General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Ray Charles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enygma
and yet, it's true...

And yet you don't want to argue your point so what you say means approximately jack.

Here, I'll make it easy on you and sum up what I've been saying so you don't even have to spend ten minutes looking through the thread.

In easy bullet-point form:


-de·moc·ra·cy
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
4. Majority rule.
5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

- America is a form of democracy (The republic).

- Since political power comes from the people, those people can exert that power to try and get things done their way.

- That's what I'm doing concerning Marijuana.

Now where exactly am I showing a lack of understanding?
__________________
"You're pretty brave in cyberspace, flame-boy." -- Scott Adams
Gen[M]ay Pro Audio Club
Old 01-26-2006, 08:54 AM Ray Charles is offline  
Reply With Quote
#376  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Charles
My point was that substances aren't illegal because they have the potential for harm. There's lots of things out there that can be very dangerous, but they are too useful (like gasoline) or are well controlled enough (perscription drugs) that we don't get rid of them. I wasn't actually referring to the debate on marijuana.
I think you have probably answered this question before, but don't remember what your answer was and don't feel like looking for it, so I'm asking now lol. Do you think that marijuana should be Schedule I, or should it be a lower schedule and therefore available as a prescription?
Old 01-26-2006, 10:17 AM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#377  

Ray Charles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMNobody II
I think you have probably answered this question before, but don't remember what your answer was and don't feel like looking for it, so I'm asking now lol. Do you think that marijuana should be Schedule I, or should it be a lower schedule and therefore available as a prescription?

I'm not familiar with the schedule system, but I said before I wouldn't have a problem with marijuana being a perscription drug subject to the same regulations as other mind-altering painkillers. The extent of the regulation (perscription, only used under a doctor's care) would be up to somebody else to decide.
__________________
"You're pretty brave in cyberspace, flame-boy." -- Scott Adams
Gen[M]ay Pro Audio Club
Old 01-26-2006, 10:57 AM Ray Charles is offline  
Reply With Quote
#378  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Charles
I'm not familiar with the schedule system, but I said before I wouldn't have a problem with marijuana being a perscription drug subject to the same regulations as other mind-altering painkillers. The extent of the regulation (perscription, only used under a doctor's care) would be up to somebody else to decide.
Schedule I = illegal for pretty much all uses, it is possible to get DEA permits to do experiments but that is it.
Schedule II = very tightly restricted, but available as prescription. prescription has to be filled out in triplicate (IIRC) and refills are not available.
Schedule III = restricted, not as tightly etc...
Old 01-26-2006, 11:21 AM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#379  

Ray Charles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMNobody II
Schedule I = illegal for pretty much all uses, it is possible to get DEA permits to do experiments but that is it.
Schedule II = very tightly restricted, but available as prescription. prescription has to be filled out in triplicate (IIRC) and refills are not available.
Schedule III = restricted, not as tightly etc...

I would say then that I would put it at schedule II, but like I said I would leave that decision to people more familiar with it than I am. Thanks for the information, though.
__________________
"You're pretty brave in cyberspace, flame-boy." -- Scott Adams
Gen[M]ay Pro Audio Club
Old 01-26-2006, 12:13 PM Ray Charles is offline  
Reply With Quote
#380  

Enygma
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Charles
And yet you don't want to argue your point so what you say means approximately jack.

Here, I'll make it easy on you and sum up what I've been saying so you don't even have to spend ten minutes looking through the thread.

In easy bullet-point form:


-de·moc·ra·cy
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
4. Majority rule.
5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

- America is a form of democracy (The republic).

- Since political power comes from the people, those people can exert that power to try and get things done their way.

- That's what I'm doing concerning Marijuana.

Now where exactly am I showing a lack of understanding?

you completely ignore number 5. individual rights and freedoms, and protection of the minority are fundamental aspects of a functioning and just democracy that you gloss over. in a just democracy the majority cannot simply say "i don't like that" and make it illegal. there must be objective standards by which to base law.

also, democracy is more than just elections. it is more than just representation. iran has elections, and i don't think any of us would consider it a democracy.
__________________
It is too difficult to think nobly when one thinks only of earning a living. ~ Jean Jacques Rousseau

this sig for sale, PM for details.

Last edited by Enygma; 01-26-2006 at 04:17 PM..
Old 01-26-2006, 01:53 PM Enygma is offline  
Reply With Quote
#381  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
- America is a form of democracy (The republic).

- Since political power comes from the people, those people can exert that power to try and get things done their way.

- That's what I'm doing concerning Marijuana.

Now where exactly am I showing a lack of understanding?
The united states is a constitutional representative democracy not a pure democracy in which the mob rules. We have rules and limits on what the government is supposed to be able to govern. The purpose of our constitution and limits on the government's power is supposed to limit both the tyranny of the representative government but also supposed to limit the tyranny of the majority versus the individual or minority. Just because the majority feels a certain way doesn't mean that that prevailing notion/feeling/belief neccessarily needs to rule the nation or neccessarily should be forced upon the minority or individual by way of the criminal justice system.

examples of where the rules have gone against prevailing wisdom because of the limits and restrictions placed on our government would be: desegregation, anti-sodomy laws struck down as unconstitutional, interracial marriage, the freedom groups like NAMBLA enjoy to assemble and discuss whatever they want. The constitution would seem to protect private consensual acts with no unwilling victims.

It should also be noted that both alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition started off as state sponsored initiatives but in the case of alcohol prohibition it took a constitutional amendment in order to ban it federally. That should tell you just how much the constitution used to protect an individual's right to govern their own body and what goes in it. It took a constitutional amendment to make alcohol illegal at a federal level. Strangely that was not necesary in order to enact a more prohibitive and punitive prohibition on a less dangerous substance.

As to the scheduling of marijuana, it should most likely be in schedule four if classified correctly according to the schedule descriptions. There was a court case where NORML petitioned to have marijuana rescheduled just to schedule two and after much delaying and unwillingness to even participate on the part of the government Norml won the case but the DEA administrator has the option to excersize sole discresion over what drugs go in what schedule and overrulled the rulling of the DEA Judge who presided over the case. Once again, an example of how this was not chosen and voted on unanimously by the people but rather decided for us. Marijuana is not the only drug to be intentionally misclassified by the DEA.

Marijuana rescheduling try number one: http://www.marijuana.org/young1.html
Ecstasy (MDMA) scheduling: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=118904
http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/dll/...ng_history.htm
More recent attempts at rescheduling: http://safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=2780

Drug schedules with descriptions:
Quote:
Schedule I

* The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
* The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
* There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
* Some Schedule I substances are heroin, LSD, marijuana, and methaqualone.

Schedule II

* The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
* The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.
* Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
* Schedule II substances include morphine, PCP, cocaine, methadone, and methamphetamine.

Schedule III

* The drug or other substance has a potential for abuse less than the drugs or other substances in Schedules I and II.
* The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
* Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.
* Anabolic steroids, codeine and hydrocodone with aspirin or Tylenol, and some barbiturates are Schedule III substances.

Schedule IV

* The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule III.
* The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
* Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule III.
* Included in Schedule IV are Darvon, Talwin, Equanil, Valium and Xanax.

Schedule V

* The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule IV.
* The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
* Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule IV.
* Over-the-counter cough medicines with codeine are classified in Schedule V.
Marinol, the synthetic version of THC (the natural active ingredient in marijuana) is schedule 3. Strange that the natural version of the molecule has no known use other than abuse but the copy of that molecule made by a patented process by a pharmaceutical company is known medecine and not nearly as likely to be abused even though they are chemically identical. Marinol is a synthetically derived THC molecule but it is still delta 9 THC and has the same characteristics, like being insoluble in water, and same effects, like geting you high just like pot brownies.

http://www.marinol.com/home.html

The rationale behind why one is medecine and the other lands you in prison is because the FDA and the DEA don't think smoked medecine is the best delivery mechanism. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html

They ignore the fact that it can just as easily be made into pills or cooked and eaten in food as marinol plus natural marijuana can be smoked if neccessary but better yet it can be delivered via inhalation through a vaporizer that delivers only active ingredients and none of the harmful chemicals associated with smoking. Inhalation allows patients who cannot swallow medecine to recieve the benefits of medication. Two methods of administration exist which completely negate any potential harm associated with smoking and it is far cheaper to grow a plant in your yard than it is to buy marinol at ~$10-$15 per pill.

The sad fact is that even with smoking as an administration route many people find relief of their symptoms yet because the dea administrator doesn't think that is the "best" route anyone seeking relief from the plant derived version should go to jail for seeking relief instead of merely being advised against it. In the case of medical access to marijuana there is overwhelming support for allowing the sick who find relief from it to have access to it. IIRC the numbers are like 80% in the USA. Too bad the DEA/FDA/feds still doesn't see it that way.

The federal government's position is that until a pharmaceutical company patents it, gains approval, and then markets a drug you are not allowed to seek relief from that chemical no matter what. This is another reason why people should retain final authority over what can and cannot go in their own body. The government should advise us as to what is healthy but not be the final authority over our inner space.


An even more damning validation of the fact that cannabis contains medically beneficial active ingredients is the UK based GWpharmaceuticals which is making actual plant derived extracts from cannabis to make oral cannabinoid sprays.
www.gwpharm.com


The notion of "prescription only" medication and how many medicines are actually made available by "prescription only" also hurts us as a nation but that is for another debate. In a nutshell many medecines that should be far more available are restricted because of meddling paternalism instead of valid medical reasoning. Examples include: Birth control pills, morning after pills, statin drugs, etc.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street

Last edited by pyramid; 01-26-2006 at 06:16 PM..
Old 01-26-2006, 04:37 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#382  

SnakeIRye
 
Hey Pyramid, have any articles on Ecstacy and the mths/truths and government propaganda involving it? From what I've heard in Britain most of the outcry and extreme laws on E have been because of the Alcohol industry in finding when people did it, they didn't want to drink as much and pub attendence fell 10% in the early nineties. Though I don't know if it's just a rumor.
__________________
Remember kids: Don't do school, stay in milk and drink your drugs!
Darth Snake, Evil Jedi Motherfucker Overlord of the Executor
Old 01-26-2006, 06:29 PM SnakeIRye is offline  
Reply With Quote
#383  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeIRye
Hey Pyramid, have any articles on Ecstacy and the mths/truths and government propaganda involving it? From what I've heard in Britain most of the outcry and extreme laws on E have been because of the Alcohol industry in finding when people did it, they didn't want to drink as much and pub attendence fell 10% in the early nineties. Though I don't know if it's just a rumor.
MDMA can be dangerous if you don't do the right things on it. If you don't keep yourself hydrated and at a reasonable temperature, it can cause serious problems.
Old 01-26-2006, 07:34 PM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#384  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMNobody II
MDMA can be dangerous if you don't do the right things on it. If you don't keep yourself hydrated and at a reasonable temperature, it can cause serious problems.


yeah
just go to Erowid and look at what MDMA stands for.
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 01-26-2006, 08:59 PM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#385  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock
yeah
just go to Erowid and look at what MDMA stands for.
3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, i know that it is closely related to methamphetamine. but did you realize that methamphetamine is available as a prescription for ADHD and narcolepsy? it isn't quite as dangerous as many people would lead you to believe.
Old 01-26-2006, 09:17 PM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#386  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeIRye
Hey Pyramid, have any articles on Ecstacy and the mths/truths and government propaganda involving it?
Well, the most recent scandal was the Ricaurte study where they came back with some alarming results but then it was discovered that somehow methamphetamine had been accidentally substituted for MDMA in most of the testing causing the alarming results.
http://www.maps.org/mdma/studyresponse.html

A good place to look for info would be the maps MDMA page: http://www.maps.org/mdma/

And it looks like they have a paper that is exactly what you are looking for: http://www.maps.org/mdma/rd011604.html

small exerpt:
Quote:
Ever since MDMA was criminalized in the United States in 1985, exaggerated risk estimates have played an essential role in preventing research into the therapeutic uses of MDMA. In 1985, the FDA even refused to permit researchers to administer MDMA-assisted psychotherapy to a dying cancer patient who had experienced no significant side effects and had obtained relief from pain, both physical and emotional, through the use of such therapy that he had received prior to MDMA being made illegal. An FDA official wrote that even dying subjects deserved to be protected by US law from the potential damaging effects of MDMA neurotoxicity. In this case, it didn't matter that the damage was hypothetical, the benefits were real, and the patient was willing to accept the consequences of participating in the research.
That is why you should retain final authority over your body and what goes in it, not the government. Those heartless bastards used the possibility of potential but as yet unknown neurotoxicity to deny an already dying person access to a medication that relieved the suffering of their already terminal condition and thereby also ended that inquiry into the potential benefits of a drug that might have helped ease millions of people's similar pain and anxiety since then. That's just ridiculous.

Maps does a great job of chronologing their efforts and I think that tells half the story. Look at how long it takes just to get the government to let you do a study when it is related to medical uses of an illicit substance. Another good example of this is the MAPS/CAL NORML vaporizer test page: http://www.maps.org/mmj/vaporizer.html

Quote:
From what I've heard in Britain most of the outcry and extreme laws on E have been because of the Alcohol industry in finding when people did it, they didn't want to drink as much and pub attendence fell 10% in the early nineties. Though I don't know if it's just a rumor.
I don't know but sponsorship of anti-illicit-drug efforts by legal drug manufacturers for the purpose of anti-competition has been a long running theme in the drug war. I know of many examples where this was true for cannabis albeit most of the originals were not drug manufacturers but textiles, cotton farmers, logging industry, paper producers and petrochemical companies. Now it may be possible that drug companies see it as a threat to potential profitability as cannabinoids are sqaurely in the realm of legitimate medical research with far ranging potential benefits and potential products. Alcohol sales might take a hit if marijuana were legalized and people compared the two and chose the one that doesn't cause painful hangovers, overdose, etc.

It may well be true for MDMA as well. It certainly wouldn't be good for the alcohol business if MDMA were legal and marketed as freely as alcohol. MDMA can make you feel better than alcohol and so far I've never seen or heard of anyone being an angry, violent e-tard. It might not be good for drug manufacturers either if instead of being on an SSRI for months or years on end that patients went to see a therapist and resolved their issues in a month worth of weekend sessions with only one reletively cheap pill needed per session and saw better results than constant medication. Who knows, lets see what the clinical trials show.

Until recently large tobacco, alcohol, and pharmaceutical companies were the major private donors to the "Drug Free America" campaign that would seem to be at odds with their products except that everyone knows they are only talking about the illegal and therefor BAD drugs, not the good ones sold to you legally in stores everywhere.

It may be true but who knows. Was it greed by large corporations that prompted the government to jump so hastily to make MDMA illegal or was it just the DEA trying to expand its powers by adding another item to its prohibition list or do government weenies just get off on making drugs other than alcohol and tobacco illegal? Who knows. I think MDMA could easily hold it's own in a product safety test if alcohol and tobacco are the acceptable standards. Unfortunately, when politics gets involves, then you need to go to jail for daring to choose a recreational drug other than alcohol or tobacco.

Perhaps just the innate injustice and ridiculousness of it all coupled with the lack of any sufficient explanation for the arbitrary way in which we decide which drugs are legal and which are not lends itself to conspiracy theories about the why of it all.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 01-26-2006, 09:59 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#387  

Ray Charles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enygma
you completely ignore number 5. individual rights and freedoms, and protection of the minority are fundamental aspects of a functioning and just democracy that you gloss over. in a just democracy the majority cannot simply say "i don't like that" and make it illegal. there must be objective standards by which to base law.

also, democracy is more than just elections. it is more than just representation. iran has elections, and i don't think any of us would consider it a democracy.

Number 5 actually says nothing about individual rights and freedoms. It says social equality and respect for the individual. In other words, it means that all people are treated fairly, and equally. It's not saying you have the right to do whatever you want. It's saying that if you cannot do X, then Joe down the street also cannot do X. If you and Joe are convicted of the same crime, Joe won't get a lighter sentence because the judge didn't like the way you look.

edit: I forgot to talk about respect for the individual. A good example of that is Due Process of Law. Every person is given the opportunity to defend themselves when accused of a crime. The individual's rights take precedence over a lynch mob and all the damning evidence in the world because every person is guaranteed that right.

edit2: I realize I contradicted my statement in the first sentence. I should clarify: I take "social equality and respect for the individual" to mean that everyone has the same rights and freedoms under the law, not that everyone has every freedom to do what they want.

edit3: haha edit, I suck at teh posting

Protecting the minority from the abuse of the majority is an important part of a functioning democracy. But, I fail to see how you're being abused by not being allowed to smoke marijuana.
__________________
"You're pretty brave in cyberspace, flame-boy." -- Scott Adams
Gen[M]ay Pro Audio Club

Last edited by Ray Charles; 01-27-2006 at 02:39 PM..
Old 01-27-2006, 02:33 PM Ray Charles is offline  
Reply With Quote
#388  

Ray Charles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid
The united states is a constitutional representative democracy not a pure democracy in which the mob rules. We have rules and limits on what the government is supposed to be able to govern. The purpose of our constitution and limits on the government's power is supposed to limit both the tyranny of the representative government but also supposed to limit the tyranny of the majority versus the individual or minority. Just because the majority feels a certain way doesn't mean that that prevailing notion/feeling/belief neccessarily needs to rule the nation or neccessarily should be forced upon the minority or individual by way of the criminal justice system.

I realize all that, but I don't see smoking marijuana as a protected right under the constitution.
__________________
"You're pretty brave in cyberspace, flame-boy." -- Scott Adams
Gen[M]ay Pro Audio Club
Old 01-27-2006, 02:41 PM Ray Charles is offline  
Reply With Quote
#389  

Enygma
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Charles
But, I fail to see how you're being abused by not being allowed to smoke marijuana.

do you also not see how it would be abusive for the government to prohibit one from eating chocolate or red meat?
__________________
It is too difficult to think nobly when one thinks only of earning a living. ~ Jean Jacques Rousseau

this sig for sale, PM for details.
Old 01-28-2006, 06:58 PM Enygma is offline  
Reply With Quote
#390  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.