Dobbed in weed-growing parents

[Fergus]

yes, but you didn't aswer the question, HOW does person A taking drugs, cause "harm to others"? or even self? asides from the pyhysiological harm caused by injestion (smoke, collapsed veins, whatever)

again, if i smoke a joint and kick you in the balls.. is it the weed's fault, or yours, for making me want to kick you in the balls?
if i shoot some charlie, and go swing a shotgun in a shopping mall, is it the coke's fault?, or the guy that let me into the mall with a shotgun?

it seems you can't qualify or quantify the "harm to others" and "harm to self" will be subjective and vary from person to person...

Of course it will vary from person to person, that doesn't make it any less measurable.
Here's the criteria FYI

Evaluation criteria and their definitions

Drug-specific mortality
Intrinsic lethality of the drug expressed as ratio of lethal dose and standard dose (for adults)

Drug-related mortality
The extent to which life is shortened by the use of the drug (excludes drug-specific mortality)—eg, road traffic accidents, lung cancers, HIV, suicide

Drug-specific damage
Drug-specific damage to physical health—eg, cirrhosis, seizures, strokes, cardiomyopathy, stomach ulcers

Drug-related damage
Drug-related damage to physical health, including consequences of, for example, sexual unwanted activities and self-harm, blood-borne viruses, emphysema, and damage from cutting agents

Dependence
The extent to which a drug creates a propensity or urge to continue to use despite adverse consequences (ICD 10 or DSM IV)

Drug-specific impairment of mental functioning
Drug-specific impairment of mental functioning—eg, amfetamine-induced psychosis, ketamine intoxication

Drug-related impairment of mental functioning
Drug-related impairment of mental functioning—eg, mood disorders secondary to drug-user's lifestyle or drug use

Loss of tangibles
Extent of loss of tangible things (eg, income, housing, job, educational achievements, criminal record, imprisonment)

Loss of relationships
Extent of loss of relationship with family and friends

Injury
Extent to which the use of a drug increases the chance of injuries to others both directly and indirectly—eg, violence (including domestic violence), traffic accident, fetal harm, drug waste, secondary transmission of blood-borne viruses

Crime
Extent to which the use of a drug involves or leads to an increase in volume of acquisitive crime (beyond the use-of-drug act) directly or indirectly (at the population level, not the individual level)

Environmental damage
Extent to which the use and production of a drug causes environmental damage locally—eg, toxic waste from amfetamine factories, discarded needles

Family adversities
Extent to which the use of a drug causes family adversities—eg, family breakdown, economic wellbeing, emotional wellbeing, future prospects of children, child neglect

International damage
Extent to which the use of a drug in the UK contributes to damage internationally—eg, deforestation, destabilisation of countries, international crime, new markets

Economic cost
Extent to which the use of a drug causes direct costs to the country (eg, health care, police, prisons, social services, customs, insurance, crime) and indirect costs (eg, loss of productivity, absenteeism)

Community
Extent to which the use of a drug creates decline in social cohesion and decline in the reputation of the community

CD 10=International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision. DSM IV=Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth revision

It's a bit more objective than some of the bizarre arguments in this thread:

"I don't think I harm people when stoned so it's safe for everyone"
"I know of two drug related deaths and no alcohol related deaths therefore drugs kill people and alcohol doesn't"
"If you haven't smoked pot your opinion on the topic is worthless"
"it has valid medicinal properties so it should be sold at dairies"

[Edbear]

Of course it will vary from person to person, that doesn't make it any less measurable.
Here's the criteria FYI

It's a bit more objective than some of the bizarre arguments in this thread:

"I don't think I harm people when stoned so it's safe for everyone"
"I know of two drug related deaths and no alcohol related deaths therefore drugs kill people and alcohol doesn't"
"If you haven't smoked pot your opinion on the topic is worthless"
"it has valid medicinal properties so it should be sold at dairies"

Hey! Everyone on KB is an expert, doncha know? Except of course, anyone who disagrees with the experts...

[Mushu]

This is sounding more and more like a religious debate, the uk crime and justice studies referred to above is interesting but I would like to see the research done by someone a bit more impartial.

Perhaps we should ask everybody where they stand on religion, that way we can ignore anybody who is not athiest or at least agnostic, because anybody that believes in the angry man in the sky is incapable of either practical research or thinking for themselves.

Edit: Whilst looking for myself within a couple of minutes I found this in a press release on the uk crime and justice site:
Among Professor Nutt's recommendations are:

1. Stopping the `artificial separation of alcohol and tobacco as non-drugs'. It will only be possible to assess the real harms of illicit drugs when set alongside the harms of other drugs `that people know and use', he writes.

2. Improving the public's general understanding of relative harms. He had previously compared the risks of taking ecstasy over the risks of horse-riding, he writes, because media reporting `gives the impression that ecstasy is a much more dangerous drug than it is'.

3. The provision of `more accurate and credible' information on drugs and the harms they cause. Drug classification based on the best research evidence would `be a powerful educational tool'. Basing classification on the desire `to give messages other than those relating to relative harms... does greater damage to the educational message', he argues.

Sent from my XT535 using Tapatalk 2

[Mushu]

I invite anyone here (both sides of the debate) to watch Penn & Tellers Bullshit, particularly season 2 episode 4, while their opinion is obvious, their research is undeniable

Also, The Union and Superhigh me

Sent from my XT535 using Tapatalk 2

[Madness]

Hey! Everyone on KB is an expert, doncha know? Except of course, anyone who disagrees with Me...

Fixed that for ya Ed.

[Grubber]

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=204351

Have you checked out your boy's eyes?

You should be sitting him down and asking him some very serious questions.

what a fuckin dweeb!
Go shoot me, he blinked!
Un fuckin believable, like i said before, you make a shot at my family, you do it at your peril you fuckin prick.
Happy to give you my address if you wish to call in cunt!
That's my Grandson, not that it's any of your fuckin business.
You are now on IGNORE!

[Katman]

You are now on IGNORE!

In capital letters?

[Grubber]

Yes. You clearly have no personal experience with pot if you think otherwise, which renders your other arguments invalid.

You know this how???

[Grubber]

Dinner was delicious, a nice cold Speights together and all while I was warm and fuzzy on cannabis. Sorry dude.

Guess I'm not getting invited back now.

And if id known, you wouldn't have been invited the first time, and yes the last.
Then you hopped on your fuckin bike and rode home. Drinking and smoking dope and you ride home. Pratt!
Awesome fella, well fuckin done. Just the type i don't need.
See everyone, you try to help someone out by inviting them into your home when they need a meal and a bed and this is what ya get.
Never trust a dope head, i think i have already said that aye!!

[Grubber]

Yup I'm telling you exactly that. Sure I could overindulge. But a toke or two or three eases my pain levels and makes me warm and fuzzy.

I believe you have another agenda, i can sympathise with that!

[Grubber]

I think any parents wiv young kids would deny that that is true.

Oh please, now you cant even tell the difference between a high and a sugar rush in a kid.
Try again! this time at least try and be sensible about it and then i might be prepared to at least read another post.

[Katman]

Drinking and smoking dope and you ride home.
See everyone, you try to help someone out by inviting them into your home when they need a meal and a bed and this is what ya get.

Really? Did he have the beer and the smoke before he left in the morning?

[Grubber]

They do if you don't maintain your usual dosage.

In you that may be, but in the norm it would definitely not.

[SMOKEU]

You know this how???

Because if you had ever had a sesh, you wouldn't be proving to everyone what an idiot you are by making such stupid comments.

Never trust a dope head, i think i have already said that aye!!

There's a big difference between a casual toker and "dope head", just like there is a difference between a casual drinker and an alcoholic. If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, then you're clearly not as smart as you think you are.

[Banditbandit]

i might be prepared to at least read another post.

Read !!!! I'll bet that will be a new experience for you !!!