"Nothing wrong with a line of coke." (dutch articl

[HeartCore]

"Public health will benefit of legalizing all drugs"

With this remark of Erik van Ree, who teaches Eastern European history at the univsersity of Amsterdam, the article opens. He mentions that he uses a line of coke or a pill once in a while. "A minority of drugusers develop problems, the majority can cope very well with all kinds of drugs in a responsible and mature way", he mentions as well.

The article describes how repressive drugpolicies fail over and over again and in that respect mentions the upcoming UN meeting where the UN will meet to discuss their previous goals, 'to have a drug free world by 2008'. The naivite of this idea, should earn every member of that club a one ride ticket to 'get the fuck out of politics NOW' if 'they' would ask me (but they don't) since this goal is based on such a blatant ignorance, that you wonder how these people can even find the lightswitch of their bedrooms, in the morning when they get up.

The article focusses on the propaganda used by opponents of legislation showing that in most cases, that propaganda is nothing more than... propaganda.

For example the idea that is widespread that whenever drugs are legal, everybody will use them. The situation in the Netherlands, proves this is not the case since we have relatively less problematic drug users as abroad. One comparison is made with cars that can drive over 180km an hour and the fact that people know you can die if you drive that fast and in general, respect the speeding laws.

Another comparison is made with the legality of abortion in the Netherlands: The number of abortions has not gone up since it became legal in the Netherlands. But the ones that are done now, are generally much more safer as they were before the law changed.

A number of arguments have been used by the anti drug lobby over the years. Cannabis for example, has been the subject of ever increasing blackmouthing and a lot of the problems mentioned by repressionists, are directly coming forth from the shady situation which exists in the Netherlands right now: It is illegal but, allowed. The supposed rising levels on THC on Dutch grass has been a concern for several, mostly Christian, politicians over the years using that as an argument to change cannabis to a more restrictive schedule. Ironically, this concern would disappear when cannabis would become legal since out of legalization would arise the wish and legal means of normalizing THC levels and guarding the quality of cannabis (as is norm with basically ALL other goods for human consumption).


Furthermore the article mentions the fact impressive results have been seen with providing herion for free to a small group of heavy addicts. These kind of initiatives prove to work very well often. The mechanics work like:'take away the need of an addict to spend the day scoring, and they will have time to think things through and focus on their life again. As simple as it sounds, a number of projects like this in Amsterdam and Rotterdam, worked very well.

Some figures:

In 2005 almost 19.000 people in the Netherlands died from the direct consequence of smoking tobacco. Alcohol took almost 800 dutch citizens life directly, and another 1000 indirectly. That year, 122 people died of the consequences of drugs.

Makes you wonder who and why and how keeps pouring OUR tax money into this repression machine, which hasn't got any ground scientifically nor from a public health care point of view. Concluding, the article mentions that its impossible to ever find someone from the repression lobby to explain their point of view before an audience. That is probably because that point of view is impossible to defend at all.

*Looks forward to the end of the day to roll another bomber*

The article: http://www.depers.nl/buitenland/133517/ ... rmaal.html

Love & Peace
HC

 

[DevXavier]

It has been knows for quite some time now that drugs policies have virtually no relevance at all!

Cohen was one of the bigger voices in this area until he retired, a very nice research has been done comparing San Fransisco (criminalized cannabis) and Amsterdam (the opposite).

If anybody is interested, you can find it here: http://www.mapinc.org/lib/limited.pdf

The big issue in legalizing is that most of the politicians think it would make everybody addicted to cocaine, heroine etc. Even though all the evidence says it will probbably not. People learn how to give drugs a place in their lives when it becomes illegal. It's the same with alcohol, freely available, but it's culturally not accepted to be drunk at work, behind the wheel, etc. The same would most likely happen when total legalization takes place. Social unacceptance of interfering with everyday life drug use.

 

[thadivine]

God article

Why don't they fucking start thinking

is it so hard????

 

[Psychoid]

Politicians like Bush must not even read those articles, or laugh their ass off at them and say "like we didn't know, we just want power, control and money!!! And we lose a little bit of each if we legalize!"

But as time go by it seems more and more articles like that are coming out (or maybe I just become more aware of them ), and that is good because it makes people talk about it.

Lets make a portrait:

With prohibition

- Drugs are on the black market, fabricated and sold by criminals. In order to make more money they cut their stuff so you never really know what you are taking, creating risks of intoxications.
- People don't talk about it, because they want to look like good and honest people. That results in misinformation and lack of ressources for people who have problems with drug addiction, which leads to more overdoses and crimes in order to get money for buying their stuff.
- Because of law restrictions scientifics can't make experiments with most drugs, so for most substances there could be consequences that we are not aware of.
- Some kids start taking drugs just because "it's cool to be illegal"

If all drugs are legalized

- There will be companies that will be making the drugs, they will have restrictions so you will be 100% sure that what you are taking is completely pure and of good quality
- More studies on all substance will occur, leading to better informations, so we know what we are doing when we take something.
- Some drugs (like opiates, cocaïne etc) would probably be controlled, so that you can't buy too much in a too small time. Which would be good in my opinion.
- As it is legal, people won't be afraid of talking about their use with other people.
- More people will consume psychedelics, leading to a better global consciousness, more open-minded people.
- As it is legal, all criminality related to drugs will disapear. That means less pot smokers in prisons, so more room for murderers, rapers, pedophiles etc

 

[forest]

in De Pers, a dutch newspaper, already three large artikles were placed about it, allso that tobacco and alcohol were more unhealthy than xtc and lsd.

 

[Brugmansia]

Legalising drugs would make big men small, that's all.

 

[Forkbender]

Politicians like Bush must not even read those articles, or laugh their ass off at them and say "like we didn't know, we just want power, control and money!!! And we lose a little bit of each if we legalize!"

But as time go by it seems more and more articles like that are coming out (or maybe I just become more aware of them ), and that is good because it makes people talk about it.

Lets make a portrait:

With prohibition

- Drugs are on the black market, fabricated and sold by criminals. In order to make more money they cut their stuff so you never really know what you are taking, creating risks of intoxications.
- People don't talk about it, because they want to look like good and honest people. That results in misinformation and lack of ressources for people who have problems with drug addiction, which leads to more overdoses and crimes in order to get money for buying their stuff.
- Because of law restrictions scientifics can't make experiments with most drugs, so for most substances there could be consequences that we are not aware of.
- Some kids start taking drugs just because "it's cool to be illegal"

If all drugs are legalized

- There will be companies that will be making the drugs, they will have restrictions so you will be 100% sure that what you are taking is completely pure and of good quality
- More studies on all substance will occur, leading to better informations, so we know what we are doing when we take something.
- Some drugs (like opiates, cocaïne etc) would probably be controlled, so that you can't buy too much in a too small time. Which would be good in my opinion.
- As it is legal, people won't be afraid of talking about their use with other people.
- More people will consume psychedelics, leading to a better global consciousness, more open-minded people.
- As it is legal, all criminality related to drugs will disapear. That means less pot smokers in prisons, so more room for murderers, rapers, pedophiles etc

You're preaching to the choir here, buddy.

 

[buffachino]

Psychonauts lose either way.

On the one hand, you have the currant monopoly through prohibition of the vast majority of psychoactive substances; save for the most lucrative, tedious and toxic; which subsequently drives corporately administrated prices and demand upward, thus escalating and dominating illicit profit.
On the other hand, with total legalisation, economic cartels have the profitable opportunity to repackage this same corporate monopoly, and generate resultant legitimate pharmaceutical dealerships from which the user is dependant and profit avariciously embargoed.

If anything is to change, the legalisation of psychoactives should not result in them becoming yet another industrial monopoly of dependence. Legalisation just means more corporate opportunity for domination, and total legalisation produces total control, just as total illegalisation produces total control.
If psychoactives are to become totally free, they must abstain from having any monetary trade value other than their own. Otherwise, psychoactives become just another conventionally legitimate commodity to be relegated to addicted consumers for constantly and selfishly disseminated profit; rather than an illicit trade of the same paradigm.

And Forkbender, I agree :lol:

Peace.