It's crazy that cannabis is a schedule 1 drug. It's by far the safe way to manage chronic pain but federally illegal. I'm glad the states have the chutzpah to make it legal. The older I get the more I see how this country is run on money above everything else.
Kratom is great as medicine to wean people off opiates.
However, it absolutely shouldn't be used in a recreational setting as it currently is, served in kratom bars (though they like to use the name "Kava" in an attempt to fly under the radar).
Why would they sell it as Kava when Kratom is more expensive? I am on day 5 of getting off of Kratom. This smy second time around, and the first was horrendous. A couple of months ago a doctor prescribed Gabapentin and I've literally experience only 5% of the side effects of withdrawal. All the intense symptoms disappeared and I glided through this week.
I wonder why doctors prescribe Suboxone and Methadone, both highly addictive.
But I never said people sell kava as kratom. Selling Kratom in bars is against the law. Instead they set up “kava” bars in which they sell kratom and kava.
> Society has "agreed" that while those substances are dangerous, it is up to the individual to determine how they are consumed.
Unless you're under a certan age, or driving a car, or piloting a plane the next day, or etc etc.
And there is strong societal pressure against pregnant women drinking any alcohol at all despite there being no evidence that small amounts of alcohol are harmful during pregnancy.
My point is that society has not said you can do what you like with alcohol, and should not do so for opioids, and that the restrictions for opioids are going to be stronger than the restrictions for alcohol even if opioids become freely and legally available to all who need them.
I'm arguing against making drugs illegal to "protect" people.
I use kratom both for pain management and at times to take the edge off. That would be "recreational" at that point. I don't want you to be my nanny.
> Are you arguing that opioids should be served recreationally in bars
Maybe, actually. When my brother died of a heroin overdose it was ultimately his mistake but the "market" failed him because there were no standards for purity or strength.
Bear this in mind: heroin is illegal. My brother is dead. What protection was offered there? The cops laughed at another dead junkie.
Do you drink alcohol? Are you fat? Do you ride a bike without a helmet? Smoke cigars? Do rock climbing? Ride motorcycles? Skydive? etc. etc. etc. If so, you must now stop. I'll let you know what you can there going forward, thank you very much.
Are you aware of the history of drug prohibition in the fact that it had absolutely nothing to do with preventing self harm but was an excuse for using the laws for oppressing the underclass.
I know you are arguing in good faith with good intentions but you are horribly, dangerously wrong.
I'm sorry about your brother, but had there been no heroin to consume, he would never have been in a position to make the "ultimate mistake", as you put it.
People are stupid, kids are dumb, people are in great pain and want oblivion, people are bored, people just want to have a good time. There are numerous reasons people abuse drugs.
The greater the access to drugs, the greater the potential damage to drug consumers and people around them.
> I'm arguing against making drugs illegal to "protect" people.
Contrary to your comment on society not deeming alcohol worth banning, we actually ban those things in most situations due to the damage they do. We do that to protect people. Riding a bike without a helmet is against the law where I live, thankfully.
I like that there are laws that restrict what I, a grown man, can do. I don't think there's an inherent need to have the freedom to do anything I want. I can't shoot a man in the head, I can't rape and pillage, I can't take some drugs that science has proven that many humans don't have the capacity to safely consume on a recreational basis.
"It's my body and I'll do what I want with it. You're not my mom!!" isn't something I'd ever say. I live in a community. I have a family and friends.
> we actually ban those things in most situations due to the damage they do
We can disagree on personal liberties but not on history. The history of drug prohibition is rife with the oppression of minorities. Here's something to consider: http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/race-and-drug-war
> "It's my body and I'll do what I want with it. You're not my mom!!"
That's really patronizing and doesn't help your argument at all.
It's clear your mind is made up so I won't push the issue, but while you are well-intended you appear to be rather naive about this subject.
Being that your attitude helps prop up this madness and actually contributes to more misery, I can't help but strongly resent your nanny-state inclinations.
It will be interesting to see if they finally make kratom schedule 1. When they tried it last time, the public outcry was enough to stop it.
And I agree it would be awful if they did. Kratom is certainly not without addiction risk, but if you believe in harm reduction, it’s far better to have people taking it versus prescription opioids or heroin.
