VOTE Should the U.S. Legalize Opium to Smoke?

[PeterTheGrape]

Drug overdoses are the number one cause of death now in people under 50 years old in the U.S.

Opium smoking does not result in death, but popping fake opium in the form of synthetics and pills does.

Pharma companies make a fortune discrediting natural medicines.

Should they be allowed to continue victimizing druggie kids?

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/drug-overdoses-leading-death-people-50-article-1.3223333

[1715086714]

1715086714

[1715086714]

1715086714

[1715086714]

1715086714

[1715086714]

1715086714

[1715086714]

1715086714

[coolcoinz]

Why isn't there a "no" to choose in the poll, let's be fair here.

I'm not against it, because I'm not interested in what other people are doing in their homes and I don't blame drugs for people's mistakes. If someone does something stupid on drugs it's his fault and he is responsible, not the drug or a person that sold it to him, therefore I support legalization.

[pisston]

Actually, I'm shocked by the fact that someone can raise the topic of legalization of heavy drugs. The fact is that even the grass hemp marijuana And, well, let and in some countries, even her legalized. But what a waste of opium, then this is another conversation. The world is already full of drug addicts, therefore, it is not necessary to provoke people to do what is not already illegal, in terms of drugs.

[joebrook]

Why isn't there a "no" to choose in the poll, let's be fair here.

I'm not against it, because I'm not interested in what other people are doing in their homes and I don't blame drugs for people's mistakes. If someone does something stupid on drugs it's his fault and he is responsible, not the drug or a person that sold it to him, therefore I support legalization.

I think OP should edit the options to the questions so that we can answer just yes or no to the question.If natural opium doesnt cause overdosing and thus causing death, The US should protect its citizen by legalizing it just as they did marijuana. It will save a lot of lives.

[Lancusters]

I don't support the legalization of all drugs. Even if the Smoking of opium does not die from an overdose of it will still lead to addiction and the addict will be looking for harder drugs. I am against Smoking of tobacco and alcohol, and you propose to legalize drugs. My opinion definitely not.

[Tyrantt]

Didn't Portugal legalize all drugs? I remember they did so and the drug use was reduce for a lot and as much as I remember, the drug addiction has been treated as a disease there, but I may be wrong tho.

Yes, legalize everything there is and let those who are stupid enough, to ruin their life with drugs, ruin it. Gotta push that natural selection a little.

[PeterTheGrape]

Why isn't there a "no" to choose in the poll, let's be fair here.

Big pharma does not give you the "no" option. You have to use their dangerous synthetic opiate products, which are killing high numbers of people. If you try to use a safer natural product you will go to prison.

I'm not against it, because I'm not interested in what other people are doing in their homes and I don't blame drugs for people's mistakes. If someone does something stupid on drugs it's his fault and he is responsible, not the drug or a person that sold it to him, therefore I support legalization.

Exactly right, but why should somebody be able to make certain plants illegal in the first place? There are people with asthma who can die from pollen, so should plants that promote asthma be illegal? Who are these people who try to control whether a person can even grow certain plants?

[Sithara007]

It is up to the individual to decide which substance he want to intake. So I am all in favor of allowing private consumption of raw opium and marijuana. It can reduce overdose deaths from hard drugs such as heroin and synthetic opioids.

[PeterTheGrape]

... So I am all in favor of allowing ...

Maybe the question should be "Are there people with legitimate authority to prohibit a plant from existing?".

Why should a person have to wonder whether somebody will allow a plant?

 

I understand it is a political practicality to ban cutting down a tree, taking a branch, and beating somebody to death with it.

But if you take leaves or sap from a plant and do not attack me with them, can I still ban you from growing the plant? Pharma drugs cause crime and death. Natural plants do not.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/drug-overdoses-leading-death-people-50-article-1.3223333

[Netnox]

I really doubt whether the American government will allow anything like this. Synthetic opioid drugs are among the top revenue earners for most of the pharma companies in the United States. If opium is allowed, the sales of these drugs are going to get affected, and the pharma cartel is not going to let that happen.

[dillpicklechips]

Exactly right, but why should somebody be able to make certain plants illegal in the first place? There are people with asthma who can die from pollen, so should plants that promote asthma be illegal? Who are these people who try to control whether a person can even grow certain plants?

I find your logic flawed.

Plants that produce pollen and triggers asthma to some people is not connected with the topic regarding drugs and growing plants that produce this. Here's the definition for allergy:

Allergies, also known as allergic diseases, are a number of conditions caused by hypersensitivity of the immune system to something in the environment that usually causes little or no problem in most people. These diseases include hay fever, food allergies, atopic dermatitis, allergic asthma, and anaphylaxis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allergy

Like people who are allergy to chicken also doesn't mean that it is bad rather it has an adverse effect to some people due to the inborn hypersensitivity to this king of things. It is not on the pollen or the chicken that the fault is on and not on that particular people also but more like natural that influences them to be allergic in these certain things.

On the other hand, drugs are defined:

A drug is any substance (other than food that provides nutritional support) that, when inhaled, injected, smoked, consumed, absorbed via a patch on the skin, or dissolved under the tongue causes a physiological change in the body.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug

There are drugs used for medical purposes which can be categorized as either over-the-counter or prescription. Some drugs who have strong content though recognized as to be used effectively to treat some sickness should be used in moderation but also prone to abuse that will lead to endanger someone's life.

Though there are drugs considered as illegal or dangerous. Some of these can be used medically like Marijuana but the danger is much greater than its treatment so medical experts are thinking twice to consider this since it is risky to handle it with its side effects. The fact is these drugs are nothing but an addiction which will not help you in anyway that's why I can't understand these people as to why they have initially think to take this drugs which doesn't bring an actual benefit to them.

To protect its citizens from these foreboding drugs that will harm them (the users and people surrounding them). It is the duty of the government to maintain order, safety and security but since these drugs are threat to this then the government should do everything in its power to extinguish this.

Whether some citizens would not agree, they will still do this since it is their responsibility like parents who needs to restrict there child to the dangers which either the child knows the danger or not, whether he like or not. The point is it is for the sake of everyone.


I don't really get it. Like smoking who have nothing but to damage your health but the government has allowed this to satisfy their addiction since it doesn't have that very strong effects with some moderation. Like illegal drugs, it has nothing that truly benefits us a side the feeling that I don't actually know since I'm not into with these kind of things.

[PeterTheGrape]

Exactly right, but why should somebody be able to make certain plants illegal in the first place? There are people with asthma who can die from pollen, so should plants that promote asthma be illegal? Who are these people who try to control whether a person can even grow certain plants?

I find your logic flawed.

Plants that produce pollen and triggers asthma to some people is not connected with the topic regarding drugs and growing plants that produce this. Here's the definition for allergy:

Allergies, also known as allergic diseases, are a number of conditions caused by hypersensitivity of the immune system to something in the environment that usually causes little or no problem in most people. These diseases include hay fever, food allergies, atopic dermatitis, allergic asthma, and anaphylaxis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allergy

Like people who are allergy to chicken also doesn't mean that it is bad rather it has an adverse effect to some people due to the inborn hypersensitivity to this king of things. It is not on the pollen or the chicken that the fault is on and not on that particular people also but more like natural that influences them to be allergic in these certain things.

On the other hand, drugs are defined:

A drug is any substance (other than food that provides nutritional support) that, when inhaled, injected, smoked, consumed, absorbed via a patch on the skin, or dissolved under the tongue causes a physiological change in the body.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug

There are drugs used for medical purposes which can be categorized as either over-the-counter or prescription. Some drugs who have strong content though recognized as to be used effectively to treat some sickness should be used in moderation but also prone to abuse that will lead to endanger someone's life.

Though there are drugs considered as illegal or dangerous. Some of these can be used medically like Marijuana but the danger is much greater than its treatment so medical experts are thinking twice to consider this since it is risky to handle it with its side effects. The fact is these drugs are nothing but an addiction which will not help you in anyway that's why I can't understand these people as to why they have initially think to take this drugs which doesn't bring an actual benefit to them.

To protect its citizens from these foreboding drugs that will harm them (the users and people surrounding them). It is the duty of the government to maintain order, safety and security but since these drugs are threat to this then the government should do everything in its power to extinguish this.

Whether some citizens would not agree, they will still do this since it is their responsibility like parents who needs to restrict there child to the dangers which either the child knows the danger or not, whether he like or not. The point is it is for the sake of everyone.


I don't really get it. Like smoking who have nothing but to damage your health but the government has allowed this to satisfy their addiction since it doesn't have that very strong effects with some moderation. Like illegal drugs, it has nothing that truly benefits us a side the feeling that I don't actually know since I'm not into with these kind of things.

Do you really want somebody to tell you every thing that is good or bad for you, and punish you when you do something 'they' don't like?

Is 'the government' like a mother or a father in your opinion?

...

[merchantofzeny]

3/5 choices are basically "yes". What's up with that?

I'd be able to tolerate marijuana but not opium. Everyone seem to forget why China tried to ban it before. It is addictive, which is why it caused problems in China. Rather than mix it with drinks like what's done in other countries, they smoked it, allowing it to be absorbed faster.

[PeterTheGrape]

3/5 choices are basically "yes". What's up with that?

I'd be able to tolerate marijuana but not opium. Everyone seem to forget why China tried to ban it before. It is addictive, which is why it caused problems in China. Rather than mix it with drinks like what's done in other countries, they smoked it, allowing it to be absorbed faster.

Fake opioids made by drug companies for profit are now the number 1 cause of death in the U.S. in people under 50.

Smoking opium is non fatal and most people will use it like alcohol, occasionally.

Swallowing bits of opium can be fatal, but most people will smoke bit not eat it. The smoke of opium is very sweet and pleasant but eating it is not pleasant, it is extremely bitter. I tried to give a fatally injured dog some opium once and it would not eat it, but the smoke is appealing to all creatures.

I personally, like most people, do not support addiction nor using drugs recreationally, but I was a kid once and do know the appeal it has. Most kids try a lot of stuff, mountain biking, surfing, soldiering, swimming, eating red meat, driving fast on lone roads, etc. All of those things can be fatal and may kill some people if things don't work out well. A person should be limited from imposing death on others, but when a person tests it him or herself they learn or burn, and that is good for the species. You can argue that red meat causes arteriosclerosis that raises health care costs, or swimming causes having to hire lifeguards to patrol beaches, but should the purpose of things be to learn or to maximize profits for companies? Should liberties be given to people, and the price paid by those people, or should it all be given to corporate entities like government?

China banned opium, they have banned a lot of things. So has the U.S. Look at the people on this bulletin noard, a crypto board. Some people you won't see for a lit of reasons, from Alan Turing to Aaron Swartz, because the government did not want to let them exist harmlessly and figure out for themselves what is right and wrong.

[Okurkabinladin]

Why isn't there a "no" to choose in the poll, let's be fair here.

I'm not against it, because I'm not interested in what other people are doing in their homes and I don't blame drugs for people's mistakes. If someone does something stupid on drugs it's his fault and he is responsible, not the drug or a person that sold it to him, therefore I support legalization.

Dtto, the OP is an obvious junkie. So obvious in fact, that in progation of his agenda he basically forfeited in semblance of disscussion on the subject. When you cant say "no", then you dont have any choice at all.

3/5 choices are basically "yes". What's up with that?

I'd be able to tolerate marijuana but not opium. Everyone seem to forget why China tried to ban it before. It is addictive, which is why it caused problems in China. Rather than mix it with drinks like what's done in other countries, they smoked it, allowing it to be absorbed faster.

Fake opioids made by drug companies for profit are now the number 1 cause of death in the U.S. in people under 50.

Smoking opium is non fatal and most people will use it like alcohol, occasionally.

Swallowing bits of opium can be fatal, but most people will smoke bit not eat it. The smoke of opium is very sweet and pleasant but eating it is not pleasant, it is extremely bitter. I tried to give a fatally injured dog some opium once and it would not eat it, but the smoke is appealing to all creatures.

I personally, like most people, do not support addiction nor using drugs recreationally, but I was a kid once and do know the appeal it has. Most kids try a lot of stuff, mountain biking, surfing, soldiering, swimming, eating red meat, driving fast on lone roads, etc. All of those things can be fatal and may kill some people if things don't work out well. A person should be limited from imposing death on others, but when a person tests it him or herself they learn or burn, and that is good for the species. You can argue that red meat causes arteriosclerosis that raises health care costs, or swimming causes having to hire lifeguards to patrol beaches, but should the purpose of things be to learn or to maximize profits for companies? Should liberties be given to people, and the price paid by those people, or should it all be given to corporate entities like government?

China banned opium, they have banned a lot of things. So has the U.S. Look at the people on this bulletin noard, a crypto board. Some people you won't see for a lit of reasons, from Alan Turing to Aaron Swartz, because the government did not want to let them exist harmlessly and figure out for themselves what is right and wrong.

1. If you are neither junkie nor wanna be dealer, than why did you post rigged polls?

2. Why do you relativize effects of heavily toxic (yes toxic) drugs in relations to everything else? Should kids just decide for themselves, if they want AK-47 for X-mas? Or a truck for that matter. It is liberty like any other afterall.

3. Good example with China. Do you know why Opium was banned China? For years private subjects saturated pre-communist China with drugs, devastating local population morally, economically and health wise. They did it on purpose too, to weaken the country from within. When the government finally reacted to this criminally evil plot where drugs were the tools - China was invaded by would be colonizers. You are defending evil agenda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

[PeterTheGrape]

...

1. If you are neither junkie nor wanna be dealer, than why did you post rigged polls?

2. Why do you relativize effects of heavily toxic (yes toxic) drugs in relations to everything else? Should kids just decide for themselves, if they want AK-47 for X-mas? Or a truck for that matter. It is liberty like any other afterall.

3. Good example with China. Do you know why Opium was banned China? For years private subjects saturated pre-communist China with drugs, devastating local population morally, economically and health wise. They did it on purpose too, to weaken the country from within. When the government finally reacted to this criminally evil plot where drugs were the tools - China was invaded by would be colonizers. You are defending evil agenda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

1) What rigged poll? Are you electing somebody? Ask the kgb for help. You have unlimited space to expound. I am not junkie, wannabe nor dealer. In the last 30 years I have probably smoked marijuana less than 10 times, been drunk less than 10 times and used any other substance aside from tobacco less than 5 times. This poll is much freer than the consumer market for pain relief medicine. I will not jail you for disagreeing, nor use any force to push my opinion, nor have goons do it.

2) Opium is not 'heavily toxic'. It is a very mellow 'drug', as long as you don't overdo it. Farmed red meat is toxic. Racing automobiles just to burn gas is toxic. Why do so many people need to make health choices for strangers? How about you eat and smoke what you want and let others do the same?

3) http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/05/china-opium-wars-battling-addiction-beijing-160516141819379.html

China is believed to have more narcotics regulations than any other country in the world, with more than 500 laws and guidelines implemented at various levels of government over different periods of time.

These "relentless and draconian countermeasures" have done little to lessen China's drug problem, according to a report released last year by the Brookings Institute, a Washington, DC-based think-tank.

In 2012, the NGO Human Rights Watch included China in its report, Torture in the Name of Treatment. It condemned China, along with several Southeast Asian countries, for "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" of drug addicts.

It's very nice to have theoretical ideas of everything but something either works or it doesn't. If you want to build perpetual motion machines, or cure cancer with almond pits or solve addiction by beating it out of people, treat yourself and let others be.

[JoltCola]

Actually, I'm shocked by the fact that someone can raise the topic of legalization of heavy drugs. The fact is that even the grass hemp marijuana And, well, let and in some countries, even her legalized. But what a waste of opium, then this is another conversation. The world is already full of drug addicts, therefore, it is not necessary to provoke people to do what is not already illegal, in terms of drugs.

That's right the world is full of drug addicts. So why should criminals make all the money off them and not us instead? Taxed and regulated is what we need for all narcotics. If someone wants to get high then by all means go ahead, but we should be collecting the taxes and fees that go along with the entire industry.

[protokol]

All drugs should be legalized.

It's obvious that controlling recreational drugs does not lead to less people dying - just look at the opioid overdose epidemic in the USA right now. If you make drugs illegal then a black market will prop up around it and more people will end up dying due to impure and unregulated product. eg. heroin cut with fentanyl.

Countries should at least adopt a decriminalising system as Portugal has done, by decriminalising drugs you treat drug addiction as a health issue rather than a legal issue, helping addicts of drugs like opiates and methamphetamine, rather than throwing them in jail.

Not to mention, in the USA especially, the fact that drug users are put in jail fuels the private prison system. It is easy to see that the whole social movement of drug use has been turned into a business, with private prison companies profiteering from the unfortunate circumstances of many individuals.

At least the USA is leading the cause for marijuana legalisation...

[PeterTheGrape]

Everyone should get educated about opium first and then they should legalize it. People will know what they are getting themselves into, and even if Opium isn't legalized, it's not like they can't obtain it in illegal ways or resort to other drugs, I think it's a change for the better.

Education about opium is difficult in the United States.

In the U.S. there are basically two kinds of opium according to the government.

1) Natural opium from the poppy. This is what Thomas Jefferson grew at his home, and the plants still grew there up until 30 years ago when some nutheads in a dark bureaucracy threatened them. What were they going to do? Arrest Thomas Jefferson?

http://www.alternet.org/story/145872/how_the_dea_scrubbed_thomas_jefferson%27s_monticello_poppy_garden_from_public_memory

This opium is considered dangerous and is illegal. It is usually smoked, and is addictive but causes very few, if any, fatalities amongst smokers. It grows easily, is cheap, and does not lead to criminal behavior unless its users are criminalized.

2) Pharmaceutical and synthetic opiates. This is legal in the United States, a multi billion dollar a year business. These must be obtained from doctors http://www.nydailynews.com/newswires/new-york/manhattan-doctor-arrested-oxycodone-prescription-case-article-1.3223474 or bought at very high prices on the street, resulting in a lot of crime from addicts stealing to get money. Also the number one cause of death in people under age 50.

-----

Despite vast amounts of evidence that jail does not cure addiction, it is still the cure of choice in the U.S.

Jailing addicts discourages people from looking for common sense treatments, but it does sustain the number one public housing project in the United States, private prisons, as somebody said in a previous post.

[Sithara007]

Actually, I'm shocked by the fact that someone can raise the topic of legalization of heavy drugs. The fact is that even the grass hemp marijuana And, well, let and in some countries, even her legalized. But what a waste of opium, then this is another conversation. The world is already full of drug addicts, therefore, it is not necessary to provoke people to do what is not already illegal, in terms of drugs.

That's right the world is full of drug addicts. So why should criminals make all the money off them and not us instead? Taxed and regulated is what we need for all narcotics. If someone wants to get high then by all means go ahead, but we should be collecting the taxes and fees that go along with the entire industry. 

I have to agree with your post. The drug ban is only helping the criminals, by allowing them to rake profits from contraband sales. If the drugs are legalized, then this underground business will stop and the government will be able to earn increased tax receipts.