The New Anti-Drug Commercial

[Dis]

who me?

anyway I am exaggerrating when i say they are stupid. They can't help their faulty genetic code. Also some studies have shown people who were abused as children have faulty pleasure receptors in the brain. So environment plays a role as well. Addicts literally can't help themselves. Only through extreme measures like massive self discipline and support groups can they succeed in staying clean.

Science has already shown evidence in an "addictive" gene within humans. and I can see firsthand how it works in my city. Nearly everyone in my city who gambles compulsively also smokes. Coincidence? I think not. And it doesn't take a genious to figure out my city also has a bad drug problem.

In time science may be able to affect brain chemistry and reduce the chances of addiction.

But I think it is necessary to be self aware. My father was an alcoholic. My brother uses drugs. I realize that I may too have an addict gene in my genetic code. I began to realize this in the navy. In 2 short years I nearly became addicted to alcohol. Technically they say I was addicted. But I think I stopped in time. I drink occasionally, but hardly more than 2 to 5 drinks a month.

My advice? know oneself. And don't put yourself in a situation to become addicted to someting.

[Berzerker]

Nearly everyone in my city who gambles compulsively also smokes. Coincidence? I think not.

Hehe, where are you? Bullhead City? Lost Wages?

I heard about a study done with monkees and cocaine where they found that the monkees fit into 2 social groups - the "ruling elite" (the dominate group) and the subordinate group. While all the monkees used the cocaine, the dominate group did not become addicted and used it "recreationally" while the subordinate group was much more prone to actual addiction.

[Dr Strangelove]

Wouldn't this prove that cocaine was merely another form of exploitation of the less fortunate classes?

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Berzerker
I heard about a study done with monkees and cocaine where they found that the monkees fit into 2 social groups - the "ruling elite" (the dominate group) and the subordinate group. While all the monkees used the cocaine, the dominate group did not become addicted and used it "recreationally" while the subordinate group was much more prone to actual addiction.

The Monkees? Jeez, they must really be hard up for cash if they're volunteering for scientific research.

[Berzerker]

[klesh]

Did the monkeys get their dope from OBL?

[Ramo]

I've read of the study as well. Fairly interesting, IMO.

Basically, the theory is that the dopamine receptor proteins of individuals become more active as individuals assume positions of dominance within social groups. This partially nullifies the physically addictive effect cocaine, which is a dopamine re-uptake inhibitor, has.

[Dr Strangelove]

Recalling my callowed days of youth, kids who did drugs generally were terrorists. Kids who do drugs generally can't stand anyone who doesn't. It's like they feel belittled by the other person's choice to not do drugs. They become very insistent that those who don't do drugs should try them and will resort to personal slurs and even violence. I don't think that this behavior is a result of the legal ban on the drug, but rather it may be a result of society's disapproval of drug use. Once drugs are legal your (my) kids will be even more at the mercy of kids who do drugs. Druggies might even get all anti-drug literature banned as slander.

[Berzerker]

Dr Strangelove -

Recalling my callowed days of youth, kids who did drugs generally were terrorists. Kids who do drugs generally can't stand anyone who doesn't. It's like they feel belittled by the other person's choice to not do drugs.

This wasn't my experience at all. I was into high school and college sports, and I, as a drug user, had contact with both the "jock" crowd and drug users. Many in the jock crowd freely expressed their disgust with drug users, while many jocks used drugs - alcohol and pot - and some drug users reacted negatively to the self-righteousness. I can't remember one "jock" who didn't use alcohol so the users of other drugs were justifiably repelled by their hypocrisy.

They become very insistent that those who don't do drugs should try them and will resort to personal slurs and even violence.

Oh yeah, I will beat you up if you don't try pot? Gimme a break! Personal slurs are a two-way street, who started the verbal war?

I don't think that this behavior is a result of the legal ban on the drug, but rather it may be a result of society's disapproval of drug use.

Hmm...not sure how to separate these since both are in effect, but we do see a minor backlash coming from many smokers who are reacting negatively to all the social pressure against them.

Once drugs are legal your (my) kids will be even more at the mercy of kids who do drugs.

Why? Are you incapable of raising your kids? When all drugs were legal, even for sale to children, child drug use was miniscule compared to today. History is not on your side...

Druggies

"Druggies"? Like I said, who started the verbal wars at your schools?

Druggies might even get all anti-drug literature banned as slander.

Like the slander of accusing "druggies" of "generally" being "terrorists"? Funny, you want them put in cages and you call them "terrorists"?

[mactbone]

Berzerker - When was the last time children had this much buying power? It's no coincidence that many things in society are geared to make children spend money. Pop culture, boy bands anyone?

Can you imagine the permanent damage suffered to anyone not even in puberty yet, if they were to use drugs, even on a semi-regular basis? We'd have brain damaged kids everywhere!

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Dr Strangelove -

This wasn't my experience at all. I was into high school and college sports, and I, as a drug user, had contact with both the "jock" crowd and drug users. Many in the jock crowd freely expressed their disgust with drug users, while many jocks used drugs - alcohol and pot - and some drug users reacted negatively to the self-righteousness. I can't remember one "jock" who didn't use alcohol so the users of other drugs were justifiably repelled by their hypocrisy.

-By my senior year I was 5'6" and weighed 140 pounds. I was no jock. In fact I'm willing to bet that jocks comprised only a small minority of even your school's population.


Oh yeah, I will beat you up if you don't try pot? Gimme a break! Personal slurs are a two-way street, who started the verbal war?

-They did. They want to know why you don't talk to them. They don't take "no" for an answer, and if you don't buy into their BS about how harmless their drugs are you get labeled as a "Jesus Freak", a "narc", or even a "homo". By comparison "druggie" is a mild slur.


Hmm...not sure how to separate these since both are in effect, but we do see a minor backlash coming from many smokers who are reacting negatively to all the social pressure against them.

-Be honest Berserker. Have you ever offered drugs to someone who subsequently turned you down? How did you feel afterwards? Have you ever pressured someone who didn't want to do drugs with you? Even if you haven't there are plenty who have.



Why? Are you incapable of raising your kids? When all drugs were legal, even for sale to children, child drug use was miniscule compared to today. History is not on your side...

-Even my children could succumb to threats and verbal abuse. When were all drugs legal? The Harrison act went into effect in 1914. At that time most kids didn't have purchasing power.
-History's not on my side? Geez, we haven't heard that line since the Nazis burst upon the German political scene!


"Druggies"? Like I said, who started the verbal wars at your schools?
-see above


Like the slander of accusing "druggies" of "generally" being "terrorists"? Funny, you want them put in cages and you call them "terrorists"?

[Ramo]

Recalling my callowed days of youth, kids who did drugs generally were terrorists. Kids who do drugs generally can't stand anyone who doesn't. It's like they feel belittled by the other person's choice to not do drugs.

Things have changed these past decades. Some of my best friends are heavy weed and ex users, while the only exceptionally dangerous drug I've tried is alcohol, and even then extremely rarely. I've never been pressured into using a drug by anyone.

[RGBVideo]

Cocaine supporting OBL?
Wasn't NA the only one which funded itself with drugs?

[Berzerker]

MacTBone -

Berzerker - When was the last time children had this much buying power?

Where do they get that buying power? From Mommy and Daddy? Drugs were relatively cheap when they were legal. It's the inflated cost of drugs that have created an incentive for farmers to grow these crops. When the profits are driven down and taken out of the hands of cartels by legalization, farmers will find food crops worth growing again. The US and foreign governments are even considering paying farmers to grow different crops.

It's no coincidence that many things in society are geared to make children spend money. Pop culture, boy bands anyone?

And the black market in drugs designed to supply adults has spilled over to children. We don't see the Marlboro Man and Uncle Bud walking about the school grounds selling their drugs. Back in the mid-80's, the feds and the states increased penalties for adults caught dealing drugs. The result was mass entry of minors into both the drug trade and gangs as many adults sought to avoid those penalties by recruiting minors exempted by the new laws. Not surprisingly, juvenile violence ballooned. In other countries where some drugs are legal for adults, teen use is lower than the US. I'd like for you'll who make these dire predictions to explain why India and Holland don't have rates of teen use that dwarf the US rates.

Can you imagine the permanent damage suffered to anyone not even in puberty yet, if they were to use drugs, even on a semi-regular basis? We'd have brain damaged kids everywhere!

You mean like all those "crack-babies"? Did you know most of those predictions turned out to be bogus? Why haven't we seen countless medical studies documenting the brain-damaged crack babies as they have aged? Because it was hysteria. Besides, I don't want my kids using cars, guns, tobacco, or alcohol, does that mean I have the moral authority to put the millions of adults who have these in cages. If a parent cannot raise their kid to avoid danger, then no law can.

Dr Strangelove -

In fact I'm willing to bet that jocks comprised only a small minority of even your school's population.

The "jocks" are part of a larger class of students - the "in" crowd. The non-"in" crowd that used drugs ("druggies") were looked down upon.

-They did. They want to know why you don't talk to them. They don't take "no" for an answer, and if you don't buy into their BS about how harmless their drugs are you get labeled as a "Jesus Freak", a "narc", or even a "homo". By comparison "druggie" is a mild slur.

And you were beat up by "druggies" for not wanting to use drugs? You said they did but mention only insults above. Maybe it was just the diversity of the city I grew up in, but I rarely heard anyone refer to a person as a "narc". The only people I saw seriously shunned were some drug users in the "out" crowd. And you're insulting people you never met, so how are you better than those who insulted you?

-Be honest Berserker. Have you ever offered drugs to someone who subsequently turned you down?

Several times perhaps.

How did you feel afterwards?

The same way I felt before offering. I didn't walk up to strangers in school asking them if they wanted to smoke a doobie. But I had friends who didn't smoke and when I offered as a courtesy and they turned down the offer, I didn't walk away in a huff or start insulting them. They had their reasons and that was good enough for me.

Have you ever pressured someone who didn't want to do drugs with you?

No.

Even if you haven't there are plenty who have.

Like I said, that hasn't been my experience.

[Berzerker]

Cocaine supporting OBL?

Wasn't NA the only one which funded itself with drugs?

There were two commercials - one claimed drug users "might" be funding the terrorists, and a second with "drug users" confessing to their support of Colombians in the drug trade and the rebels protecting them for money. But you're right, the NA was in on the drug trade and undoubtedly will be again as long as the profits created by the black market remain in place. I'm not sure why supporters of the drug war cannot see that it is their intrusion into the marketplace - prohibition - that has created the opportunities for terrorists, cartels, farmers, and rebels to make the enormous profits from drugs.

Ironically, the US government gave our money to the Taliban to fight a drug war and will do the same with the new Afghan government. The fact OBL and the Taliban was funded by US taxdollars and millions from diamonds and oil seems unimportant to the hypocrites pointing to drug users...