Propaganda: Marijuana leads to heroin use

[RainDog]

Last edited Thu Apr 10, 2014, 03:29 AM - Edit history (2)

This is the sort of reporting we've seen so often in mainstream media. Thankfully, we now have the internet to dispute this propaganda, rather than let it fester for decades to be regurgitated whenever the prohibitionists need to feed the public misinformation.

The article linked and quoted below claims that legalization is leading Mexican marijuana growers to switch to heroin because the price has dropped drastically when domestic marijuana in the U.S. is legal to grow. Of course drug cartels will look for new avenues of revenue when a product is no longer illegal (in some states, in some ways.)

This is what happened with the mob in the U.S. after alcohol prohibition was lifted - the mafia invested in heroin as an alternate stream of revenue before prohibition ended, in fact.

What is fueling the rise of heroin use, however, is the war on drugs - which has focused on prescription opiates extensively, thus making them (and they, not marijuana, share the features of heroin) difficult to obtain. Therefore, those who are addicted to prescription opiates are turning to heroin.

In fact, the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence already knows this is the reality - not the politics of marijuana.

http://www.ncadd.org/index.php/in-the-news/377-prescription-drug-abuse-fueling-rise-in-heroin-addiction

The increase in prescription drug abuse is fueling a rise in heroin addiction, NBC News reports. A growing number of young people who start abusing expensive prescription drugs are switching to heroin, which is cheaper and easier to buy.

Prescription pain pills cost $20 to $60, while heroin costs $3 to $10 a bag. Many young people who use heroin start off snorting the drug, and within weeks, most start shooting up, according to the news report.

“Kids in the city know not to touch it, but the message never got out to the suburbs,” said Chicago Police Capt. John Roberts, whose son died of a heroin overdose. He founded the Heroin Epidemic Relief Organization to help other families deal with teen heroin use.

In 2009, the most recent year for which national data is available, 510 young adults, ages 15 to 24, died of a heroin overdose, up from 198 in 1999. Almost 90 percent of teens who are addicted to heroin are white.

That sentence lets you know the drug warriors are serious about the issue (cough.) Or maybe that comment was intended to scare suburban soccer moms cause their kid may be the next to use - cause, otherwise, who cares if something happens outside of suburbia, amiright? (sarcasm, if that's necessary.)

Maybe all that propaganda that equated marijuana with actual, harmful addictive drugs that those white kids heard in their DARE sessions made them too gullible - too willing to believe authority figures - and then they found out those figures lied about marijuana - so maybe they're lying about other things? And those are the people currently taking on marijuana - heaven help us all when those with good intentions have bad ideology.

Or maybe a reality is that addiction rates have stayed fairly static in the U.S. for decades (under 2% of the population), but the drug of choice changes, depending on which drug source the drug warriors targeted. It's like squeezing a water balloon - the shape changes but the volume doesn't.

Or maybe the economic crisis from economic policies has created a depressing job market for younger people and that makes stronger drugs more attractive in a "what have I got to lose" sort of way. But that statement does not hold true because the majority of addicts hold jobs and are not on public assistance - but there is a diff. in rates based upon age - just as other risk-taking behaviors are concentrated among teens and young adults.

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/04/marijuana_news_legalized_pot_i.html

The New York Times' Adam Nagourney reports on the disconnect between Democratic governors and voters when it comes to cannabis policy. Governors like California's Jerry Brown are finding themselves at odds with the public, which increasingly supports legalization.

Even with Democrats and younger voters leading the wave of the pro-legalization shift, these governors are standing back, supporting much more limited medical-marijuana proposals or invoking the kind of law-and-order and public-health arguments more commonly heard from Republicans. While 17 more states — most of them leaning Democratic — have seen bills introduced this year to follow Colorado and Washington in approving recreational marijuana, no sitting governor or member of the Senate has offered a full-out endorsement of legalization. Only Gov. Peter Shumlin, a Democrat in Vermont, which is struggling with a heroin problem, said he was open to the idea.

And finally, The Oregonian editorial board over the weekend weighed in on an upcoming marijuana conference that's closed to the public and the press.

It's a perfect opportunity for Oregonians to learn from those who fear marijuana's legalization the most. And that's why it is flummoxing that the media is barred from the $250-a-ticket event and the nonpaying public unwelcome. Calls by The Oregonian's editorial board to the Mount Hood Coalition and Drug Free America went unreturned.

The Drug Free America coalition is sponsored by the propaganda arm of the federal govt. aka the "Drug Czar's office" whose task and whose budget is allocated to lying to the American public about marijuana as the greatest part of its reason for existence. The bureaucracy has been audited for its value in the past - and those tasked with this job found the Drug Free America commercials, etc. resulted in increased acceptance of marijuana - and a lot of ironic wearing of tee-shirts given away by the same.

Here's some info on the conference -

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/media_blackout_no_help_to_oreg.html

Oregon State Police Superintendent Richard Evans Jr. caught a whiff of the public's shut-out only after being informed that two of his officers were scheduled to speak at the conference while on the taxpayer's dime. He correctly withdrew the appearances of the officers, whose subject was the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program and the impact of marijuana on property

The stakes are high. That's especially so if you hear from those who argue pot paves the way to cultural and educational ruin. More public education would help. And the conference subjects are enticing: Peter Hitchins, who writes for Britain's The Mail on Sunday newspaper, will excoriate public officials for failing to correlate marijuana use and mental illness. Mitch Morrissey, the district attorney of Denver, Colo., will align 12 Denver homicides that, his youtube.com video contends, would not have occurred were it not for marijuana. Mary Segawa of the Washington State Liquor Control Board, whose background is in drug prevention, will speak about the impact of legalization in Washington. And Calvina Fay, executive director of Save our Society from Drugs and the person sometimes demonized on the Internet as the queen of reefer madness, will present her findings on pot's escalating potency and the latest thinking from "scientific scholars dedicated to advancing research of drug use and drug abuse," the conference brochure states.

But Evans had it right: If Oregonians were to have sent two of its Oregon State Police experts to explain the impacts of marijuana, as it has done in previous years, they should be able to get something in return. Preaching to the well-heeled choir doesn't count. What's needed now, before the next ballot initiative goes to voters and Oregonians make a fateful choice, is information.

Stringing up the barbed wire to keep the media at bay won't help. Press releases surely to emerge from the conference will be crafted to ensure everyone is on-message – in precisely the same ways those who advocate marijuana's legalization follow a script designed to debunk myths surrounding marijuana use. What citizens are left with are extremes, at worst hysterical and at best open to question. Smart decisions ahead won't be made from the extremes.

The Drug War. In actual combat, when generals see that something is not working - they don't continue to do the same thing. Sometimes they sue for peace because the inhabitants of a place get so sick of war they don't want either side to keep fighting. If you've spent trillions of dollars on an ideology (that drug abuse can be abolished), yet the rate of abuse remains static over decades, while spending just keeps on going - and going, primarily, to military contractors - you have to wonder if the war on drugs is a racket of its own.

It's certainly good news for military contractors who will need to build aircraft to, say, poison the groundwater upstream among poor Mexican populations - but we have suburban white kids to save, so spare no expense.

[Warren DeMontague]

1. K&R

I seem to remember reading recently that the Administration is (finally!) expressing openness to the idea of rescheduling cannabis?

If so, about damn time, of course.

[wercal]

2. I know two people who are addicted to heroin

Just yesterday I refused to 'loan' one of them money...a ritual familiar to anyone who knows a heroin addict.

Both people I know are very young and white. One grew up in a working class household, and the other grew up in an upper middle class suburban setting.

I agree that both probably misunderstood the warnings on heroin, because their teachers equated marijuana with heroin....they even equate alcohol with heroin...classifying it as a 'drug'. So both these two got started with marijuana, mushrooms, etc....went to Oxy pills...and when those became hard to get, tried heroin.

Neither have a job btw. They are both intelligent enough to have a good job. One of them is an incredible salesman, and seems to constantly be landing new jobs...only to get fired a few weeks later. But they are definitely not classified as 'functioning addicts.' And I really don't see how either ever could hold a job, until they sober up.

I've talked to both of them about the source of their addiction. One says he had an abusive father, and it is an escape mechanism for him...the other got offered drugs at a party and she hasn't stopped since.

Now about their relationship with marijuana...

First, I think the best possible outcome for them, which will at least prevent them from dying in the next few years, is incarceration. I've bailed both of them out before, so I don't come to this conclusion lightly - but they always promise to go straight, and always falter. Now I live in Kansas, and both of them have been arrested in Kansas and Missouri several times. They get pulled over for whatever reason...and they've got suspended licenses, no insurance (heroin use equals zero money to pay for fines and insurance)...so car gets searched....needles are found...they go to jail. But it very much is a revolving system, and very bureaucratic...sometimes the police don't follow through with charges, or testing for residue, etc. So its a revolving door - especially when people like me make the mistake of posting bail.

So they get tired of getting arrested. So what beckons them? Colorado. They can carry needles around all day, as long as they have a card from the health department. And of course, marijuana is legal. One of them missed a court date a few weeks ago, because he was busy getting high in Colorado...his next one is Thursday, and if he misses it, I'm out $3,500....so I've taken an interest.

And I have to say - his heroin addiction is very much intertwined with marijuana use. They seem to go hand in hand with him...one always, and I mean always leads to the other.

I've read somewhere that only a small portion of the population at large is pre-disposed to becoming physically addicted to heroin...meaning 85 out of a hundred people who try it are able to stop and never try it again. I suspect there is a similar set of people who cannot handle marijuana (seems to also apply to alcohol). And, I suspect there is a significant overlap in these sets of people. In other words, the person who can't stop using marijuana is probably also the same person who gets hooked on heroin the first time.

And for this set of people....do I believe marijuana use leads to heroin use?

Yes - I do.

Some societies on this planet have almost zero drug use (I think Singapore is an example), due to draconian penalties. Now I'm sure the same 15% set of potential addicts still exists in these populations...but they have never tried drugs...because its almost physically impossible. So I don't buy into the "they'll get addicted to whatever is available" argument. Potential addicts in Singapore don't have a socially accepted precursor drug, like marijuana...so they end up sober...not so desperate for drugs they start huffing paint.

Same applies to potential addicts in this country. I guarantee the upper middle class woman I know, who grew up in a prim and proper suburb in Overland Park, KS, would not have initially started out vaping or injecting heroin. No, she had to be at a party, in a social setting, to start out with marijuana, to get the wheels in motion (and I admit it could be argued that alcohol greased the skids earlier than that).

What's my point?

I don't know. I do agree that the schools are doing kids a disservice by equating marijuana with heroin...they aren't at all the same, and each carries a different amount of risk. However, I see in the pro-marijuana movement a push to portray marijuana as perfectly safe. Its not. It is a drug...it does activate the pleasure centers of the brain....and it does impair you (think DWI). And frankly any marijuana most people can get their hands on is a highly 'engineered' crop...which arguable can no longer be called 'natural'. It presents a strong danger to a portion of our population....remember, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping d@ckhead will make it to court on Thursday...I have seen up close how some people react to it. And I guarantee that, if we had been further away from Colorado, D@ckhead would never have missed his first court date.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Singapore also sentences people to public lashings for gum chewing.

"publicly accepted precursor drug"... the most publicly accepted precursor drug of them all, is alcohol. How many addicts got "started" with booze? Did your pals drink beer along with the mushrooms and pot you say they "started out" on?

Generally, that's the case, but people have a blind spot with alcohol being a "drug" so they point a finger at pot. However it's undeniable that all sorts of bad decision-making chains start with the twisting off of a cap on a beer bottle.

That said, all drugs are different. Some addicts- many- need to stay away from all substances lest they fall back into addictive behavior. You may be blaming pot for your friends' heroin addiction or use without adequate basis. Despite decades of throwing millions of dollars of "research" at these cockamamie assertions around people 'getting started with' pot and leading to heroin, aside from anecdotal assertions of drug war gravy train types, there has been no evidence of that being the case. People get started on the road to heroin from prescription opiates, for sure, but there is a chemical relationship between those and heroin.

Tens of millions of otherwise law-abiding people in this country smoke pot recreationally and manage just fine, do not turn into crazed "play faster" piano playing junkies.

I would also say that no matter how annoyed you may be with your buddies, there is no fucking way in the world we are ever going to incarcerate our way out of the drug problems in this country, even if we were to adopt insanely draconian drug laws like the totalitarian approach of Singapore (which is oddly, when it comes to businesses, considered some sort of 'libertarian paradise' ) ... in case you haven't noticed, we've been trying that way for several decades, and it hasn't worked.

Sorry if legal pot in CO is bothering you, but the fact is, prohibition is a fucking failure and a cruel inhuman joke and waste of resources. It's well past time to try a different approach.

[wercal]

8. Re-read my post, with an emphasis on comprehension

A. I never advocated for the Singapore system - just used it as an example.

B. Didn't I acknowledge that it could be argued that alcohol was the initial pre-cursor...I sure thought I did.

C. I don't remember advocating for prohibition either...now did I? But you are demonstrating precisely the knee jerk reaction that I have described - pot is fine for you, so it must be fine for everyone in you mind, and any rational discussion about its potential dangers must be met with rabid dissent. That type of closed minded attitude (on any topic) terrifies me.

Ok, now that you've re-read it, lets discuss incarceration. For my acquaintances, I readily admit its a short term solution. I'm going to make an assumption here...that you really aren't close to anyone who is addicted to opiates. Because from where I'm standing, I'm 90% certain that both of these people will be fucking dead within 5 years...I've looked into in patient therapy, naxolene programs, etc.....none of this matters because they all require the addict to actually want to get sober. Frankly my only hope for them is that they get arrested and spend a significant portion of time in jail or prison. I even told the bondsman to revoke D@ckhead's bond and apprehend him at the last hearing he actually attended....but he refused to do it.

I actually would love a system that replaces jail time with compulsive re-hab...monies that would have been spent on incarceration could be applied towards inpatient treatment, or at least a naxolene program...and you'd be in a state of parole, and subject to drug testing on a very regular interval. But since that doesn't seem to be an option right now, I just want them behind concrete walls, where the needles won't find them.

Is marijuana addictive....for some people? You of course cite a generic universe of failed studies...whatever. I will relate a documentary I once saw. The topic of the documentary was how hard it was for young people to get started in life in the USA. Along the way, they started following a young couple. The girl was pregnant and underage. The guy was 18...which was a big problem, since he had been arrested on a drug charge and was now subject to seeing a parole officer on a regular basis....this really cut into his partying. The documentary chronicled their on and off relationship, and the run up to the birth of the baby. The stress was killing the guy...and he kept pining for Marijuana. The documentary featured 'diary' sessions, where he spoke to the camera about how badly he wanted to smoke. Now he had been able to smoke occasionally - as soon as he was done seeing his PO for the month, e would go out and party...banking on it all getting out of his system by the next time he got tested. But here he sat, less than a week before his next PO visit...the stress was getting to him...and he absolutely HAD to smoke. He acquired money, and made his way to where he normally bought his marijuana. In an unusual move, the producer behind the camera started pleading with him - establishing the fact that, if he smoked, it was an absolute certainty that he would fail his piss test, and miss the birth of his child. The guy understood very clearly...but he COULD NOT resist. So he smoked, failed the test, got arrested, and missed the birth of his child.

Go ahead - tell me that guy wasn't addicted.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. Er, I've seen -actual- addiction. Do some people use marijuana habitually? Sure.

However, in terms of physiological addictiveness, THC is nothing like opiates, or alcohol for that matter. The DTs can kill. How many people have died from marijuana "withdrawls"?

Your argument is "heroin addiction is terrible! Therefore, pot". Do you see where that logic breaks down?

If you've acknowledged that alcohol "could be argued" to be the logical precursor, why aren't you out complaining about the 50 states where it is legal, as opposed to the two where Pot is?

Fine, you obviously have enough vested in the drug war, emotionally or otherwise, to come over here from the gungeon and agitate for it.

I support treatment on demand for opiate addicts. I support legalization, regulation, and taxation for marijuana. Why? Because marijuana isn't heroin.

[wercal]

11. Setting up strawmen...

"How many people have died from marijuana "withdrawls"? "

Why would I answer that? Did I ever make any claims whatsoever about deaths from marijuana withdrawals? Of course not. So why did you bring it up. Parenthetically, I really don't how many people, if any, die from heroin withdrawals...but I am quite certain that its the heroin that kills most often, not the withdrawals. But why split hairs.

"you obviously have enough vested in the drug war"

Since its obvious, could you please point out precisely what I have 'vested' in the drug war? I bet you can't.

"...to come over here from the gungeon"

Ah....the gungeon 'diss'. You know what? The only place I ever go on this board is the 'latest threads' forum...I honestly don't even know how to find the Gungeon. But, it turns out that a lot of the threads I respond to originate out of there...so I just must spend my days masturbating with an AR-15 in my hand, right? First of all, you are making my point - trying to insult me instead of having a rational discussion about drugs. Secondly, its a bad attempt at an insult. As far as I know, the president, vice president, the last Democrat president, the last unsuccessful Democrat presidential contender all have one thing in common - they go on the campaign trail as gun enthusiasts and supporters of the second amendment. So I really don't understand why a clique of people think they have carte blanche to impugn gun owners.

Now you never answered my question - was the guy who smoked pot before seeing his PO, guaranteeing he would miss the birth of his child, addicted? I won't hold my breath.

As to this: Your argument is "heroin addiction is terrible! Therefore, pot". ,

you have completely missed my point.

You have illustrated why my point is more important than ever, but missed it all the same.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. An 18 year old with shitty decision making skills? Well, that proves -something-...

I mean, the reality of that situation is, it was prohibition and parole which kept that kid from the birth of his child. I think its also arguable that the real crap decision making came in when the 18 yr old decided to become a parent at that age. I havent known a single 18 yr old in my life that was ready for that.

Sure, but blame the weed.

As for the rest of it- you're lauding singapore's supposed lack of heroin addiction (not surprising, when they give the death penalty for drug crimes) but you're not advocating their crazy-ass "solutions". You're complaining about legal pot in CO, but you say you don't support prohibition. You object to ridiculous conflations of your views around addiction, yet you're bringing up junkies in a thread about pot.

As for the rest of it, I'm simply not big on wasting my time. I've been around the block with DU long enough to know what it means if I google someone's username, and the first thing that comes up is a Zimmerman OP. I don't "impugn gun owners" but I find it extremely fucking hard to take anyone seriously who whines on one hand about folks legally smoking weed (HALP!!!) and then turns around and gets all "FREEEDOM!" On the topic of the 2nd Amendment.

I personally think gun control is a loser at the federal level and it's never been a front-burner for me, but give me a fucking break. No one has ever walked into an elementary school and killed 20 kids with a grafix bong.

[wercal]

16. Just because you say it, it doesn't make it true

"you're lauding singapore's supposed lack of heroin addiction"

You see, this is the part where you show exactly where I 'lauded' anything about the system in Singapore. If you can't (and trust me you can't), then you are just making up words to shove in my mouth. Bad form.

"No one has ever walked into an elementary school and killed 20 kids with a grafix bong."

Since you brought it up. Trivia question:

What was the deadliest school attack in US history?

This will actually be a good test on your closed mindedness. Will you persist in your belief that guns are responsible for the worst one? Or will you look it up and enlighten yourself?

I think I know the answer.

But if I'm wrong.....Bath School Disaster.

Now I've got to run and get a hair cut. But there are several incomplete assignments outstanding:

1. I asked, but you did not respond - did I not bring up alcohol before you did? And wasn't it inappropriate for you to excoriate me for leaving alcohol out of the discussion?

2. I asked, but you have not confirmed - your assertion that I advocated for prohibition was false, an unsubstantiated...correct?

3. The addictive 18 year old - you've deflected the question, but never answered it. Was he addicted to pot?

4. Do you confirm that you incorrectly set up a strawman argument concerning death from marijuana withdrawals?

No partial credit...really just yes or no answers will suffice. That will you'll...err....avoid putting more words in my mouth that aren't there.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. "persist in your belief that guns are responsible for the worst one"... Did I say that?

Kinda funny that you're accusing ME of putting words in your mouth.

Also, digging up ONE school massacre from nearly 100 years ago that DIDN'T involve guns, doesn't exonerate them or somehow make some point about relative social harm between guns and pot. I'm not really sure what your point is- oh, yeah, people have been killed by other things besides guns, so guns are great? Sure, dude.


1. You brought up alcohol, and you were also complaining about pot being legal in CO and it being a "gateway" drug, you know, on the basis of your vast anecdotal experience which says that it was the smoking of pot which caused the people that you know who are junkies, to become that. Yet you didn't complain that alcohol is legal. Why the disconnect? And no, it wasn't "inappropriate", sorry. If you can't handle people disagreeing with you, you probably don't belong on the intertubes.

2. I don't know what your position on marijuana prohibition is. Please, enlighten me.

3. "Was he addicted to pot"? Addiction is a label that can be applied to a wide range of behaviors, sometimes (to my mind) incorrectly. I've seen (despite your presumptive assertion to the contrary) severe physical addiction in individuals. To me, an 18 year old making a shitty decision regarding his parole officer does not indicate "addiction", it indicates shitty decision making. Which is pretty fucking endemic to 18 yr. olds. Again, I don't see anything saying "addiction". I see someone making a stupid call. By any yardstick, people don't have withdrawl symptoms from THC. Quitting pot "addiction" is not the medical event that quitting alcohol or opiate addiction is. I think lumping those substances together, is ludicrous.

4. No, because your entire point in this thread is to try to point up some ludicrous fucking bogeyman around pot and some imaginary relationship to heroin addiction. If that's NOT your point in this thread, maybe you can clarify what is.

[Tsiyu]

39. Kudos for staying with that convoluted blather

I've used cannabis off and on for years, yet have never once tried heroin.

Most of the people I know who use cannabis have never used heroin.

As for the loser relative your new friend has, he's addicted to whatever he can get his hands on. He needs therapy, not solitary confinement.

It's the system - locking him up and shaking him down for addiction - that keeps him from his life.

And if anyone thinks prisons don't have plenty of drugs, or thinks prison is the best place for an addict to come clean, it's just hard to take that person very seriously.

Anyhoo, thanks for your thoughtful responses to the nonsense.

[nomorenomore08]

31. I think the problem is you seem to exhibit the same almost unconscious pro-alcohol, anti-pot

bias that (frankly) most Americans do. Even though alcohol has been shown to be a far more harmful substance in virtually every respect.

Are a certain percentage of people capable of "addiction" to marijuana? Sure, just as they're prone to dependency on substances in general, having a naturally addictive personality. But comparing marijuana dependency - with its attendant, rather mild side effects - to opiate addiction or full-blown alcoholism honestly borders on the absurd.

[seveneyes]

18. One should never imply that marijuana use leads to heroin use

Aside from being completely wrong, it will just give the anti pot authoritarians more ammunition to promote their idiocy. Way too many jurisdictions harassing people as it is, and costing them money and comfort in life. It's hard enough to make it in this environment as it is. Don't make pot use another hell on Earth.

[RainDog]

19. Thanks for your thoughtful reply

Last edited Tue Apr 8, 2014, 11:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Singapore has not eliminated drug use - even with a death penalty for possession over x amt qualifying as dealer, not user, but they have reduced use by two thirds, according on one source - from 6000 to 2000 over twenty years (and more recent stats below.

Some call it "Disney With the Death Penalty" because of its clean streets and oppressive laws - but they haven't eliminated drug use - people still drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, and gamble (the only non-drug activity currently considered an addictive behavior by the psy manual folks here.

It's also one of the nations with the fastest growing elderly population, fwiw. Arrests for new drug users is greatest among those under 29, which matches every other nation, no matter the law. They're importing people to work there, as well, and there is resentment about foreign workers. It's not exactly Disney, even with draconian laws - tho it does have better stats than the U.S. for health care.

But, like the U.S., it classes marijuana in the dangerous category, along with heroin, tho our own drug policy people admit cannabis is about as addictive as coffee - and less dangerous than legal substances like alcohol and tobacco.

http://www.cnb.gov.sg/drugsituationreport/drugsituationreport2012.aspx
Stemming the supply of drugs from making its way into Singapore and intensive enforcement efforts inland remain key priorities for CNB. In 2012, CNB conducted 49 major operations, dismantling 22 drug syndicates. The intensive all-round enforcement efforts saw a record seizure of drugs in 2012. The estimated street value of the drugs seized in 2012 amounted to S$18.3 million, 14% higher than the estimated S$16 million in 2011. In particular, CNB seized a record 50.84kg of crystal methamphetamine (‘Ice’) in 2012, of which, about 43kg or 85% of it was not intended for the local market.

Here's some of what I could find on their drug policy:

*The Misuse of Drugs Act in Singapore allows the police to search anyone they deem to be suspicious of drug use or trafficking without a warrant.

*Police can demand a urinalysis, and the failure to comply carries an automatic presumption of guilt.

*A conviction for trafficking of drugs (which means anyone carrying a certain amount of drugs such as more than 500 grams of cannabis, 30 grams of cocaine, or 15 grams of heroin) carries a mandatory death penalty.

Amnesty International calculated that Singapore had more executions per capita than any country in the world. Of course, the U.S. has more prisoners per capita than any nation in the world, even without the death penalty for drugs that Newt Gringrich wanted to establish here in the 1990s - after he had used... sorry but this sort of rank hypocrisy makes me ill.

As far as your friends - yes, most people do not immediately jump into heroin but there is no causation b/c so many people use marijuana and never use anything else. Personally, I think most drug abuse is self medication and I'm not in favor of executing people for mental health issues - tho Singapore does offer treatment programs for drug use offenders under x amt. in possession.

But the issues for them are meth, etc. - again, cannabis is not the issue. It is not a "hard" drug - unless you want to classify coffee in the same way - and I would bet you that just about everyone drank a coke or coffee before they ever used marijuana - but I don't think caffeine is a gateway drug either.

But... what do you say.. even with the most severe punishment - people still use drugs. In Iran, even with severe punishment, people still drink alcohol and smuggle it in - people who, to me, are not doing anything worth the severe sentences they face. Iran does allow non-Muslims to produce and use alcohol - but it is entirely prohibited for Muslims - yet, still, among the most educated Muslims there, alcohol use has a cachet simply because it is not allowed and because such personal freedoms are highly valued by people in societies, even with repressive laws - and because people want it and the minority Kurdish population is willing to risk smuggling it.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/25/iranian-pair-death-penalty-alcohol
Under Iranian Sharia law, certain crimes such as sodomy, rape, theft, fornication, apostasy and consumption of alcohol for the third time are considered to be "claims of God" and therefore have mandatory death sentences.

Despite the ban, many people in Iran drink alcohol, usually a homemade liquor called araq, which contains 45% pure ethanol. It is usually mixed before consumption and can be dangerous because of the ethanol used in its distillation.

Hosts who throw parties call an alcohol vendor who delivers it to the door. Western alcohol is smuggled to Iran and can be found in underground markets but can be costly. People who belong to non-Muslim minorities such as Christians and Armenians, which are recognised by the authorities, are allowed to produce and consume alcohol in the country.

In a rare acknowledgement of Iran's hidden alcohol consumption, which has become - as Golnaz Esfandiari of Persian Letters puts it in her blog - a "means of escape" for the young from state restrictions, a senior official in the country's health ministry warned recently against reports of an increase in its use.

Despite such laws, Iran has the third highest rate of alcohol use, behind Turkey and Lebanon. It's not just the young using it, either.

So, I guess what I see is that, no matter the policy, drug use does continue (and, yes, alcohol is as much of a drug as cannabis - with more negative and fewer positive outcomes from use.)

People like to alter their consciousnesses sometimes - with a variety of substances - and the substance, not the act, should be the issue of importance in terms of relative safety for use - because this nation values personal freedoms like this - even when there may be negative outcomes for some - because the overarching issue is what harm such actions do to society, versus the kind of society you have to have to apply draconian laws. Me? I hate Disneyland. Never wanted to live in a gated or planned community - and I accept there is a level of risk that goes with freedoms. but that's just me.

nevertheless - the gateway theory, tho still heavily propagandized, has not been shown to be valid, unless, as I said, you also want to take all the coffee drinkers into acct.

that said - yes, I do accept that marijuana may pose a harm to some people - but, overall, it's the safest psychotropic substance known to humankind - and that alone makes me think it is wrong to imprison people for its use - or to make its use illegal.

[wercal]

24. Thanks for the detailed response

I want to make clear that I don't advocate for the Singapore system. It just provides an example of a society with a lower abuse rate....indicating that even people with highly addictive personalities can go through life without abusing drugs...simply because they aren't available.But I do understand that it can cut both ways, as it proves some people will risk death to use drugs.

On to my friend's situation. I have a sincere question. Hypothetically lets suppose that he spends half a year in rehab and kicks his heroin habit. Hes clean...hes got a job....hes been to therapy to sort through his father issues...in short, he is in a very good place. Then lets say he tells me that hes going to Colorado for the weekend to smoke pot.

What should be my expectation of the outcome?

Will he have a fun weekend, smoke some pot, but come back and go to work on Monday like nothing happened?

Or will he smoke pot and 'fall back into the lifestyle'? Will smoking pot make him feel carefree enough to decide to go find some heroin again?

From what I have observed with this person, my guess is that he could never ever smoke weed again, without starting heroin again. Admittedly the same is probably true with alcohol, but I'm concentrating on marijuana.

In short, can a recovering addict safely smoke marijuana.

[RainDog]

25. I'm not an addictions specialist

but I did have to learn quite a bit about it when a family member was dx'd as alcoholic - and, once the drinking stopped - bipolar disorder. I spent a lot of time learning about these situations. That family member had other family members (not related to me) who also had problems with alcohol and bipolar disorder. All to say - I don't come at this issue with the idea that there is no such thing as drug abuse - or that there are not situations where people are able to make changes in their lives for the better.

Their hope, their stake in life, really - is the most important factor, imo.

The amount of support they get matters. When my family member went through this - I quit drinking too, even tho I don't have a problem with alcohol. I did it to make it easer to quit and stay quit. But that person also had to deal with personal issues - and has to take medicine every day for mental health issues - and one of the biggest problems with mental health issues is when people think... hey, I'm okay now. I'll go back to what I was doing, or I don't need the medicine, etc.

So, I can't predict what will happen with your friend. Relapses for drug/alcohol users are common. People often require multiple stints in rehab, or other psychiatric and therapeutic treatments. It's part of a dangerous learning curve that makes you sometimes hold your breath in hopes someone will make it through safely.

Personally, if someone associated cannabis use with heroin use - I wouldn't think it's a good idea to make yourself vulnerable. That's what I would advise - but I also know that some people are able to switch and not go further. But I would err on the side of caution - it takes a lot to go through withdrawals and rehab. Why put something that worthwhile at risk? (That's a hard argument to get through to risk takers, tho.)

I didn't think you were suggesting the Singapore system is the thing - I just wanted to note that, even with their laws, they still have drug use - and have a level of "guilty till proven innocent" that offends my sensibilities b/c of my own cultural beliefs.

[RainDog]

34. I forgot to note that 50% of the population drinks

in a given year, according to their stats, and about 70% of the population has been an alcohol user at some point.

http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/sgp.pdf


- again, to say - they have not eliminated drug use - they've eliminated choice - and I say choice b/c marijuana is a better choice than alcohol - it has different effects that generally do not lead to violent or disruptive behavior, for instance.

[wercal]

38. I've never quite understood the alcohol comparisons...

But I'll go down that road.

Two years ago on Christmas Eve, a liquor store clerk in my town was shot and killed by a.drunk who needed a drink.

Three years ago in my town, two teens killed a man on the high school grounds in a marijuana deal gone wrong.

And this is fairly constant. We average around one murder a month - the vast majority of them are easily traceable to drug use.

What does this tell me? People can become so dependent on something that they are willing to kill for it....and that includes alcohol and marijuana. So they both can be destructive - and alcohol's bad effects shouldn't cause us to overlook potential problems with marijuana....if people will kill for it, that gives me pause.

And I'm not trying to be fippant....but nobody in my town in the last twenty years has been so desperate for coffee....ice cream....food for their family...to kill. Juwt drugs (to include marijuana) and alcohol.

[RainDog]

40. That's a false equivalence

the first is about a substance and the second is about an illegal business deal with no process to resolve disputes in courts, so street justice or lack of is how issues are settled.

but, of course, those making the deal could be users of other things. I don't know.

but the second example does not demonstrate addiction, unless business is an addiction.

The alcohol comparisons come from studies that indicate the relative addictiveness of things and associated behaviors. Alcohol is considered a more addictive substance.



Alcohol, not marijuana, for instance, is correlated with domestic abuse. Alcohol consumption can kill you in one sitting. Marijuana consumption cannot because the amount required to reach a toxic level is physically impossible, in natural form, tho probably one of these days someone will try to consume 1500 lbs of cannabis reduced via extraction to something consumable in 15 minutes - but that's not likely. Alcohol consumption carries with it various health concerns over time. Cannabis consumption does not - beyond a potential risk of schizo-affective disorders in someone whose family already demonstrates a propensity for such mental health problems. (The expert on mj in GB, Roger Pertwee, has stated there is no validity to the claim of a risk of psychosis for people who are not already at risk.)

So, from a harm reduction standpoint, you look at the positives and negatives and think that if someone is going to use a substance, they would be better off to use the less harmful one.

And the comparison also stems from unequal treatment under the law. There's no valid reason for something to be illegal when it does not present a great harm. The reason marijuana is illegal is because of its association with Latinos and African-Americans back in the 1930s - and, conveniently, the prohibitionists found another product for the service they offer... even when it's not asked for by the medical community. Prohibition of alcohol itself was associated with anti-immigrant fervor among rural Americans and was meant to punish Irish and German-American immigrants. This is why the KKK was big on prohibition.

When Democrats were the ones coddling the regressives among us - the fight in the party was between wets and drys - prohibitionists and anti-prohibitionists. Northern Democrats sided with the immigrants, while Southern Democrats sided with their midwestern KKK brethren. The end of prohibition was the beginning of a better era in Democratic politics as the segregationists, the separatists according to race and ethnicity lost power.

Overturning prohibition was FDRs promise to the wets in return for their support. The election of FDR began the move from populist/racist Democratic Party to a party that embraced human rights.

So, see, sometimes creating more freedom, less discrimination and a less punitive approach creates a better world for more people. The history of prohibition - and the comparison to alcohol, helps to demonstrate this, to me.

[Warren DeMontague]

43. The "Marijuana deal gone wrong" most likely was about money, not someone killing to get some pot.

The highly addictive drug in question there is green and comes from a plant, but that's about the only similarity.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. I would add this: and let me say that part of my initial response to you was due to the fact that

I don't respond well to drug war or marijuana prohibition tropes, and IMNSHO, the "pot leads to heroin addiction" is one of the oldest, and the worst- AND it is still trotted out by drug warriors desperate to maintain the main justification for the 60 Billion Dollar a year drug war gravy train, the lion's share of which goes to fighting pot smoking.

It's bad science, and it's trying to lay the blame for an admittedly addictive and dangerous drug, at the feet of one which is by most accounts neither, certainly not to the extent of many other substances.

Now, as to your personal question about your friend- you are, in my opinion, right to express concern. Of course, at the end of the day, as you are no doubt aware, an addict is going to be the one in charge of their own recovery. No one can make them get better, or get (or stay) sober. I strongly disagree with you, about incarceration- as well as about addicts not abusing drugs because they are not, or less, available. A determined addict is going to find a way- the 12 steppers have something in the book about being on an ice floe and having an Eskimo show up with a bottle of brandy. And while I've seen the undeniable health and social costs of alcohol and alcoholism, I don't believe that sticking everyone who is busted with a bottle of Jack Daniels, in prison for 10 years, is any sort of an answer OR would even be doing a favor to the worst alcoholics among them.

We need to treat addiction as a public health issue, not a LEO one.

That said, here's my take on your friend's situation: And like raindog, I am not an addiction specialist, but I have a ton of experience around addicts and recovery people, and am pretty familiar with the various treatment modalities. I think your friend is quite possibly taking a risk by going to Colorado to smoke pot, however, it is by no means certain that smoking pot will lead to a heroin relapse or even be problematic for him. (Also, I'm not sure where your friend lives, but unless he's going to Colorado to celebrate legalization from a sociopolitical perspective, it's kind of surprising that he feels he needs to go all the way there to smoke pot. There's not a state in the Union I've ever been where finding pot to smoke has been a problem, despite it being illegal) The psychology of relapse is complicated; and among other things peoples' sobriety can depend on their definition thereof. If he's active in a 12 step group or other abstinence-based recovery program, they may be defining recovery as total abstinence from all mind-alterants, although where the line for that ends is even fuzzy among those folks- I've known 12 steppers who felt they needed to abstain from caffeine, even, although that is far and away not the norm I've encountered. But if that's the case, he should be running it by his group and his sponsor, not you- and any group worth its salt would already be all over it IMHO.

And for some addicts, any use of something like pot, or alcohol, is definitely enough to swing the door open to their other addictions- not just for the ones who have defined sobriety as total abstinence, but because for others that use can lead to other use. This is not something intrinsic to the substances themselves, like I said, I think "pot leads to heroin" is a trope- although certainly with something like alcohol, there is a reduction in judgment and a "fuck it" attitude that can come along with the substance... however, absolutely anyone with addiction issues ought to be extra careful when messing around with anything. If your friend is going into it without some measure of checking himself, I would be concerned- at the very least he should be able to acknowledge that he might be putting himself in a sticky situation with potential for relapse-related danger.

An addict who is honest with themselves and committed to long-term recovery will, in my mind, accept this as sort of a "duh", no-brainer proposition, and say "yeah I realize I need to stay extra on my toes around this, even though pot was never my problem" ... many addicts will stay away from stuff like pot even though it's not problematic for them, just because they're careful about those things. And an addict who is immediately looking for a different mind-alterant after not a ton of sober time, I would say, is also courting trouble, because they do not sound like someone who is finding peace and happiness in sobriety or abstinence.

[Glassunion]

3. Yep... And masturbation leads to blindness.

[Warren DeMontague]

5. That explains why I'm reading DU in braile.

[RainDog]

20. I wish I could read this...

[Warren DeMontague]

22. I want to know what "name removed" said.

Nah, actually, I probably don't.

[RainDog]

26. something about making money in your spare time

by typing in braille for the internet?

[Warren DeMontague]

45. I said the "Z" word

it's like catnip for trolls.

[RainDog]

48. Zapata?

[Sissyk]

32. sshhhhh

Hopefully, the library is closed for the night.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. Ah, but then why was Mr. Magoo such a god-damn stud?

Riddle me that.

[eShirl]

6. if people could control pain w/ medicinal pot and avoid opioids (sp?) in the first place

there might be fewer painkiller addicts ready to try heroin

[Warren DeMontague]

7. Yeah, that's the rational, science based attitude.

Especially given that kicking a THC habit is generally way fucking easier than kicking an opiate addiction.

[Nevernose]

27. FWIW, not all pain can be controlled with pot

I've found that it's good for aches and pains, but on those occasions when I have truly severe back pain, or major dental work done, only opiates can touch it. I also avoid weed almost entirely (I think I've smoked three times in the last decade) because I don't like smoking it. Too much inflammation. I could get a prescription for edibles, but my state still doesn't actually allow people to purchase legally and getting a prescription is expensive and difficult.

I just get frustrated that occasionally I have severe pain, there is medication to treat that severe pain, and doctors will not prescribe even small amounts of said medicine.

[Warren DeMontague]

44. I agree with this, as well.

We should not be in a situation where doctors are terrified to adequately manage pain because of the DEA.

[FiveGoodMen]

10. Based on personal experience, it must take a LLLLLLOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGGG time to do so.

[nomorenomore08]

33. I'm one of the supposed "gateway" folks who progressed from weed to smack - though really

more like weed to hallucinogens to coke to smack - but I don't blame marijuana in the slightest for what happened to me, and it was in fact partly thanks to smoking weed that I was able to quite opiates.

[spanone]

13. 'gateway' bullshit

[edbermac]

14. Marijuana usage leads to something worse than heroin.

PLAYING THE PIANO!!

[Downwinder]

17. Cancer leads to heroin derivative use.

Lets ban it.

[gulliver]

23. The drug laws lead to heroin.

People go to the black market dealer to buy marijuana and that same person has heroin sitting right next to it on the tray. Legalize marijuana, and drug dealers won't have their profit gateway.

[phleshdef]

28. Most marijuana users do NOT want to stick a needle in their arm...

...and inject something they could become instantly addicted to and physically dependent on. Most of us who are adults and know even a tiny bit about drugs know that heroin is rock bottom type shit that you will most likely need supervised medical treatment to ever get off of it. We know that heroin can easily be dirty and kill you if you get a bad dose.

A lot of people who decide to try marijuana do so because they know they will likely survive it, that it won't kill them, that they aren't going to overdose on it or risk delirium tremors trying to quit.

[RainDog]

30. That's what I see, too

and like gulliver, above, I think removing cannabis from illegal markets would eliminate an outlet to "try this." But, as I understand it, most heroin users these days are coming to it b/c they can't get (regulated) opiate pharmaceuticals (a better option, imo, because of known qualities, strength, etc.)

I was just a little gobsmacked to see anti-legalization zealots glom onto the heroin problem as anything other than a financial decision - it's not a negative that more pot is being grown in conditions that require information about its growth, potency, etc.

Also - the "it's so much stronger" claim now overlooks that people know this and they reduce their consumption (tho, from what I have heard, but cannot know from personal experience, edibles are much easier to overdo - which for most people would mean they would have a long peaceful sleep - but people who smoke or vape have heard for years that cannabis is more potent - which is why it's sold by the bud, not the bag/lid of the olden days.)

This means, too, that people take in far fewer particulants.

[shanti]

36. Thank you

You are absolutely right. Nothing would make me try heroin.

[Jesus Malverde]

42. Many of todays heroin addicts

Became addicted to legal opiates for legitimate reasons. Legal opiates carry a premium on the black market. When an addict can not satisfy their habit they will move to heroin.

Agreed most people will not go out and try heroin "for fun".

[nomorenomore08]

29. "It's like squeezing a water balloon - the shape changes but the volume doesn't."

An absolutely perfect analogy for the impossibility of abolishing drug use.

[RainDog]

35. I definitely agree with the harm reduction model

but I'm one of those do-gooder bleeding hearts.

[nomorenomore08]

49. Me too. After a fashion. n/t

[Jesus Malverde]

41. Bump..nt

[bunnies]

47. Every junkie I know got there because of opioids.

Oxy's to be exact. Weed? Not fucking hardly. I cant believe theyre still pressing this shit.