The "gateway drug" hypothesis is pretty much total crap. There have been a number of studies to this effect.Originally Posted by no_brains_no_worries
The "gateway drug" hypothesis is pretty much total crap. There have been a number of studies to this effect.
Exactly, if you're going to go out and do drugs, you're going to go out and do drugs.
These people tend to do drugs at a younger age, and pot doesn't open them up to these drugs, it's just the easiest to get.
I know just as many stupid people who smoke as I do intelligent. I also think a lot of people just think they're being insightful while high, when in reality they're probably just more engaged.
I don't mean to be rude, but I think the only thing your 'study' shows is a pretty good example of how easily small sample sizes can be skewed by confirmation bias.
Granted, but I don't think I'd want to live in a world where heroin and meth were legal and non-stigmatized. There's also the question of the kind of burden, if any, this would place on the health care system. At first glance it seems plausible, although I'm unaware if we'd simply be shifting money from punitive to rehabilitative means.
Even if this were a sound theory, the real gateway drugs would tend to be alcohol and tobacco.
Even if there was enough of an increase in health care costs to cancel out the decrease in police/court/prison costs, we'd still be seeing a pretty considerable decrease in the amount of needless suffering that goes on as a result of our drug policies. Every year, a huge number of people go to jail for recreational drug use; in addition to the fact that jail itself isn't much fun, even once these people get out they are stuck with that criminal record for the rest of their life, which makes it incredibly hard to get a good job, get a bank loan, and so forth--and that, in turn, is more likely to drive them to commit real crimes. We're ruining these people's lives because they want to put a recreational chemical into their own bodies. I don't think it's right. Not to mention the fact that the illegality of drugs in the US plays a large causal role in the cartel violence that's turning the Mexican border into a warzone.
Also, it's worth pointing out that the main reason people use meth is because it's a much cheaper alternative to stimulants like cocaine. If things like cocaine were legal, they'd be cheaper and there would be much less incentive for people to use drugs like meth. Plus, I doubt the use of hard drugs like that would be non-stigmatized even if it were legal. Alcoholism is legal but there's definitely a stigma attached; I think the same would be true of meth addiction, heroin addiction, and so on.
Right... to repeat what I said, some states/localities are moving to relax their laws, but many others aren't, so I don't think we can make a general statement that "pot is slowly becoming more legal". I think it's great that Michigan is one of the states that is relaxing it's marijuana laws, but that doesn't change my point. Aside from Michigan, California, and maybe a few others, most of the 50 states aren't doing anything like this, and neither is the federal government.
Yeah, he probably would. He doesn't make the laws, though. His willingness to let pot slide will only matter if and when Congress decides to repeal the legislation that criminalizes marijuana possession, and sends the bill to him for a signature. And that doesn't look like it's going to happen anytime soon. So, again, my point stands.
Last edited by Syme; 03-25-2009 at 06:52 PM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabi..._United_States
What is that, like around 25% of America over a 12 year period?
Thanks for reminding us how the Government works. I totally forgot and I'm sure many of the people here didn't know this either.
Great way to come in here and take a whack at Bush. You must feel like a man now. Thanks for your amazing contribution to this topic
Hey he was kinda on topic. Whoever said Obama would be easy on drug laws because he had done drugs before didn't consider that several Presidents have used drugs in the past.
Great way to come in here and take a whack at Bush. You must feel like a man now. Thanks for your amazing contribution to this topic
Great way to miss the underlying point of my reply.
Great way to come in here and take a whack at Bush. You must feel like a man now. Thanks for your amazing contribution to this topic
As no_brains has already said, just because a president has done a drug doesn't mean it will affect their policies towards said drug.
Luckily Obama is a teensy bit more likely to judge the drugs debate using logic and science (and probably a little bit too much rhetoric) as opposed to faith and hearsay (and probably not enough big words that might hurt the thinky ball in his head).
(Bold text is what made me feel like a man)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks