Drug warriors are "science censors"...

desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/12/researchers-say-the-drug-war-amounts-to

"
"The decision to outlaw these drugs was based on their perceived dangers, but in many cases the harms have been overstated," said David Nutt, a professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London.


In a statement accompanying the Nature Reviews paper, he said the laws amounted "to the worst case of scientific censorship since the Catholic Church banned the works of Copernicus and Galileo"."




In other news, the Feds raided 103 MMJ outfits in California yesterday:

" Federal officials now have busted more 625 marijuana stores in California, prosecutors."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/12/58431.htm
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
lol, the same guy who thinks ACC is a hoax is now praising science.

yet another spam fail thread.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
lol, the same guy who thinks ACC is a hoax is now praising science.

yet another spam fail thread.
Click to expand...
I am disappointed, Buck. I thought for sure you would be leading the cheers for the MMJ raids yesterday. It's no surprise that you are on the censor's side of this; you never saw a DEA raid you didn't cheer.
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
racist assholes like you are exactly what allowed for prohibition in the first place, and your continuing love for all that is anti-science makes you the very person you bemoan in the OP.
Click to expand...
So you don't deny that you like hearing about the raids?

Thats fucked man, (God forbid) it could be you some day...
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/12/researchers-say-the-drug-war-amounts-to

"
"The decision to outlaw these drugs was based on their perceived dangers, but in many cases the harms have been overstated," said David Nutt, a professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London.


In a statement accompanying the Nature Reviews paper, he said the laws amounted "to the worst case of scientific censorship since the Catholic Church banned the works of Copernicus and Galileo"."




In other news, the Feds raided 103 MMJ outfits in California yesterday:

" Federal officials now have busted more 625 marijuana stores in California, prosecutors."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/12/58431.htm
Click to expand...


Surprising this hasn't been said sooner, the drug laws are based off of unsupported science, are absurdly scheduled, and are put in a class by the federal government where we can't even question anything about them.

I think just because something has the potential for abuse, that shouldn't outweigh the potential benefit to patients actually suffering from a disease or disorder. PTSD for example, there is strong evidence that supports the notion that sufferers using doses of MDMA show beneficial signs of improvement, holding this study in the United States would land a research scientist behind bars. How many other substances are we underutilizing because of such absurd drug policies? It's a shame.

Not to mention the hypocrisy in the whole thing itself, they push "just say no!" and all the other propaganda bullshit while simultaneously peddling prescription drugs to 3/4 of the American population, those same drugs that make up the majority of substance abuse problems and overdoses in the country. It would seem what they're actually saying is "don't do these drugs, do ​these ones!". It was never a public safety or security issue, it was always a money issue, and early on in the beginnings it was fueled by indiscriminate racism because at the time, they could get away with it.

I'd like to have high hopes this shit will finally be solved sometime in the next few decades, but life so far has taught me that being optimistic about important shit like this just leads to even bigger let downs.. I'll live my life as I see fit, that's all we really can do at the end of the day..
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
the drug laws are based off of unsupported science
Click to expand...
it's a good thing one side of the political landscape is supporting science so strongly by calling evolution "lies from the pit of hell", and ascribing magical properties to women's vaginas, and deeming the overwhelming consensus on anthropogenic climate change to be the work of communist scientists "on the doll".

yes, it is a very good thing.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
it's a good thing one side of the political landscape is supporting science so strongly by calling evolution "lies from the pit of hell", and ascribing magical properties to women's vaginas, and deeming the overwhelming consensus on anthropogenic climate change to be the work of communist scientists "on the doll".

yes, it is a very good thing.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. The OP was spot on, current drug policies prevent actual science from taking place studying substances and their potential benefits because of their scheduling that's based on bunk science.

Why, of all subjects, would you choose this one to make it about how republicans deny accepted science? What would be the benefit of that? Take these kinds of opportunities as an extension of an olive branch, even though it might not be, and probably isn't.


The rest of this post isn't directed at you, just general thoughts.

It makes me feel stupid for even saying this because I feel like it doesn't matter anyway.. nobody listens, nobody really cares about seeing the other guys point of view, I don't get that.. This need to always argue, it might as well be the same as a drug addiction, I see no benefit to gain out of it other than inflating the ego. We should feel our egos inflate when we come to an uncommon agreement because that is something to be proud of.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. The OP was spot on, current drug policies prevent actual science from taking place studying substances and their potential benefits because of their scheduling that's based on bunk science.

Why, of all subjects, would you choose this one to make it about how republicans deny accepted science? What would be the benefit of that?
Click to expand...
public opinion drives progress on this issue, that's why.

OP has stated that fox news will undoubtedly continue with their honest reporting, when i can easily name a half a dozen lies they have told about cannabis.

on the other side of the aisle, MSNBC is just as much a bunch of partisan hacks, but at least they do tell the truth about stuff, cannabis included.

OP can't feign outrage over bad science driving the drug war while simultaneously embracing the sponsors of bad science.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
public opinion drives progress on this issue, that's why.

OP has stated that fox news will undoubtedly continue with their honest reporting, when i can easily name a half a dozen lies they have told about cannabis.

on the other side of the aisle, MSNBC is just as much a bunch of partisan hacks, but at least they do tell the truth about stuff, cannabis included.

OP can't feign outrage over bad science driving the drug war while simultaneously embracing the sponsors of bad science.
Click to expand...
Surely you don't expect them to accept science overnight..

Progress has many forms
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Surely you don't expect them to accept science overnight..

Progress has many forms
Click to expand...
i don't expect an old coot like desert dud to accept science anytime before he shuffles off this mortal coil.

but someone who may just be browsing the forums might take note that the same person lodging the complaint is the same person who calls ACC a hoax and ascribes magical properties to women's vaginas.

in other words, it's not OP that i'm trying to convince.
 
B

bundee1

Well-Known Member

  • Not to mention the hypocrisy in the whole thing itself, they push "just say no!" and all the other propaganda bullshit while simultaneously peddling prescription drugs to 3/4 of the American population, those same drugs that make up the majority of substance abuse problems and overdoses in the country. It would seem what they're actually saying is "don't do these drugs, do ​these ones!". It was never a public safety or security issue, it was always a money issue, and early on in the beginnings it was fueled by indiscriminate racism because at the time, they could get away with it. ​
Click to expand...
Preach on brother! We just have to convince people 1 at a time. Be a good ambassador.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
To people who say it's always about money. It's really not. It's about power. Money just happens to be tied into power.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Then it is about money..
Click to expand...
No, because sometimes money is frequently sacrificed for power. The Rockefellers give away huge amounts of their own to further political ends for example. Of course it's also a nice tax haven too (The Rockefeller Foundation).

But they could have so much more than they are reportedly worth. They could have hoarded it all, but they did not.

It's like how these families have also supported communists in the past. Communists surely are not about the money, right? No, it's about power. It's about control. Money is one tool to gain it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top