well , after a long thinking, I will try to put it in a formula
alcohol
100 cube cm needs x amount of customs. taxes,police,producing, transporting ,over whole control ----
to reach 1person high effect
narcotics
100 cube cm needs 20 x or may be more of customs. taxes,police,producing, transporting ,over hole control ----
to reach 100 person high effect
so the efforts for the second case is unbearable
but for alcohol it is bearable profitable for the governments and the production cycle
2007-07-27 16:19:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The government's definition and the scientific definition of the term "narcotic" are completely different.
Actual scientific definition of "narcotics": An addictive drug, such as opium, that reduces pain, alters mood and behavior, and usually induces sleep or stupor. Natural and synthetic narcotics are used in medicine to control pain.
The bureaucratic definition of "narcotics": Any drugs which cannot be legally possessed, sold, or transported except for medicinal uses for which a physician or dentist's prescription is required.
There you have it. The only difference between alcohol and narcotics is that one is completely legal (without requiring any special permission) and the other is not. And there is a cultural bias to this. You can bet that if alcohol had been discovered only 50 years ago or so, it definitely would have been classified by the feds as a narcotic and banned for use by the general public. This double standard is pretty inconsistent and hypocritical, and they really should regulate both in the same manner - either ease the restrictions on drugs now classified as narcotics, or classify alcohol as a narcotic and restrict it the same way as the others.
2007-07-27 14:44:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Alcohol And Narcotics
2016-10-22 04:31:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's mostly tradition. Alcohol has been used by human beings for thousands of years in virtually every culture. Narcotics, not so much, in fact, some are newly-developed synthetics. In a sense, there were just fewer people to object to anti-drug laws compared to Prohibition (and Prohibition still stuck around for a while).
2007-07-27 11:57:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
im against it all there is no point to drinking smoking snoorting or injecting any thing that gives you a temporary high and then makes you hurt and ache the day after and pluss smoking burns your throat drinking is taste nasty needles are scary and they all make you stupid shorten your life and give you hang overs or cravings its just not worth your up to a day high!
2007-07-27 12:03:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋