Re: ST7 Re: ST7 ST7 bonkers bonkers
".....What evidence do you have that the outcomes would be worse and that I would have to increase my tax contributions if these substances were available in a regulated environment ?" Ooh, you want me to prove a negative? Well, you could start with the history of heroin. It was first manufactured (as a patented product) by the German firm Aktiengesellschaft Farbenfabriken (today known as Bayer), who gave it their trade name of Heroin in 1895. Ironically, they thought they had developed a non-addictive replacement for morphine. Whilst it was a very effective surgical pain-killer (so effective that the Allies specifically demanded that the patent was surrendered as part of the Great War's Armistace terms), it became clear very early to the German authorities that over-the-counter sales of Heroin was leading to a massive rise in addiction. The Allies soon came to that realisation too, and 1925 it was banned by the League of Nations. So, my proof of the negative is that heroin has already been tried as an over-the-counter drug for public consumption, and was a failure.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Etymology
Biting the hand that feeds IT
