Didn't really read that thread...
I'd be pro-gun though I guess. I dont own one yet, but I want to one day.
I dont see it as a right to bear arms issue, the resoning behind that
amendment has long past. I just lean Libertarian / anarchist here. If
someone wants a gun they are going to get one, and they should be able to
get one without the risk of imprisonment.
Viva la revolution!
jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kaytor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Let's talk about drugs [was:RE: Violent education]
> damn, you are right on the money there..... Where you in the pro-gun or
> anti-gun group jon? (just trying to see if there is a correlation here,
not
> trying to start that topic back up)
>
> -george
>
>
> >From: "Jon Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: Let's talk about drugs [was:RE: Violent education]
> >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:28:58 -0400
> >
> >I agree that the governments "war on drugs" is totally misguided.
> >However the real reason that drugs are illegal which the government goes
> >out
> >of their way not to say. Is that drugs in general lower the productivity
of
> >the population. If drugs were legalized in any fashion, we might be a
> >happier country, but the overall productivity of the nation as a whole
> >would
> >probably drop as we have more fun ;-)
> >
> >The US govt. wants to keep the illusion we are under that we live in a
free
> >country and have all sorts of right. This illusion is the root of it's
> >power. If we actually lived in a free country we would be allowed to
smoke
> >marijuana in our houses. So the govt. hides behind scary words, like
> >addiction, and crack babies.
> >
> >Scientific study is also a bad thing, because the truth is impossible to
> >avoid. The citizens may learn it, and because "we the people" are still
in
> >charge because they cant change the Constitution, we may cause the laws
to
> >be changed, and as a result productivity in this will decline for good or
> >worse.
> >
> >This is where the internet comes into play, and the real reason why it is
> >so
> >important. Before the internet and it's precursor BBS's, where would we
as
> >citizens have a place to discuss this issue without fear? Remember, the
> >commercials during the 80's? Kids were encouraged to turn in their
parents.
> >Your neighbors might turn you in too...
> >
> >We see now that the more socially liberal, and more technically advanced
> >states are voting to legalize medicinal marijuana. This is a direct
effect
> >in my opinion of the ability of citizens to educate themselves as to the
> >facts. The real power of the internet is it's ability to allow people to
> >communicate. That's why it's so hyped by everyone beyond what it really
is.
> >Everybody wants to internet to succeed, because it's a tool for giving
> >individuals power. Ebay, Yahoo, and everyone else are really just pawns
in
> >the ordinary citizenries play for more power. They keep money flowing in
so
> >the internet grows more powerful and so do we.
> >
> >That's what it's alway's all about anyway.
> >
> >Money and Power.
> >
> >jon
> >
> >p.s. the other constant...sex has already taken advantage of the internet
> >;-)
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jennifer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 4:01 PM
> >Subject: RE: Let's talk about drugs [was:RE: Violent education]
> >
> >
> > > At 12:22 PM 5/23/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> > > >Yes..case in point the legalising of medicinal marijuana use at a
State
> > > >level, and the refusal of the Federal courts to recognise the state
> >laws.
> > > >
> > > >Although in other instances they HAVE allowed States to have their
own
> >take
> > > >on certain laws.
> > >
> > > The laws in question are pretty strict and one of the reasons that
they
> >are
> > > pretty strict is the "War on Drugs." Federal Law supercedes state law
> >and
> > > federal law says that marijuana is one of the most dangerous
substances
> > > available. Where federal law conflicts with local laws, federal wins.
> > > Marijuana is simply not as addictive nor as deadly as some drugs that
> >are
> > > correctly classified as less dangerous, and it is the physical
> > > addictiveness and deadly side-effects that are supposed to dictate the
> > > classification. Caffeine is more physically addictive than marijuana.
I
> > > have yet to hear of a case of death caused by marijuana itself, as
> >opposed
> > > to caused by the bad judgement that its use can induce.
> > >
> > > Its classification is also why the US can't use hemp paper, even
though
> > > hemp is an easily renewable resource (unlike trees which can take
> >hundreds
> > > of years to regrow) which doesn't require the chemicals needed to
> >process
> > > trees into paper (which are poisonous and very harmful for the
> > > environment), and which contains THC in such small amounts that it's
> > > unusable as a drug. (Can we say paper industry money?) Hemp clothing
has
> > > been somewhat ignored but is technically illegal-- there is now talk
of
> > > prosecuting people for having hemp soap that again contains so little
> >THC
> > > that it can't be used to get high. How? Under drug laws. All Hail the
> >Drug
> > > War! I suggest a zero-tolerance policy for all those darned hemp-soap
> >using
> > > hippies.
> > >
> > > >They claim that Marijuana has no medicinal uses, even though research
> >has
> > > >shown otherwise, and anecdotal evidence by the people who are
suffering
> >and
> > > >using marijuana, also shows otherwise.
> > >
> > > They don't even claim that there are no medicinal uses-- only that the
> > > medicinal uses suggested by anecdotal evidence has never been
> > > comprehensively proven. Comprehensively proven means that they don't
> > > discount the research as "having been done by potheads," that it's
been
> > > done by "respected scientists" which in part means people who have US
or
> > > European credentials, and that the results of the experiments are
> > > repeatable by large numbers of unbiassed respected scientists. Anyone
> >from
> > > a country that allows use of marijuana is automatically dismissed as a
> > > pothead. Anyone from a country that allows testing of marijuana for
> >medical
> > > uses is dismissed for "probably having gotten into the test
materials."
> >The
> > > results can't be confirmed by people who can be given the benefit of
the
> > > doubt, like our own US scientists can be, because those people can't
do
> >the
> > > necessary the experiments to prove or disprove the results.
> > >
> > > >But I guess if people can grow a herb in their backyard, and get the
> > > >benefits of painkillers and psycho therapeutic drugs wihtout the
> >terrible
> > > >stomach upsets, headaches and numerous other side effects...it would
> >dent
> > > >the profit margins of quite a few large drug companies ....wouldn't
it?
> > >
> > > It's not just the drug industry that stands to lose money-- there's
> >drugs,
> > > paper, textiles, and fuel, plus the industries that support them:
> >chemical,
> > > wood, cotton, wool, flax, oil, natural gas, etc. There are a lot of
> > > businesses that would be hurt by the legalization of marijuana and/or
> >hemp.
> > >
> > > But, to be fair, marijuana does have side-effects. It's an
hallucinogen.
> > > Generally speaking, hallucination is considered a bad side-effect.
> >However,
> > > several psychiatric drugs are also hallucinogens and LSD was
originally
> >an
> > > attempt at an anti-depressant (as was aspartame, better known as
> > > Nutra-Sweet, which has really bad side-effects including short-term
> >memory
> > > loss). Many psychiatric drugs are just plain scary in terms of
> > > mood-alteration and side-effects. The reason that people are trying to
> >come
> > > up with synthetics for marijuana is to allow the benefits without the
> > > side-effects. But other substances that cause bad side-effects are
> > > prescribed when the side-effects are less problematic than the
symptoms.
> > > These are usually last-resort medicines.
> > >
> > > And that is what medical marijuana was intended to be. Really strong
> > > painkillers (opiates, in particular) can cause severe nausea. If a
> >patient
> > > on those painkillers has nausea as a side-effect, giving him/her/it
> > > anti-nausea medication can decrease the effectiveness of the
> >painkillers.
> > > I've had this side-effect while passing two kidney stones-- it is not
a
> > > withdrawl side-effect, although withdrawl can also cause nausea. If
you
> >are
> > > already in enough pain to get that medicine, throwing up half-an-hour
> >after
> > > taking it every time you take it makes it a pretty horrible
medication.
> > > That side-effect in a person who already has nausea is probably much
> >worse.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, there is no last resort medication for the combination
of
> > > pain and nausea. If marijuana has any medical benefit, people who are
> >not
> > > helped by other medication fit the requirements for a last resort
> > > medication. Being unable to keep food in your stomach can cause death.
> > > Death is a more severe side-effect than hallucinations. If it could be
> > > proven to US government standards that marijuana could help these
> >people,
> > > it could probably be legalized federally for medicinal uses.
> >Unfortunately,
> > > if the current situation continues, this will never happen.
> > >
> > >
> > > > >;-)
> > > >
> > > >-Gel
> > > >And the Wheel Of Morality Turns.
> > > >Turn Turn Turn
> > >
> > > Show us the lesson that we should learn...
> > >
> > > >Wheel Of Morality..
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >From: Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > >
> > > >That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that "any and all efforts"
> >(not
> > > >even any and all existing efforts, but any and all efforts) to thwart
> >drug
> > > >use would include stopping drug use even when it is medically
> >justified.
> > > >Stopping legal use of illegal drugs is a valid effort to stop people
> >from
> > > >using those drugs. You have mentioned several exceptions to laws. My
> >point
> > > >is that "any and all" allows no room for exceptions and thus allows
no
> >room
> > > >for legitimate or understandable uses, which makes the statement not
> >very
> > > >well thought out.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
