4 ms·

It is a step in the right direction, but it still half-baked. We all want the revolution overnight but it takes careful and calculated steps to make progress.

It is a step in the right direction, but it still half-baked. We all want the revolution overnight but it takes careful and calculated steps to make progress. Consider Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) when accosted by a Republican Rep who claimed the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act was a sly step towards the process of legalizing marijuana outright. Barney's (paraphrased) answer: Yep, you got me. That is our goal. And of course once you've legalized the selling of marijuana, you're potentially opening the doors for other substances. But they come with their own set of problems and taboos so it will take time. Initiatives have to start somewhere and demonstrate their utility with minimal fuss. Baby steps, but in the right direction.

hodder 11y ago
"And of course once you've legalized the selling of marijuana, you're potentially openings the doors for other substances" I agree you've got to start somewhere. I find the argument that marijuana is a door opener to other substances is flawed though. If pot didn't exist, would the same argument be made for liquor stores, tobacco sales, coffee shops, red bulls at 7/11, cough medicine at Walmart etc? Or is it just because of the stigma around marijuana?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- zanny 11y ago
  Tobacco and alcohol are legal and used because they were staples of the founding of the US. Tobacco was one of the chief exports of the colonies and the new US for centuries and made a lot of people rich and even more people happy. Alcohol is legal in almost every country on Earth because you can make it out of almost everything. What might end up happening is regional fermentation variants are stigmatized. Cannibis was persecuted and outlawed in the US because of extreme zenophobia against Mexican migrants in the US after the Mexican-American war. Heres a longer form history of it: http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/how-did-marijuana-become-illegal-first-place http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/how-did-marijuana-become-ille.... Its the same bizarre backwards thinking that leads to republican frontrunner's garnering praise for wanting to build a concrete wall on the scale of the Great Wall of China to keep impoverished refugees out. Pot got banned because it was gaining popularity and was threatening entrenched tobacco interests. The same thing happened to opium with Chinese migrant workers. The vast majority of the "controlled substances" that are not particularly life threatening (heroin and cocaine are probably the only outstandingly dangerous ones due to immediate bodily effects, the psychedelics are dangerous because of the behavioral changes usually) but were simply outlawed because they competed with US tobacco and alcohol for consumers drug addictions and habits. So if pot did not exist, we would probably be a similar state to where we are now - migrant Mexicans would have probably used opium or tobacco, and we have already seen the reactions to both of those in the American historical psyche. We would just probably be pushing MDMA / Meth / LSD legalization instead. Meth most likely, since it also has medical applications.
  - llamataboot 11y ago
    MDMA and LSD also have medical applications. http://www.maps.org/ http://www.maps.org/
    - aburan28 11y ago
      They do show some promise in the unfortunately limited research done but it is nearly impossible to conduct legal research on the medicinal potential of highly controlled substances
    - ionised 11y ago
      They're also immensely fun.
  - moonchrome 11y ago
    >cocaine are probably the only outstandingly dangerous ones due to immediate bodily effects Is that true about ? I "know" that heroin ends up causing a physical addiction + all the risks with the way it's used but I was under the impression that cocaine was in the same category as speed/extasy in terms of downsides.
    - zanny 11y ago
      Just quoting wikipedia on this one, but: Cocaine addiction occurs through accumbal ΔFosB overexpression, which arises through transcriptional regulation and epigenetic remodeling of the nucleus accumbens. It is definitely physically addictive, and alters brain chemistry through long term use. It also causes accelerated heart rate. I'll give its not nearly as bad as tobacco, but it is in a league above psychedelics.
      - moonchrome 11y ago
        Sure but MDMA/meth aren't psychedelics either but you made a distinction between them so I was curious why. From my high school experiences I would put them in the same league (although I know very little about the science behind them they are all recreational party drugs, former being a lot cheaper than the latter)
- yason 11y ago
  I think the only hint of truth in gateway drug theory is that once you're consuming something that's illegal you are more likely to end up dealing with people who are also selling other illegal drugs which, if you're into that sort of thing, makes it easier to experiment with new drugs. If alcohol was illegal and thus only sold by traffickers who also happen to stock cocaine, the same would equally apply. It's more about the markets rather than the substance. Of course, the vast majority of pot is either homegrown or, if commercially produced, supplied into a chain of friends by someone who knows someone who knows someone. That's how I guess pot is commonly bought: "Hey, you had this friend of yours who uses pot, I wonder if he'd sell me a bit, too?" The exposure to other drugs, for the average pot smoker, is very negligible in practice even if the original source is in the drug business that operates on the more serious side.

hodder 11y ago

"And of course once you've legalized the selling of marijuana, you're potentially openings the doors for other substances" I agree you've got to start somewhere. I find the argument that marijuana is a door opener to other substances is flawed though. If pot didn't exist, would the same argument be made for liquor stores, tobacco sales, coffee shops, red bulls at 7/11, cough medicine at Walmart etc? Or is it just because of the stigma around marijuana?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
zanny 11y ago
Tobacco and alcohol are legal and used because they were staples of the founding of the US. Tobacco was one of the chief exports of the colonies and the new US for centuries and made a lot of people rich and even more people happy. Alcohol is legal in almost every country on Earth because you can make it out of almost everything. What might end up happening is regional fermentation variants are stigmatized. Cannibis was persecuted and outlawed in the US because of extreme zenophobia against Mexican migrants in the US after the Mexican-American war. Heres a longer form history of it: http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/how-did-marijuana-become-illegal-first-place http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/how-did-marijuana-become-ille.... Its the same bizarre backwards thinking that leads to republican frontrunner's garnering praise for wanting to build a concrete wall on the scale of the Great Wall of China to keep impoverished refugees out. Pot got banned because it was gaining popularity and was threatening entrenched tobacco interests. The same thing happened to opium with Chinese migrant workers. The vast majority of the "controlled substances" that are not particularly life threatening (heroin and cocaine are probably the only outstandingly dangerous ones due to immediate bodily effects, the psychedelics are dangerous because of the behavioral changes usually) but were simply outlawed because they competed with US tobacco and alcohol for consumers drug addictions and habits. So if pot did not exist, we would probably be a similar state to where we are now - migrant Mexicans would have probably used opium or tobacco, and we have already seen the reactions to both of those in the American historical psyche. We would just probably be pushing MDMA / Meth / LSD legalization instead. Meth most likely, since it also has medical applications.
- llamataboot 11y ago
  MDMA and LSD also have medical applications. http://www.maps.org/ http://www.maps.org/
  - aburan28 11y ago
    They do show some promise in the unfortunately limited research done but it is nearly impossible to conduct legal research on the medicinal potential of highly controlled substances
  - ionised 11y ago
    They're also immensely fun.
- moonchrome 11y ago
  >cocaine are probably the only outstandingly dangerous ones due to immediate bodily effects Is that true about ? I "know" that heroin ends up causing a physical addiction + all the risks with the way it's used but I was under the impression that cocaine was in the same category as speed/extasy in terms of downsides.
  - zanny 11y ago
    Just quoting wikipedia on this one, but: Cocaine addiction occurs through accumbal ΔFosB overexpression, which arises through transcriptional regulation and epigenetic remodeling of the nucleus accumbens. It is definitely physically addictive, and alters brain chemistry through long term use. It also causes accelerated heart rate. I'll give its not nearly as bad as tobacco, but it is in a league above psychedelics.
    - moonchrome 11y ago
      Sure but MDMA/meth aren't psychedelics either but you made a distinction between them so I was curious why. From my high school experiences I would put them in the same league (although I know very little about the science behind them they are all recreational party drugs, former being a lot cheaper than the latter)
yason 11y ago
I think the only hint of truth in gateway drug theory is that once you're consuming something that's illegal you are more likely to end up dealing with people who are also selling other illegal drugs which, if you're into that sort of thing, makes it easier to experiment with new drugs. If alcohol was illegal and thus only sold by traffickers who also happen to stock cocaine, the same would equally apply. It's more about the markets rather than the substance. Of course, the vast majority of pot is either homegrown or, if commercially produced, supplied into a chain of friends by someone who knows someone who knows someone. That's how I guess pot is commonly bought: "Hey, you had this friend of yours who uses pot, I wonder if he'd sell me a bit, too?" The exposure to other drugs, for the average pot smoker, is very negligible in practice even if the original source is in the drug business that operates on the more serious side.