a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
https://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/
ScottL wrote:Diogenes,
You do realize you just agreed to non-prohibition for LSD right? Just pointing it out in your 2nd to last from this post.
CKay wrote:I'm not on any side.Diogenes wrote:You talk about it as though it were a bad thing. Are you sure you are on the right side?
Skipjack wrote:Yeah, I am sometimes a bit dense like that, so help me out by putting aSometimes I'm just here for comic relief.wherever you do that
CKay wrote:Anyhow, I take it that you do not advocate prohibition for non-addictive substances such as psilocybin and LSD?
He's asking if you do not advocate prohibition on LSD in which you respond no more than dynamite and antibiotics which aren't prohibited. Maybe you meant something different, but based on this language, my understanding is reasonable.Diogenes wrote:No more than I do for Dynamite or Antibiotics. Harmless stuff like that ought to be available to anyone without requiring a license or permit.
ScottL wrote:CKay wrote:Anyhow, I take it that you do not advocate prohibition for non-addictive substances such as psilocybin and LSD?He's asking if you do not advocate prohibition on LSD in which you respond no more than dynamite and antibiotics which aren't prohibited. Maybe you meant something different, but based on this language, my understanding is reasonable.Diogenes wrote:No more than I do for Dynamite or Antibiotics. Harmless stuff like that ought to be available to anyone without requiring a license or permit.
ScottL wrote:CKay wrote:Anyhow, I take it that you do not advocate prohibition for non-addictive substances such as psilocybin and LSD?He's asking if you do not advocate prohibition on LSD in which you respond no more than dynamite and antibiotics which aren't prohibited. Maybe you meant something different, but based on this language, my understanding is reasonable.Diogenes wrote:No more than I do for Dynamite or Antibiotics. Harmless stuff like that ought to be available to anyone without requiring a license or permit.
As long as the license is based on objective standards and available to any competent non-criminal citizen adult.Diogenes wrote:While i'm on the subject, I believe every adult should be able to own and use firearms, but I was very much in favor of the creation of a firearms carry license.
So you agree education plays a large part in preventing stupidity? One of my arguments all along....Diogenes wrote:ScottL wrote:CKay wrote:Anyhow, I take it that you do not advocate prohibition for non-addictive substances such as psilocybin and LSD?He's asking if you do not advocate prohibition on LSD in which you respond no more than dynamite and antibiotics which aren't prohibited. Maybe you meant something different, but based on this language, my understanding is reasonable.Diogenes wrote:No more than I do for Dynamite or Antibiotics. Harmless stuff like that ought to be available to anyone without requiring a license or permit.
While i'm on the subject, I believe every adult should be able to own and use firearms, but I was very much in favor of the creation of a firearms carry license. Yes, everyone has a right to them, but other people have a right not to get shot by amateurs carrying weapons.
Go through a training program that insures you know how to carry a gun responsibly, and that insures you won't be a threat to other people, and I welcome your presence in my vicinity.
Dangerous stuff requires a minimal degree of assurance of competence. Society has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to minimize injury to innocents.
ladajo wrote:I also think that education matters. However on first take the below stats may indicate otherwise.ScottL wrote:I just don't think I'd start doing drugs just because they're available. You may feel different about yourself, but no amount of availability is going to get me to do them. That's my argument on pushing vs. availability. If you educate people on the subject while available, I think you'll find most people will stay away and/or drugs will become a problem of the past, but there are only a few real world cases.Diogenes wrote:And that is how I feel about your "pushing" argument. It doesn't make any sense to me.
As for your "old man" story, I'll admit I'm young, but my view from my teens, through 20s and entering 30s haven't changed. I tend to try to abide by a common sense interpretation of "live and let live." Of course common sense is subjective.
http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k10NSD ... ts.htm#2.1Education
Illicit drug use in 2010 varied by the educational status of adults aged 18 or older, with the rate of current illicit drug use lower among college graduates (6.3 percent) than those with some college (10.7 percent), high school graduates (8.5 percent), and those who had not graduated from high school (10.8 percent). However, in 2010, adults aged 18 or older who had not finished high school had the lowest rate of lifetime illicit drug use (38.9 percent) compared with the lifetime rate among high school graduates (46.4 percent), those with some college (56.2 percent), and those who were college graduates (52.0 percent).
On second take, when one considers who (left slant) controls the education system in the US, it may make more sense. And if you add another dimension, to include that higher education tends for higher interest in media(news, etc), and who (left slant again) drives the media, it may indicate that there is a self-licking ice cream cone effect where a definite impact is seen from education to media influence to an individuals take on things.
Interesting in any event.
edit: added study link.
Cab Calloway doing "Reefer Man" - 1933 before prohibitionAfter National marijuana prohibition became law in America, Commissioner Anslinger found out that a certain group of people - all of whom were identifiable by their shared occupation - were flagrantly violating the law by continuing to smoke pot. What the transgressors had in common was that they had rhythm. In fact, they included all the key geniuses of Jazz: Louis Armstrong, Dizzy Gillespie, Thelonius Monk, Count Basie, Jimmy Dorsey, Duke Ellington, Lionel Hampton and Cab Calloway, to name a choice selection.
From the early 1930s, the Commissioner compiled a dossier that would later be known as the 'Marijuana and Musicians' file, noting each and every marijuana case involving a member of the musical fraternity. Documents from the Anslinger papers and the DEA Library in Washington DC reveal that, from 1943 to 1948, Anslinger plotted a pogrom of jazz and swing musicians, ordering all his agents throughout the USA to watch and keep criminal files on all the musicians in their areas so that they could all be rounded-up in one fell swoop.
http://www.ukcia.org/potculture/48/anslinger.html
