Col

Your remark about the history of drug use inspired me, for I to tend to look to history for it's lessons.

I found a few sites but the most interesting was the Parliamentary Library site.

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bp/1996-97/97bp12.htm#LAWS

Three or four points stuck me as relevant.

Firstly, 'the typical dependent user being a middle-class, middle-aged woman or health professional. This 'user' profile remained largely unchanged until the 1960s.'

Secondly, 'the emergence of international conventions dealing with illicit drugs, played a major part in the development of illicit drugs laws and policies in Australia.' The work later insinuates the probihitionist wowsers in the US were the major force behind many of these conventions.

Thirdly, '...(the) early illicit drug laws had their origins in anti-Chinese prejudice and the temperance movement. They also heralded the emergence of the medical professional as a powerful pressure group,...'

I'd say there were quite a few assertions that could be made on the basis of the above researched information but one could not be that the drug laws were introduced to curtail extensive and/or disorderly use.

It goes way back even before that, The Moslem Assassins during the Crusades were drug users before they went into battle, That is where the word assassin comes from.

I'm all for the legalisation of illicit drugs. I will not, however, allow my tax-dollars to go to maintaining the hospital room of comatose 15 year old girls, and other expenses associated with addicts and abusers.

If we legalise drugs, we first need to privatise the health system so Australians do not have to pay for the mistakes of others.

That is right All, we need to become more literate before commenting on such deep subjects. History will reveal much about people simply by showing they have grown or became stagnate and contaminating. From Wikipedia, the Hashshashin (also Hashishin), or Assassins were a religious sect (often refered to as a cult) of Ismaili Muslims from the Nizari sub-sect with a militant basis, thought to be active in the 8th to 14th centuries as a mystic secret society specializing in terrorising the Abbasid elite with fearlessly executed, politically motivated assassinations (the word "assassin" is generally thought to derive from their name). Their own name for the sect was al-da'wa al-jadīda which means the new doctrine and they called themselves fedayeen from the Arabic which means one who is ready to sacrifice their life for a cause — that term has the modern connotation of "freedom fighter". The name Hashshashin was given to them by their Muslim enemies. The United States has a barbaric pasts as well.

I note Stan1 has felt the wrath of that inveterate warrior Col Rouge: I wouldnt lose any sleep over his critcism or views: like so many self made men as his posts suggest he his - among being an expert in so many fields - he will soon fall to the fate of so many other self made men and suffer at the hands of poor work manship.

Gosh I think he even accused you of "hubris"! Kettles and blackness are brought immediately to mind.

He is not alone however in holding entire classes of people in contempt - it is as much that attitude that fosters abberrant behaviour in others as does any single choice "to do the wrong thing".

The act of taking narcoitcs for recreation is small beans when compared to the act of consuming alcohol for not dissimilar reasons - and inspite of the crime associated with narcotics the cost to the community is relatively small when comapred to alcohol and what it does.

As a community we endorse drug taking, we advertise it, we foster it - large fortunes have been built upon it- legally. Bootleggers were once criminals now people with a similar bent (making booze) head corporations like Southcorp.

It would seem those opposed to regulating what is currently illegal dont like that class of people whose preferred tipple comes in narcotic form more than they oppose the notion of drug taking it self.

S P, I have never heard of a violent act or assault as the result of smoking a cigarette, and alcohol is a drug, but in moderation is also good for you, your GP will confirm that, But, how do you regulate the effects of Narcotics by Moderation, you can not, and the immediate damage it does to Brain cells just by the very nature of the Hit, and the consequences to the rest of the Human biological system.
Besides, have you checked the data for Taxation, what the Government collects in taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, if drugs were so good for you, they would legalize it, and collect an ever bigger tax haul. Some what of an Oxymoron, But:
I would hypothesize why some sections would like to legalize Drug use, considering the nature of existentialism and the dark side of that nothingness, a substitute to ease the realms of reality and to enhance the surrealism of such a void. Escapism. (Cheap shot, but I wonder).
People should choose life, not death, although we all get to that point eventually, I see no need to speed the process up