Each year, 5 million people die of tobacco related causes. On the other hand, a psychoactive drug like LSD hasn't been directly implicated with the death of a single person. Yet tobacco is legal and psychoactive drugs remain illegal. Does that seem right to you?
one billion people will die from smoking in this century alone...but the tax $$ from tobbacco is good and the politicians are whores... i not against or for drugs i dont care but the only reason they are illegal is: TURF the US narco market is 450 billion$/year...every druggie knows where to "score" but the FBI/DEA/NORAD/NSA/NASA dont can you smell it?
People smoking will not cause any trouble to the surrounding people(violence etc.,) But drug addicted people will indulge in violence and in all sort of bad activities... According to me both are two evils,they need to be eliminated as soon as possible....
The illegal nature fuels far more of the 'violence' you speak of.. According to me you being on this forum is an evil that needs to be eliminated as soon as possible. 'not nice telling others what they can and can not do is it?'
What I said was 110% correct If I am the ruler of a country I would eliminate these evils from my country as these two spoil may people!
It was 110% correct in YOUR mind. So you like telling others what they can and can not do in their own personal residence. Many feel religion is 'evil' that can 'spoil' people, would you make that illegal as well? How about drinking? How about working out? Where will it end. All you do is create an unregulated black market which fuels violence, you do no good..
History has shown, prohibition does not work. It creates black and gray markets, it leads to violence and it causes unrest. For whatever reason, humans have a psychological and spiritual attraction to mind altering/mood altering substances. Through many cultures, throughout our recorded existence, if it's not something you smoke, it's something you eat or drink. Almost every culture has some generally accepted outlet for this craving.
I am just saying what is good for them... if they did n't take it I will not force them they will realize sooner or later about drugs and smoking... drinking is all about how many pegs you( a person) have in a day ,if you are drinking day and night ,then you are going to die soon... Same can be said about smoking,If you smoke daily then it is definitely going to reduce your lifespan by 15-20 years... But drugs.... once you get addicted it may spoil your entire life and also your family... Any person should stay away from this...
Actually what you said was complete BS! You obviously dont know too much about the substance if you think it makes you a violent person. And I dont know too many drug fiends as a result of their LSD addiction. If your going to preach at least have some substance behind it
Drugs means=>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin( I am talking about these drugs)(Opium etc.,) If a person does n't have money to buy a drug(banned substances) that he got addicted to ,he will do anything t o have the money to buy that drug...
Just going to pick on LSD for a minute. It can cause a dis-association from reality, and outside of a clinical enviroment can also magnify the effects of existing psychosis. I will find a source when I am more sober That being said, alchohol which is decriminalized to a large extent is much more physically dangerous. Each chemical should be treated individually in my opinion.
Not it can it does, thats why its called a psychoactive substance, because it alters your mind and mood. This doesnt mean you will go into some psychotic rage if you have it.
Yes that's true but if you have that on a regular basis then you are going to get affected (Too much of anything is good for nothing)
No it is not right. It is absolutely wrong. For one thing the government should not tell you what you can or cannot put into your body. Now, if you break laws while under the influence of whatever substance than you have to own that.
People get addicted to all sorts of things; Cigarettes, caffeine and alcohol spring to mind. In fact, Nicotine is as addictive as opiets. The reason we don't find people committing violent crime to fund a cigarette habit is nothing to do with the substance, it's to do with the legality of it and associated aspects of illegality, Specifically the cost. So given that the crime committed because of a drug habit is to do with the illegality of it shouldn't it become legal? If drugs are legal the price will come down, People will be able to afford it and as a result, Like with nicotine, Won't find themselves in a position where they have to commit crime to fund that habit. if tomorrow tobacco was made illegal and treated the same as heroin it wouldn't be long before some people with a nicotine habit would find themselves committing crime to fund their suddenly illegal and enormously expensive habit.
I believe that drugs should be free, but I think LSD is far more dangerous than tobacco. It's colorless, odorless, tasteless, and you can absorb it through your skin. One drop on your skin is like the equivalent of 3 hits? After you spend the next 12 hrs of your life(which feels like a week) watching the walls melt and seeing funny things, you'd be a mental wreck. I do think people should be able to kill themselves, so smoke yourself to death, but LSD is dangerous.
I don't think LSD should be legal. If you've ever done LSD, you'll know how dangerous it could be if the wrong person took it in the wrong situation. Also, if you chain smoke, it's not going to be damaging in the short term, if you do some crazy 5000µg+ dose of LSD, it will probably screw you up for life.
Exactly what blitz said. As Timothy Leary said, he believed you should need a license to take it and you should be evaluated psychologically first. The scary part is that someone could easily screw you up by putting a drop in a drink or just rubbing it on your skin and you'd never know. Not knowing would make it twice as worse because you'd think you're going crazy and kill yourself.
That's like saying if you drink a bottle of scotch to yourself, you will probably end up in the emergency room. When does responsibility lie with the individual?
They could do that anyway. the illegality of a substance has no effect on someones willingness or ability to use it in a nefarious way. people are talking as if illegality renders substances nonexistent. The trouble with arguing against other peoples right to take substances is this; 1) if you are talking from experience, you are a hypocrite. 2) if you aren't talking from experience, you are arguing from ignorance.