Answering the Libertarian argument for drug legalization

["W"]

Originally Posted by hawgsquatch

If it is non addictive, why are people willing to go to jail to do it?

If it is non addictive why do people pay so much for it and it is always in demand.

If it is non addictive why does it work on the pleasure centers of the brain and release dopanine the same as caffiene, alcohol, and cocaine.

We has a college professor here kill his wife, behead her, and eat part of her...what does that do to your argument. If your professors status and education makes him right about addiction, my professor makes yours a cannibal.

BTW you can't teach ethics, you have them or you don't.

Yea that was a stupid statement by Mako that weed is not additive..... my own brother was addicted to weed for years until he finally grew up and got help!

But I guess that USL professor was a pot head in denial

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by "W"

Yea that was a stupid statement by Mako that weed is not additive..... my own brother was addicted to weed for years until he finally grew up and got help!

But I guess that USL professor was a pot head in denial

Weed is not addictive... This is not some scientist's / doctor's conjecture or one off study it is as you say "the Fact, Jack"

What weed is accepted to be is dependency forming. That means that when you regularly use it, you enjoy its use, and the experience of using it enough that you voluntarily want to continue doing so.

This is the exact same process that we go thru in the enjoyment / use we get from things like fishing, hunting, eating good food, eating junk food, sex, and / or anything that you regularly find enjoyment in doing.

If you were supposed to go fishing tommorrow, and you were unable to go "for whatever reason" and your fishing dependant. You would be a little bit sad, but would basically say, "well there will be another time that i can chase them trots" and then you would go on and take care of all the things that day that you needed to. Like any normal person would.

If however you had a PHYSICAL ADDICTION to fishing, upon learning of not being able to go, and as the physical addiction began causing it's chemical affects. You would become physically incapable (due to convulsions, withdrawal rage, pain etc) of doing anything else (productive or not) until either your addiction was given to you, or until withdrawals from the chemical stopped impacting your body.


In regards to your brother, I commend him for seeking help and curing his dependancy to weed. Like alcohol some people can become very dependant on it, It is however fortunate that he did not have to go thru the physical symptoms of a drug / alcohol addiction in addition to dealing with his dependancy. That would have been even worse for him. I hope he does well in the future, and if he does choose to use in the future, i hope he is able to keep it to a non regular / recreational use level.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by AceArcher

Weed is not addictive... This is not some scientist's / doctor's conjecture or one off study it is as you say "the Fact, Jack"

What weed is accepted to be is dependency forming. That means that when you regularly use it, you enjoy its use, and the experience of using it enough that you voluntarily want to continue doing so.

I understand the scientific distinction between physiologically addicting and what you call "dependency forming" which is also often called psychologically addicting in the scientific papers.

The practical difference is how quickly the addiction can form. But once the addiction is formed, how much does it matter? Honey Badger was hooked on weed and could not quit even though the stakes were very high for him. He went from being a Heisman finalist and very promising LSU player to being a washed out loser in no time. His inability to quit smoking dope cost his LSU teammates, the LSU fans, and his own college football experience dearly.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

I understand the scientific distinction between physiologically addicting and what you call "dependency forming" which is also often called psychologically addicting in the scientific papers.

The practical difference is how quickly the addiction can form. But once the addiction is formed, how much does it matter? Honey Badger was hooked on weed and could not quit even though the stakes were very high for him. He went from being a Heisman finalist and very promising LSU player to being a washed out loser in no time. His inability to quit smoking dope cost his LSU teammates, the LSU fans, and his own college football experience dearly.

Let's blame the evil weed, and not the idiot that made those decisions. Let's blame the guns and not the idiots running around killing people.

The fact is if he were hooked on alcohol he would be cool. Weed being illegal made him a washed up loser, not the affects that weed had on him as an athlete. The perception and ignant law in place by fear mongers like yourself is what made him a "loser".

[Clampy]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Let's blame the evil weed, and not the idiot that made those decisions. Let's blame the guns and not the idiots running around killing people.

The fact is if he were hooked on alcohol he would be cool. Weed being illegal made him a washed up loser, not the affects that weed had on him as an athlete. The perception and ignant law in place by fear mongers like yourself is what made him a "loser".

^^ ding ding ding

I'm sure Matthieu was a straight laced guy before weed. Church every Sunday and I heard he would go out of his way to help old ladies across the street.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by Clampy

^^ ding ding ding

I'm sure Matthieu was a straight laced guy before weed. Church every Sunday and I heard he would go out of his way to help old ladies across the street.

On a side note, Willie Nelson has been "on weed" for 127 years and I'm pretty sure he has never done heroin.

The most educated guy on the site, and the high school drop out (both have never "done weed") have the same argument - the irony. Then you have us realists that fall somewhere in the middle, the place I like to call Awesome.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Goooh

The fact is if he were hooked on alcohol he would be cool. Weed being illegal made him a washed up loser, not the affects that weed had on him as an athlete.

Les Miles kicked Honey Badger off of the team for breaking team rules long before Honey Badger had any trouble with the law over his weed habit.

Are you saying the coach of a college football team can't have and enforce the rules he sees necessary for maintaining order and discipline?

Are you saying that college football players should have a "right" to smoke weed even if their schools, coaches, and the NCAA disagree?

I would think the libertarian position would be that coaches, institutions, and employers still should have the right to make and enforce the rules they deem necessary, even if cannabis is legalized. Have I misunderstood?

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

I understand the scientific distinction between physiologically addicting and what you call "dependency forming" which is also often called psychologically addicting in the scientific papers.

The practical difference is how quickly the addiction can form. But once the addiction is formed, how much does it matter? Honey Badger was hooked on weed and could not quit even though the stakes were very high for him. He went from being a Heisman finalist and very promising LSU player to being a washed out loser in no time. His inability to quit smoking dope cost his LSU teammates, the LSU fans, and his own college football experience dearly.

I have no doubt that you clearly understand the distinctions, I chose to lay them out in plain terms for others who are showing that they are not sure about what the differences are between the two.

I can't speak to the honey badger situation because i haven't kept up with it. But i do know that you can be dependant on many things to an extent that you cause detriment to your own life. Gambling, Fishing, Hunting as well as many other things have caused plenty of headaches to plenty of people, That does not constitute a valid reason for imposing criminal / civil / and moral penalties on the acts of gambling, fishing, hunting... etc...

On a side note, I welcome your return to a facts based open discussion without personal attacks. It am happy to return to that between us as well.