Actually actually....The genesis of the modern day "War on Drugs" occurred in 1970 when Nixon created the DEA and successfully lobbied Congress to pass the Controlled Substances Act.
And Nixon's motivations were made quite clear once we talked to his colleagues after he left office and of course after we were able to listen in on the Haldeman tape recordings.
Simply put, Nixon (in his own words) felt "we need to get a handle on the niggers and the hippies."
As the 1960s wound down, far too many young adult Americans were smoking pot and suddenly becoming a lot less interested in picking up a gun and shooting brown and yellow skinned people on behalf of Uncle Sugar.
The second underlying motivation for the WOD in the early 1970s was the creation of the DEA itself.
For at least a decade, the CIA had been running dope (mainly heroin, but also marijuana) into the U.S. from Southeast Asia. But doing so of course exposed them to possible public censure if they were ever openly exposed.
Once the DEA was formed and funded, American "agents" could travel back and forth to Southeast Asia (and later on South America and the Middle East) for the supposed purpose of "fighting the illegal drug trade".
In fact, their primary mission was to run drugs and make sure that the US got their chunk of the literal billions of dollars being cranked out by the illicit drug cartels.
In the 21st century, that type of clandestine cohabitation with the drug cartels is not so easy to hide. And as we see in Mexico, there's a shrinking interest on the part of the American people to allow the illicit drug cartels to remain empowered.
Actually, if you had paid attention to the lead posts in this Thread, you would see that the topic has nothing to do with whether using marijuana is a good or a bad idea.
The Topic is to discuss which is preferable - to have the marijuana trade controlled by cartels, organized crime and street dealers? Or to have the trade controlled and legally regulated just as we do with 99.99% of all other drugs.
I'm sure that you CK, would agree that it's much better to sensibly control and regulate a drug market than it is to leave it 100% in control of the street.
ck, that's your opinion that people who smoke pot haven't grown up. Don't project your own experiences on those of us who have experiences different from yours. That being that smoking marijuana isn't just some way to rebel against our parents or authority.
Some of us partake for the same reason that social drinkers partake of alcohol. You see not all of us do it to rebel. We just like the effects that it gives us when we partake.
Smoking marijuana on an occasional basis isn't more any harmful than social drinking.
I read a very interesting and well written article recentley that claimed that the DuPonts were/are very instrumental in keeping MJ banned.
They of course control 90% of all the synthetic textile trade.....nylon, polyester, etc., while other families control the cotton trades.....hemp is a major competitor and is very cheap to cultivate. Hemp is also a fantastic supplement
They of course control 90% of all the synthetic textile trade.....nylon, polyester, etc., while other families control the cotton trades.....hemp is a major competitor and is very cheap to cultivate. Hemp is also a fantastic supplement
My pop is a retired pharmacist. He became a pharmacist in 1956. I'm going to ask him if he remembers changes in how the store operated and if things tightened up during that time. I remember drugs were graded Class 1 through Class 5 but I don't know when that started. I know in the 80s when I visited him once Class 2 drugs were always locked up in a special drawer. When someone that wasn't a regular customer would come in with an Rx for a Class 2 drug he always called the Dr. just to make sure it was legit.
I'm remembering something else. In the early 70s a lot of women were on speed, legally. Diet pills like Dexamyl. All that shit disappeared by the mid 70s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexamyl
Junkies were always trying to get ahold of Tuinal and Secanol. And Dilaudid. I can't remember what class drugs they were, but it didn't matter as junkies would mix shit and shoot it. I was so glad when my dad finally got out of North Philly. I feared for him. Funny though, I'm sure he'd go apeshit if his kids ever took pills, but the smoke rising from the den up toward their bedroom never bothered my parents.
QL I don't think most pharmacies have had cocaine in stock for 50 years. Now when I went to visit him in the late 60s at work there was a coke machine with glass bottles, and coca cola was made with real cane sugar at that time and I loved that machine. It tasted great, but Coca-Cola removed the coke out of the Coke a looooong time ago.
Cocaine is a precursor for several oft-used anesthetics used in surgery, but no, it won't be found "raw" within a pharmacy.
====
JH, the cannabis west of the Rockies, all the way up through BC is likely the most consistent higher grade available in North America
The Mexican cartels are still moving plenty of schwag and brick weed nationwide, but for the more discerning adult consumer, it's hard to beat what can be had out west.
====
JH, the cannabis west of the Rockies, all the way up through BC is likely the most consistent higher grade available in North America
The Mexican cartels are still moving plenty of schwag and brick weed nationwide, but for the more discerning adult consumer, it's hard to beat what can be had out west.
Scott, agreed. Pharmacies do not have cocaine. I was simply making the point that there is a medical use for it which is why I couldn't understand all the furor over medical marijuana.
bar: not sure what you mean by "raw" but here is an excerpt (many can be found) that explain the use of cocaine in surgery:
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/874104-overview
Cocaine is an alkaloid derived from the leaves of the coca plant (Erythroxylon coca). It is the only naturally occurring local anesthetic in medical use today.
And, as a father of a young son, I might add that the idea of him having his life ruined by the legal system - and possibly jail - is much more terrifying than the possibility that he might experiment with drugs.
God Bless Willie Nelson. And Waylon Jennings, RIP.
And you aptly note the "furor" over medical marijuana. However, be assured that said furor is only being generated by a very tiny percentage of the population and their entire discussion can be broken down in less than 15 seconds by simply posing a single question (see below).
That's why in any scientific polling done nationwide, an average of over 75% of voters respond with Yes to the question, "Should marijuana be legally available?"
Now that's certainly incredibly strong support.
But if you want to jack it up to the 90% range, you ask the question in inverse fashion.
"Do you believe that Americans who use marijuana as medicine should be arrested, prosecuted as criminals and subjected to time in prison?"
Staunch Prohibitionists are the only people who will answer Yes to that question.
And my advice is that if you know anyone like that in your life, get as far away from them as possible.
That's why in any scientific polling done nationwide, an average of over 75% of voters respond with Yes to the question, "Should marijuana be legally available?"
Now that's certainly incredibly strong support.
But if you want to jack it up to the 90% range, you ask the question in inverse fashion.
"Do you believe that Americans who use marijuana as medicine should be arrested, prosecuted as criminals and subjected to time in prison?"
Staunch Prohibitionists are the only people who will answer Yes to that question.
And my advice is that if you know anyone like that in your life, get as far away from them as possible.
