The trouble with the whole debate is that everyone involved is still using the useless, homogenizing, pejorative term, "drugs".
Cannabis is a "gateway drug" only because the word "drugs" predisposes people to confuse a disparate group of chemicals - with wide ranging effects - with one another; as though, somehow, they're all the same thing: they're all just "illegal drugs". And, in that case, if it's alright to smoke a joint, it might be alright to pop an E. The stupid notion that they're all somehow related is born out of language that attributes to these different chemicals some kind of bizzare continuity/similarity.
Legalisation might put a stop to this semantic mistake, eliminating, as it would, the use of the word "illegal" from the equation.
Anyway, E Prime related rant over.
Let's move on to some of the other idiotic stuff the media and the politicians are spewing.
quote: I saw that story on teletext and right after it was a headline 'Canabis leads to hard drugs'.
Firstly, so what if it does? I couldn't give a toss if people move on from cannabis to cocaine. The vast majority of people don't turn into skag users, so who gives a shit. The only real cause for concern are the economically deprived areas where heroin/crack use is commonplace. But this is a very complicated problem, that doesn't simply reduce to "Hey! Let's get the drugs out and then everything'll be OK!".
quote:"LSD is a hallucinogenic drug which distorts the way the mind perceives things."
Again, this kind of statement is born out of faulty semantics. Please define "distorts" Mr. Cunty. I'm sure the definition will have something to do with an "absolute reality" that only exists for a mind incapable of assimilating change and diversity.
quote:"Users do not become physically dependent on LSD, but some may experience a psychological dependence."
What was that, Mr. Cunty?
"psychological dependence"?
What?
How many people have you met that have ever found themselves getting within a billion, trillion miles of an addiction to a psychedelic as powerful a LSD? It's too exhausting, too much of a headfuck for most, and this, combined with the fact that it has an exceedingly high tolerance rate, leads you almost unerringly to the figure, less than zero.
And, I'll say it again, who gives a shit if people do get addicted to it?
quote: "LSD users sometimes experience flashbacks which may distress them. Some have long-term psychological effects, such as schizophrenia."
So let's deny them the opportunity to access these states; let's enforce a law....
Jesus.
quote: "Cannabis may impair short-term memory and affects body coordination."
Err? Booze? Anyone?
quote: "Heavy use can lead to confusion, aggravate existing mental disorders and sap energy."
Again, let's deny people the responsibility of taking charge of their bodies/lives.
But, Mr. Cunty, isn't it up to me?
I can't help thinking that all this concern about peoples mental health etc just disguises a knee-jerk, Pavlovian reaction to the word "drugs". This isn't rational debate, and it's only through rational debate and inquiry that we can really begin to deal with some of the problems that "drugs" can cause. Let's begin with legalisation/decriminalisation and move on from there.
quote: Mr Clarke told BBC News on Friday "an alternative, slightly druggie lifestyle" had emerged from relaxing cannabis law in Amsterdam and Kingston, Jamaica, which he did not want to see in Britain."
Dear Mr. Clarke, you already live in a "druggy society", now let's do something constructive about it rather than sweeping it all under the carpet with legislation, stigmatizing and loaded language.
[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: Jamieon ] |
