', and 'therm'. Regions like New Orleans, Washington D.C. and Houston, TX have unique names like: 'clickums', 'loveboat', and 'wack' (chronologically correlative to the city listings).  The epidemic seems to have peaked in 1993 or 1994. Use by adolescents became so problematic that a Hispanic gang, the Latin Kings, asked the State Department of Public Health to intervene[1]. The National Institute on Drug Abuses Community Epidemiology Work Group from Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. indicated that the increased use of PCP may be associated with the growing utilization of marijuana cigarettes, and marijuana cigars progressively laced with PCP. During the same time, Los Angeles recorded finding PCP-sprayed tobacco, parsley, or marijuana, and Chicago reported the use of 'sherm (or happy) sticks'. In New York City, PCP was sprinkled on mint or parsley leaves and sold by the bag, while dealers allowed individuals to dip a cigarette into a small container of embalming fluid for approximately $20 per dip. Whether the New York embalming fluid itself contained PCP is still undocumented.

Use of the PCP, embalming fluid-laced, marijuana blend has also made its way into Texas. In the city of Houston, the use of marijuana cigarettes laced with embalming fluid appeared in the news in 1992. Two years later in a survey of youth entering Texas Youth Commission facilities, 3.8 % of them reported ever using 'wack' or 'fry', while 2.3 % of participants reported using the substance within their last month of freedom[2].

The use of 'fry' or 'wet' has not yet become so widespread that it warrants a broadly based campaign as in Connecticut, but it is clear that education about this substance is necessary so that the general public is informed of this dangerous additive in some marijuana cigarettes or blunts. Marijuana smokers need to know that adulterated marijuana may contain other, hazardous substances that can put them at extreme, immediate risk of adverse effects. PCP has an underground street name of 'water', or 'embalming fluid' because it can be presented in bitter-tasting, clear liquid form that is consumed orally, injected, sniffed, or smoked on tobacco or marijuana products.

Phencyclidine is also available in a white crystal-like power form, a pill or capsule and may be called 'angel dust', 'crystal', or 'horse tranquilizer'. The drug intensifies the effects of other depressants, and can cause severe hallucinations, impaired motor coordination, extreme anxiety, depression, disorientation and paranoia. Not to mention: aggressive behavior and violence, seizures, and respiratory arrest; even comas and/or death may result from over-intoxication.

In May of 2003, for the first time I was exposed to the consuming of 'wet' via Ricki Lake, whom aired a special exploring the swelling trend of 'getting wet'. There was segment about a young man who committed the major offense of murder under the influence, but was unable to recall the events of the night in question. Amnesia is a factor that influenced the withdrawal of PCP from the legal market as an anesthetic. Patients often times experienced delirium and agitation, and later the drug was moved to tranquilize animals before being discontinued.  People indulging in the recreational psychoactive (wet) may become limp and catatonic within their upper extremities, there is a period where paranoia soars and hallucinations are intensified. In a personal interview of an observer watching someone using wet, within the first five minutes there seemed to be no change. However, as time progressed it seems as if the person slips into a "semi-coma"[3]. The subjects on Ricki Lake refer to the catatonic state as being 'stuck'. Essentially trapped in time; unable to move at will.

In Houston, increased forgetfulness was cited following days of reported group sex (while high on 'wet') and trading sex for 'fry sticks'. This short-term memory loss was described as more extensive than after smoking marijuana. The users also relayed vomiting, depression or sadness, and facial or bodily edema in the reports. The increase in the use of fry and in the incidence of sexual intercourse in relation to the substance may assist in the amplified transmission of STDs, (including HIV) among young people throughout this decade.

The poison control centers, at first, were unsure whether to catalog the intoxications under marijuana or PCP, and it was in Galveston and Connecticut that the wet-related data collections began in 1993. In 1985, Ivan Spector published a series of cases in which five patients smoked 'wet'. The notations made by him regarding their conditions were: difficulty producing speech, sweating, increased salivation, and the inability to entertain environmental stimuli.

A report appearing three years later mentioned confusion, irritation, upper body weakness, and depressed reflexes as outcomes of a patient smoking two cigarettes dipped in formaldehyde. In said case, it took 17 days for the person to return to a homeostasis stage and no allusion to the use of phencyclidine was indicated. Contrary to the omission, the patient suffered nystagmus or rapid involuntary movement of the eyeball(s), which highly suggests PCP inebriation.  The irony and blatant harm lies in the suggestion that Spector made about the post intake behavior reactions; he proposes that when patients endured acute anoxic encephalopathy or damage to the brain due to lack of oxygen, it was due to altering the THC molecule by the induction of formaldehyde. Formaldehyde intoxication proper led to affecting lung parenchyma (or functioning). However, when five samples of 'illy' or 'water water' were examined, the concluding analyses yielded no marijuana at all. The samples were consistent with mint leaves soaked in embalming fluid and PCP. One case was neither mint nor marijuana, but cut up duct tape; all of the samples had findings of PCP, but no weed. Still, more oxymoronic are: six patients who had visited the E.R. and admitted to smoking 'wet', but their urinalyses revealed negative flags of phencyclidine.

Despite the toxicology adversities, polydrug use is on the rise. The terms for embalming fluid-saturated marijuana are actually alternate names for PCP in different corners of the States. The disparity doesn't seem to lie within the actual mixing of the substances, but the misconceptions of what the combined substances really are. Recovery patients in an Angleton, TX rehab center were said to have permanent mental deficiencies related to attending 'fry houses', 'dank houses' or 'getting wet'. There were repeated descriptions of memory dysfunction, decreased spontaneous speech, lethargy and two other cases accounted for persistent dysmnesia, or poor or impaired memory. Several observations of individuals regaining normalcy from 'wet' are symptomatic of medium to high PCP ingestion. The ending result leans heavily upon the dosage consumed.

The long-term effects of smoking 'fry' or 'wet' are not pretty. Participants recalled seeing long-term smokers who muttered to themselves as they walked around in bizarre fashions. Such impaired individuals also ceased their personal grooming habits, and were dirty and disheveled. So it is appropriate to corroborate the contribution of using 'wet' may later lead to suffering schizophrenia. Five adolescents in one study conveyed that smoking fry causes brain damage; two knew friends who were in mental health/mental retardation facilities because they had overdosed on use of the combination.

Two additional long-term effects of the embalming fluid are: accumulation in the spinal cord, which in turn, causes the back to break down. It is also thought to halt the maturation process. Other effects listed by the state of Connecticut include: high fever, heart attacks, high blood pressure, damage to the kidneys, destruction of muscle tissue, brain damage, coma, convulsions, coughing, pneumonia, anorexia, and death. Exposure to embalming fluid, alone, includes: bronchitis, body tissue ruin, brain damage, lung damage, impaired coordination, and inflammation and sores in the throat, nose, and esophagus. While it is inconclusive to gather total data of people consuming 'fry' or supposed marijuana dipped in formaldehyde, it is clear that the use of PCP within the concoctions needs to be investigated. For those people like the young man on Ricki Lake serving twenty-five years for a crime executed at his hand, yet unbeknownst to his recollection. Moreover, he was unaware that the marijuana cigarette he took a drag off of prior to performing the criminal act of murder was, indeed, 'wet'. The people that are paralyzed by 'water water' are driven by auditory hallucinations to do things that their memory fails to record afterward.

In one case a young Connecticut man slit his wrists and drank floor stripper, under the 'illy' psychosis episode he wanted to kill himself before "they got him"; a precise display of acute paranoia and acoustic hallucination. A homosexual male 'hydro' smoker from New York City heard a distant male voice call his name under the influence. There was a narrative detailing memory disturbances, especially forgetting what was being said while speaking, and also an admittance of unprotected anal sex during the time he was high. He reported no memory of the consummation, and it was only through friends that was he informed. He, too, was unsure whether the marijuana included PCP.  A potential long-term effect of marijuana is, in fact, impaired memory function but the occurrences exhibited in aforementioned case studies suggest the public really is ignorant to the actuality of their purchase of 'wet' weed, or 'fry' cigarettes. Because it is obviously a common recreation in areas such as TX and CT there has been a surge in health department reports and website dedications. Nevertheless, there needs to be a national focus on the re-emergence of phencyclidine. The hazard of over-consumption needs to be addressed, and America needs to be real and surcease cannabis bashing. It is perceived that addiction to 'fry' or 'wet' can occur as early as initial consumption, and the majority of participants indicated that their second time of 'getting wet' occurred either the same day as their initial use or on the next day. Marijuana is drug that has been proven to cure nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients, promotes appetite in AIDS patients, and reduces the pain that attacks glaucoma suffers and it does not need to be re-evaluated. The synthetic compound that was taken off the legal market for possible results of death and psychotic induced brain damage is the one that needs to be tackled. PCP is the silent destroying culprit of death-defying 'wet' not sativa. It's about time that the government whet the public's palate with the information needed to help guard our children against the showering, expanding effect of getting 'fried'.





_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to camille65)
Profile   Post #: 222
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 10:04:33 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

The saddest part of this whole thread as far as i am concerend is people have to try to twist my words and make me out to be a liar as a disuasive tactic. 

VT - Your words aren't "twisted" they are quoted. The reflection you are getting from holding them up isn't my fault.

Thanks for providing more information and evidence for making marijuana legal!

Remember the facts:
  • There has never been a death from overdosing on Marijuana.
  • Legalization and access has helped many experiencing the pain and provided relief for many suffering from the effects of Chemotherapy and AIDS.
  • Rehabilitation propaganda must focus on "additives" and fear to rationalize their position of keeping marijuana illegal.
  • The drug companies and liqueur companies support standing laws which maintain their monopoly and profits.
  • Caffeine, is more dangerous than the active ingredient in marijuana. Evidence? You can die from an overdose of caffeine - (See point #1.)

quote:

The "bad neighborhood" source wouldn't be there if it could be bought at the equivalent of a liqueur store.   Is that your answer to my question about allowing  beth to smoke seedy street corner pot?  Seems evasive to me. 
You have yet to answer ANY question. Evasive? beth used to have to smoke "seedy street corner pot". Most of the other people who use it medicinally did to. Now they don't have to. Are you in support of criminals as well as the drug, alcohol, and rehabilitation industry?  

quote:

Let me ask you this question. If it is legal one day, i am sure 15 yr olds won't be able to buy it. Where will they go to get theirs?
15 year olds could also get it right now with a prescription. As a rehabilitation person you should be aware of that fact.  
quote:

THAT is who i am concerned about. Not where a bunch of adolecent left over hippies in their 40's and 50's get their pot from.
Name calling! Always need to be reduced to that. The "adolescent leftover hippies suffering from pain and or other problem helped by marijuana should suffer for your hypocrisy? Only a closed mind could rationalize being judge, jury, and label assigner.

quote:

For the record i never said it didn't smell or taste different.  Do you actually think a lot of pre 21 yr olds take much notice when they wanna get high and are passed a joint? 
YES - I suggest you read many of the horror stories you site to prove the point. But if it were legal and available the point is gone isn't it?

quote:

The Rich get pharmaceutical grade drugs.

The Poor get whatever shit they can afford.

And this is ok with you?  Sad commentary on your outlook.  Very selfish.
Your lack of knowledge is stunning! EVERY marijuana Co-op providing legal marijuana in California has FREE product available making access to all not a matter of having the ability to pay. From a cost standpoint marijuana the same if not LESS expensive than it was on the streets. How amazing that you'd prefer these people go to the streets and steal or beg or prostitute themselves instead just to support your industry and your referral sources. You really need to do your homework before you make such a callous and inaccurate statement.

It requires a hypocrite to support some drugs, use some drugs, and fight against the use of others. The mark of a fraud and hypocrite - Alleging no response to questions while never answer any directly. I'll try again...

Since it would give access to un-tainted marujuana, do you support legalization?

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 10/23/2007 10:06:58 AM >

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 223
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 10:07:17 AM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Zaraseeks
You guys are being assholes, and coming off as druggies. seriously, the guy that went on and on about her brothers being junkies...umm. She did say recovered, I think YOU have more reason to lie or tell someone what they want to hear then him....Christ!


A point i tried to make, which was overlooked, thank you zaraseeks. i know the "junkie" comment was made to be disparaging, as a dig, but if  my brother was here he would be the first to tell you he's a junkie - albeit in recovery.   The comment i thought was more hurtful was when someone said addicts have weak genes and should all die off anyway.  Does Natzi Germany ring a bell to anyone?

my brother hasn't used in over 15 years.  He did everything, almost died a few times. Had a heart attack during one overdose. Ended up with Hep C, but went through inteferon for a year and it cleaned it out - so far no traces of it left. He's been to hell and back.  He has no stake in lying about any of it anymore.  We all grew up in a very permissive environment of the 70's (5 of us)- parents knew and allowed pot use. In fact my older brother sold it.  i will never know had my parents been better role models for them how things would have turned out.  Maybe they would have gone on to be junkies anyway.  i just will never see a society that advocates getting high as permissible and harmless as a good thing - call me stupid, stubborn, whatever you want to call me - i will wear that label proudly.


_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Zaraseeks)
Profile   Post #: 224
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 10:09:51 AM   
SirRober


Posts: 364
Joined: 1/2/2006
Status: offline
Pfft I think that the US should go the way of Amsterdam or Singapore on the drug laws.  Either legalize and tax it. or make it ilegal and be sentanced to death (within 30 days [no appeals]).

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 225
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 10:14:54 AM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
Twist my words and put all the words in my mouth you want to merc.  Infer, make assumptions etc.  Maybe same will assume i said those things - i am sure your banking on that - others will read what i actually said and decide for themselves.  Now i have to go to work - you know, try to help the weaked genes one who all should be dead.. have a great day!! 

_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 226
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 10:25:38 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Had a heart attack during one overdose.
NOT from marijuana.

quote:

Ended up with Hep C, but went through inteferon for a year and it cleaned it out - so far no traces of it left
Not from marijuana.
quote:

 
We all grew up in a very permissive environment of the 70's (5 of us)- parents knew and allowed pot use.
Not mine - not beth's - Maybe it's YOUR personal upbringing and family.
quote:

 In fact my older brother sold it.  i will never know had my parents been better role models for them how things would have turned out.
So he was a dealer as well as a junkie or is this another brother? The first reference to "junkie" was yours - your label; used in future posts to point to the reference.

quote:

i thought was more hurtful was when someone said addicts have weak genes and should all die off anyway.  Does Natzi Germany ring a bell to anyone?
Oh - no! The Nazi reference! Are all your arguments lost or refuted to the point that you can't make them anymore?


quote:

i just will never see a society that advocates getting high as permissible and harmless as a good thing
Then what are you doing in this society? How many hours, or perhaps minutes of TV watching does it take to see a commercial selling some kind of drug. Caffeine, to a pill to make you leg stop shaking at night; beer, wine, or Jack Daniels ads sell legal DRUGS. That's the existing "society". Are you in support on instilling Muslim Sharia laws which would eliminate all of them? Or do you prefer assigning yourself the position of ultimate arbiter of what is "right" and what drugs should and shouldn't be allowed based upon your family history and your stories?
quote:

- call me stupid, stubborn, whatever you want to call me - i will wear that label proudly
You no - your words and position are however hypocritical on their face.

Still waiting for some answers. Is the "War" lost? How will you know "victory"? Does it require that your hypocrisy be universally adopted and accepted?

Is it your position that government defined "legal" drugs are fine? Your "drug" be it caffeine, an "infrequent" drink, or a pill taken to modify mood swings or hormones; is OKAY and GREAT - but any alternative isn't? And your reasoning when it comes to marijuana is because it potentially can be and is laced? Forget my label, and feel free to "un-twist" any twisted words. What kind of label comes to mind that you would assign yourself with that position?

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 227
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 11:33:24 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

Twist my words and put all the words in my mouth you want to merc.  Infer, make assumptions etc.  Maybe same will assume i said those things - i am sure your banking on that - others will read what i actually said and decide for themselves.  Now i have to go to work - you know, try to help the weaked genes one who all should be dead.. have a great day!! 


....you still haven't answered two questions. If pot was legalised then it can be controlled vis a vis quality. Tainted pot becomes a matter of choice not a hazard. Secondly you haven't said why prohibition, which failed so spectaculary with alcohol, works with other drugs. C'mon........two questions, two answers.....no rhetoric.

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 228
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 12:50:18 PM   
Zaraseeks


Posts: 130
Joined: 9/5/2007
Status: offline
I am sorry you were offended by the comment "smart enough to stay away from it"  Here is what I meant by that...ANYONE who for the first time trys pot is taking a risk, I have tried it, well more then tried it, and that was a risk, it didnt agree with me or my mental/emotional well being, there for it was a risk and one I should have never taken.  I have seen it truly hurt peoples lives.  I have also seen it truly help people in various forms, but how do you know if you dont try, and if you do try you ARE risking some sort of pain or adverse affect.  Then of course there is the gateway theory, I do not really agree with that so I will leave that out of the "possible risks"  But anyways, I do personally believe it is smart for someone to not try pot, do I think it is dumb to try pot, not really, I dont think it is smart either though, I just felt Velvetears was being picked on.  Do I agree with her veiws and disagree with yours?  No, far from it.  Sorry again to have offended you, didnt mean it as an insult or as ignorance, and I find the statement or at least my reasoning for the statment FAR from ignorant as it came from lots of life experience and first hand knowlegde, best of luck to all and their fight, and that includes Your fight.  I enjoy your passion
Eryn aka lil zara

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 229
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 1:16:13 PM   
Zaraseeks


Posts: 130
Joined: 9/5/2007
Status: offline
This is all so baffeling to me!  I couldnt believe the weak genes comment either, shows mass ignorance.  I do need to point out the artical you posted about pcp was largely (not entirely) referring to people who KNEW and sought pcp, and I do personally get from that, well legalize pot and there are no worries.  But I am not going to get in the mix of all that, but hey everyone, look I dont think anyone can argue at this point that pot is never laced with something and dropped on an unsuspecting buyer...please, maybe not often (and in some places who knows maybe often) but it DOES happen and will continue to.  Anyone think of some guys maybe wanting to have their way with a naive girl and so they lace the pot much like dropping a pill in a drink?  Just something to consider *hands up walks out backwards* peace everyone, peace!

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 230
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/23/2007 2:19:16 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zaraseeks
I am sorry you were offended by the comment "smart enough to stay away from it" 
Zara,
No offense was taken from your post or position. I stand behind my comments that VT's positions and posts are dangerous if allowed to pass without comment. A "gateway lie" is much more insidious and with longer reaching consequences than any "gateway drug"; even if that gateway drug is a cup of coffee.

I wasn't even concerned that VT used your "asshole" reference. It speaks to the weakness of her argument. I do drink coffee daily, have a drink fairly regularly (not just to celebrate special occasions), and although as of yet I don't need any prescription medication; I do use some form of OTC pain/sinus medication at least once or twice a month; so your representation of me as a "druggie" is accurate.

My "passion" isn't pro drug in general or pro-marijuana in particular. My "PASSION" is against hypocrisy and the frauds who represent and support it. I am just as much an advocate for smokers - and don't smoke and hate being around the smell of it. Yet I'll fight vigorously for the rights of those who do. But leave that argument aside.

The need for pragmatism in this "War" is obvious. Only a rationalization can get you to a point to conflicting position regarding a drug like marijuana. You can't overdose from it; unlike any other "legal" drug ranging from caffeine to codeine; let alone the legal mind altering substance such as alcohol. Yet when pointed out, there is no retraction only something like this; "What about the many accidents kids get into, and are killed, each year that are drug related?" Well more kids die from drowning in swimming pools than will ever die from an overdose of marijuana. The argument of VT's logic suggests that VT should be rehabilitating swimmers and supporting the arrest of swimming pool installers. You know, I'd respect applying that standard and a similar stance regarding all potentially harmful activities and substances. I don't respect or support the hypocrisy which is the end result of the position taken by VT. I don't see how that hypocritical position toward marijuana can not be challenged. I fail to see any evidence that access through legalization and monitored distribution would somehow result in a breakdown in society.

I don't know who's reference it was to "weak genes". I don't think it was me, it could have been beth, but so what? Most of us have "weak genes" in some manner or other. I don't think anyone is suggesting these people should be killed, but the fact that they die as a result of their addition again doesn't make an argument against marijuana since you can NOT overdose from it. If all "addicts" and "junkies" were given marijuana in 55 gallon drums, sticking a hose though a hole in the bottom and smoking it all still won't kill you.

The other "arguments" are similarly specious unless applied universally and in all cases. Cancer? Well then why are cigarettes, although under attack, still legal. The relationship there between smoke and cancer is more direct. The long term detrimental effect to the brain? Again, the same time and use period applied to alcohol gets you to the detrimental effect faster and the same drink does similar damage to the liver - yet its legal. The worse is the propaganda and how it effects those who, when they determine it wrong, will logically consider any information from the same source to be just as irrelevant to facts. Apply any label you want to a person who represents that "good intent" trumps truth and reality. My label is hypocrite.

There is no "attack" in this position. I'll never understand how refuting the validity of a person can be considered "picked on". I don't feel "picked on" when my questions aren't answered. Mostly I feel vindicated and believe the lack of resonse points to insecurity and doubt.  

(in reply to Zaraseeks)
Profile   Post #: 231
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 10:27:17 AM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
In a recent US report, 20 % of 8th-graders reported that they had tried marijuana,and 9% were current users.  The CEWG reports that street marijuana is often combined with other drugs such
as crack cocaine and PCP, often without the user being aware of it  
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Had a heart attack during one overdose.
NOT from marijuana.

quote:

Ended up with Hep C, but went through inteferon for a year and it cleaned it out - so far no traces of it left
Not from marijuana.
quote:

 
We all grew up in a very permissive environment of the 70's (5 of us)- parents knew and allowed pot use.
Not mine - not beth's - Maybe it's YOUR personal upbringing and family.
quote:

 In fact my older brother sold it.  i will never know had my parents been better role models for them how things would have turned out.
So he was a dealer as well as a junkie or is this another brother? The first reference to "junkie" was yours - your label; used in future posts to point to the reference.


This is how you twist things i say.  i never said this happened to my brother because of pot.  i was relating his experience overall being a drug user - shooting heroin.  He began his entrance into the drug world "just smoking pot"  i have three brothers - all addicts (1 in recovery) 1 just relapsed within the last year to year and a half. The other (baby brother) is on methadone.  Also, an alcoholic sister.  When i use the term junkie, to me it means needle in the arm addict.  Addict can be any substance.  Actually the brother i was referencing in that post was not the dealer. That was my older brother, and not a nice person at all. When i said "We all grew up" anyone reading that post  could probably figure out i meant my family, not the general public. How could i speak for "all families"?  Thanks for yet another attempt to twist my words. You wanted an example of how you twist my words, i gave you one.


quote:

i thought was more hurtful was when someone said addicts have weak genes and should all die off anyway.  Does Natzi Germany ring a bell to anyone?
quote:

Mercnbeth
Oh - no! The Nazi reference! Are all your arguments lost or refuted to the point that you can't make them anymore?
If the shoe fits.  You can refute anything you want - doesn't make my argument "lost". 

quote:

i just will never see a society that advocates getting high as permissible and harmless as a good thing
quote:

Mercnbeth
Then what are you doing in this society? How many hours, or perhaps minutes of TV watching does it take to see a commercial selling some kind of drug. Caffeine, to a pill to make you leg stop shaking at night; beer, wine, or Jack Daniels ads sell legal DRUGS. That's the existing "society". Are you in support on instilling Muslim Sharia laws which would eliminate all of them? Or do you prefer assigning yourself the position of ultimate arbiter of what is "right" and what drugs should and shouldn't be allowed based upon your family history and your stories?

I highlighted a question you asked me – I do plenty.  I have done drug surveillance in my area with this one particular house where I know they deal crack from. I have gone to the owner of this house and confronted him, I have written letters to authorities, gone to the sheriffs office to lodge complaints, visited the parole officers and reported their clients, gone to the local schools and reported what I knew to be happening – I get myself involved on every level.   I do what I can.  The reason for my hiatus from online is because a friend of my daughter’s mother (drug addict) killed herself (she lost her war) and I have been attending the wake, funeral, and getting the girl situated in my home, taking her to get medical care and trying to get her benefits through social services. This girls life will be forever changed and she never had the mother she could have had because of drugs.  What are you doing in this society merc?  Or is your only concern getting something legal that will benefit your life and you don’t give a damn about anyone else?
Your answer to a problem is throw your hands up in the air and say screw it and give up.  i can't do anything about alcohol.  There is not a snow balls chance in hell anyone is ever going to get that banned, that doesn't mean we should make more mind altering substances for the purposes of getting high made legal and easy to use.   If for some reason stealing became a hugh problem should laws be put in place to legalize “some stealing”, should we make “all stealing” legal?  My answer to a problem isn’t to give up, it’s to find other solutions to conquer it.  Yours seems to be – you can’t beat em join em. 

my family stories are mild compared to some, and very common - maybe not in your circles.  Maybe you don't care what happens outside of your circle. I don’t imagine you know many families “like mine”.   Maybe making it legal will make it a lot easier for you to obtain your weed.  I think legalizing pot is sending a message that taking a substance to get high, avoid stress, etc is detrimental message.  How do you plan to control people smoking and driving under the influence?  At least with alcohol they can give the driver a breathilizer test, how will they ascertain someone is under the influence of pot?  Or are you saying it’s perfectly fine for eople to smoke and drive, that there are no effects on motor coordination and judgment?



quote:

- call me stupid, stubborn, whatever you want to call me - i will wear that label proudly
quote:

Mercnbeth
You no - your words and position are however hypocritical on their face.  
  I wonder if your views on being hypocritical run across the board for everything. Any slave, for instance, who claims to be a no limits slave, if she ever says no – she’s a hypocrite?  Any overweight person who tells others they need to loose weight and give guidance is a hypocrite?   Any alcoholic who counsels others about the dangers of alcohol is a hypocrite?  They better close up all AA and NA meetings – all those hypocrites trying to help others.  You don’t strengthen your case by trying to create a hypocrite in me. 

quote:

Mercnbeth Still waiting for some answers. Is the "War" lost? How will you know "victory"? Does it require that your hypocrisy be universally adopted and accepted?
  Which war merc?  The ones nurses and doctors are fighting to keep up with the drug dujour?  Or perhaps the war teachers fight to teach brain damaged children whose parents are drug addicts, or even the kids themselves, and the violence that goes along with all that?  Or maybe the war parents fight in trying to keep their kids away from dealers and other kids who influence them to do drugs or drink?  There are many wars going on because of drugs.   

quote:

Mercnbeth
Is it your position that government defined "legal" drugs are fine? Your "drug" be it caffeine, an "infrequent" drink, or a pill taken to modify mood swings or hormones; is OKAY and GREAT - but any alternative isn't? And your reasoning when it comes to marijuana is because it potentially can be and is laced? Forget my label, and feel free to "un-twist" any twisted words. What kind of label comes to mind that you would assign yourself with that position?
  Drugs fill a purpose when they alleviate a physical condition. I have yet to hear a report where coffee was laced with anything or the coffee drinker killed anyone while driving.  When taken just because one wants to escape reality and get high – there is no purpose in that.   And a certain percentage of users will have a genetic predisposition to never be able to abstain, it will not be a passing phase, or casual use.  People living in poverty use drugs to escape reality.  People with depression and anxiety use drugs to self medicate, and end up not able to stop.  I would never endorse giving up or giving in to something that can potentially destroy lives – not only of the user but the families of that user.  If someone is in great pain and marijuana can help alleviate that pain i am all for them being able to use it, but I fear it being legalized for medicinal purposes will open the door for it being legalized one day for everyone.   Making it legal won’t stop pre 21 yr olds – I would hope and assume it would have laws regulating it like alcohol – and to my knowledge alcohol is legal to buy at 21.  Everyone else would still have to buy it on the streets.  I have always said in this thread my concern is for pre 21 yr olds. 

< Message edited by velvetears -- 10/28/2007 10:32:08 AM >


_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 232
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 10:41:32 AM   
kc692


Posts: 3701
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline
OMG-you truly are obsessed with this thread, aren't you,,,,,everyone else is letting it go, why don't you?????

_____________________________

Anyone can overpower; not many can INSPIRE.....

This is only MY opinion. If it's not yours, let's agree in advance to agree to disagree, OR, you can just get the fuck over what I had to say:)

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 233
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 12:00:35 PM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
And you are posting why?  i happened to  have  been away - had planned to answer merc's post - do you have a problem with that?  No one forced you to read this post - or are you obsessed with banging your head 

_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to kc692)
Profile   Post #: 234
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 6:18:16 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
This fiction is still going on?

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 235
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 9:21:42 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
VT,
Your hypocrisy is evidenced by one fact - you never answer a direct question. Not mine - not anyone else's:
quote:

Original philosophy: ....you still haven't answered two questions. If pot was legalized then it can be controlled vis a vis quality. Tainted pot becomes a matter of choice not a hazard. Secondly you haven't said why prohibition, which failed so spectacularly with alcohol, works with other drugs. C'mon........two questions, two answers.....no rhetoric.


You didn't respond to anything addressed only told more family stories. Fantastic as fantasy or reality but irrelevant to the questions ignored.

Your concern for the under 21 crowd would be more honest if you didn't need the lies you proselytized for the first 12 pages of this thread. The examples of hypocrisy you give? The overweight, the alcoholic, they are honest in telling people not to be them. Be just as honest and the hypocrisy disappears. You instead call one drug "good" say caffeine, and anther "bad" because it is "illegal". The facts that it works better for some people, has less side effects, and can be produced virtually free for personal use, appears irrelevant to you. By the way - withdraw from caffeine and your body does experience a "withdraw"; another distinction to marijuana.

quote:

I highlighted a question you asked me – I do plenty.
You worship a false "god" of the drug industry; honoring all the propaganda as dogma. You support selective prosecution, and based upon your stories of neighborhood surveillance you aren't only an advocate for that prosecution but a participant in the surveillance activity. Who compares more favorably to the Nazi standard of behavior? I'm sure they, and the legal drug companies, appreciate your efforts.

quote:

Your answer to a problem is throw your hands up in the air and say screw it and give up. 
No.And its also not my tactic to create facts, or distort reality. In the simplest of terms, freedom of access, control of distribution, decriminalization and removal of morality based laws isn't "throwing up my hands". Challenging the status quo isn't giving up, it is just the opposite. Continuing to allow hypocrisy to go unchallenged would be giving up. That just isn't going to happen.  

(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 236
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/28/2007 11:28:15 PM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
VT,
Your hypocrisy is evidenced by one fact - you never answer a direct question. Not mine - not anyone else's:



Welcome to the club then - i have answered questions if you care to read. i won't repeat myself.  You want to portray me as such, getting people on the defensive is a tactic used as a ploy to divert attention.  i won't play your game.  If you care to actually read my posts, the answers are there.   i asked you several questions in my very  last post - i see no answers - so if i am a hypocrit for not answering - so are you my friend, so are you. 


_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 237
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/29/2007 7:22:51 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

I've been curious though as to why marijuana is considered a deadly drug?


Sunao,
It is considered to be a "deadly drug" because the drug industry has paid for propaganda; legitimized by a bought and paid for government, supported by hypocrites in the "rehabilitation" industry. They don't answer questions because they have no answers. Hiding behind the cult of child worship, they rationalize their hypocrisy; a hypocrisy that their target audience recognizes. As a result they cultivate skepticism that generates a self fulfilling prophecy.

The deadly nature of "legal" drugs is treated with the same skepticism as the lie that "most pot is laced" once experience exposes the lies. Representing lies as fact is more dangerous and causes more harm than marijuana can ever do. It perpetuates the image of a lying government, a lying industry, and in the face of legal mind altering OTC drugs and chemicals is hypocritical on its face.

Sunao, if you are still around, observe the defenders of the status quo. Who refuses answers? Who hides behind ignorance to facts in opposition? Who tells stories in the the face of reality? Who believes in perpetuating more limits to choice, less self determination? Who thinks that their version of reality is the only reality? Who can rationalize that a drug which is toxic in the extreme, has the potential of destroying a liver and kills brain cells with every use should stay legal using it personally, albeit only at "special celebratory occasions"? The hypocrisy, and the person, is much more dangerous and, if the rhetoric is believed, deadly. 

(in reply to Sunao)
Profile   Post #: 238
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/29/2007 8:15:27 AM   
velvetears


Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I've been curious though as to why marijuana is considered a deadly drug?



Because it's a stepping stone to other drugs and also because dealers (on all levels) lace it with pcp, heroin, formaldyhyde, etc...  The pot heads who want it legal will argue that it isn't, they have a vested interest in spreading their "rhetoric" that it is harmless.  It is also dangerous because they are conducting studies and finding that the earlier one smokes it the more at risk it puts you for developing a psychosis later in life, specifically schizophrenia.  Not all pot is laced, not everyone will get psychosis but people should know the risks involved. Not one person has answered a very important question i have asked several times - How would the authorities control our highways and test for those driving while under the influence. A breathalizer at least gives you a specific reading and if you are above it your butt goes to jail, your licence is yanked and you pay a hefty fine. This does prevent a lot of people from drinking and driving. How will pot heads be prevented from smoking and driving?  No one will answer that question because they can't. Simple as that. Legalizing pot is a lot more complicated than everyone assumes and they talk of individual freedom and rights - but they could give a shit less about anyone elses. 

< Message edited by velvetears -- 10/29/2007 8:18:09 AM >


_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 239
RE: War on Drugs. - 10/29/2007 9:24:33 AM   
camille65


Posts: 5746
Joined: 7/11/2007
From: Austin Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

quote:

I've been curious though as to why marijuana is considered a deadly drug?



Because it's a stepping stone to other drugs and also because dealers (on all levels) lace it with pcp, heroin, formaldyhyde, etc...  The pot heads who want it legal will argue that it isn't, they have a vested interest in spreading their "rhetoric" that it is harmless.  It is also dangerous because they are conducting studies and finding that the earlier one smokes it the more at risk it puts you for developing a psychosis later in life, specifically schizophrenia.  Not all pot is laced, not everyone will get psychosis but people should know the risks involved. Not one person has answered a very important question i have asked several times - How would the authorities control our highways and test for those driving while under the influence. A breathalizer at least gives you a specific reading and if you are above it your butt goes to jail, your licence is yanked and you pay a hefty fine. This does prevent a lot of people from drinking and driving. How will pot heads be prevented from smoking and driving?  No one will answer that question because they can't. Simple as that. Legalizing pot is a lot more complicated than everyone assumes and they talk of individual freedom and rights - but they could give a shit less about anyone elses. 

http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/kaiseraccidentstudy.html
"In an analysis of different injury causes, the study found a significant increase in injuries due to motor vehicles in males (1.96 times higher in users than non-users); for females, the risk ratio (1.23) was not statistically significant. These results don't necessarily reflect greater driving recklessness, since they include injuries to passengers, pedestrians and innocent drivers. Other driving studies have suggested that marijuana users are more likely to be injured in auto accidents, yet are no more likely than other drivers to be responsible for driving fatalities. "
 
the inferred risk from marijuana is not inordinate compared to that of many other everyday products, including alcohol, tobacco, guns and automobiles. An abstract of the study follows below. Note that it erroneously states that the injury risk ratios for marijuana users were 1.58 for males and 1.55 for females adjusted for alcohol and tobacco use and other factors; actually, these were adjusted only for age; the fully adjusted ratios were 1.28 and 1.37. By way of comparison, cigarette smokers have an accident risk ratio of 1.51 compared to non-smokers; teen drivers have two to five times the accident risk of older drivers; and males are twice as likely as females to have auto crashes.

Not that any of that will change your views...
You have the right to not smoke pot, you have the right to not associate with 'pot heads'.


_____________________________


~Love your life! (It is the only one you'll get).




(in reply to velvetears)
Profile   Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: War on Drugs. Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.328