This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Issykitty.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Clint-Eastwood-Anti-Drug-Commerical

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by jonny. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

@dannym3141

Can't quote that behemoth without trying to figure out all the embedded coding to only pick your newest stuff.

Anyway, I just wanted to address the last line of it. I have no first hand knowledge of Amsterdam, but according to their wiki they limit their coffeehouse (weed, food, coffee/drink, no alcohol) to only selling small quantities of weed and other rules:

In the Netherlands, the selling of cannabis is "illegal, but not punishable", so the law is not enforced in establishments following these nationwide rules taken from the wiki page:

no advertising
no hard drug sales on the premises
no sales to anyone under the age of 18
no sales transactions exceeding 5 grams
no public disturbances

For some offenses, a business may be forced to close for three to six months, for others, completely; all this is detailed in official policies.

-------------------------------

So it's not as if they allow anyone, anywhere, anytime to do whatever they wish....it's controlled to some degree. They also have closed shops due to proximity to schools and I believe I've read articles where they want to close access to coffeeshops to tourists. So......I can only assume the mindset of many tourists toward drug use is a nuisance at a minimum. And there will be those who argue is anti-drug mindset, etc.

And it might be a little bit of a lot of things, but I think it speaks to a failure in education namely the complete lack of when approaching a lot of "un-approved" topics. Where you end up with polar opposite opinions, 1) no one should do it ever, 2) everyone should do it, as much as possible. It applies mostly to drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and sex in the US. It evens out a little in people (and if it doesn't it usually goes really bad) when they get past college-age when it comes to alcohol, tobacco and sex, but drugs seem to stick with them whether it be to the forbidden nature of it or addiction.

I guess with sex, unless you end up with something incurable you can recover (even a pregnancy). Tobacco you can quit, but it does have consequences for some who are genetically unlucky. Alcohol, liver issues but worse are drunk driving and just overall bad decision making that could lead to a record.

And then drugs, illegal or prescription, sometimes people become too reliant on them...especially if they affect pain and mood...and they often even get intertwined where the brain associates lack of mood suppressors/enhancers as pain. Personally I don't see why many people would risk using their drug of choice regularly if it means potentially losing their job when a drug test comes around or other consequences...and that's where I see it as an addiction when they want the job and the drug but at some point they will conflict and unwillingness to change one to keep the other.

Anyway, it's one of those things where you could go back and forth on it all day long. But in the end I think it boils down to how much other people's choices affect others. If using whatever doesn't have a noticeable impact on others then fine. But you run the spectrum of smoking in restaurants to drunk driving as to how much of an impact is noticeable. And on that, I am done posting about this as it's guaranteed to turn into some sort of political/religion discussion.

Wasn't worried, nor did I take it personally .... it is just my nature to say -- hey, I didn't say that, you misunderstood. Just like to keep the record straight, is all.

I'll eventually learn to just let misunderstandings be, it seems to provoke more confusion than trying to straighten things out.

PSAs. There is a whole 'nother topic....

Kisses!



In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
hey lady,
i didn't take your comment personally if that's what you were worried about.

i always feel like most of the PSA campaigns i see are going about it all wrong.
for instance, i would like to see an anti-drug PSA that's more about human rights and the gross exploitation of the third world thats inherent in the production of hard drugs. I did a ton of drugs as a very young kid, and knowing the kind of kid i was, i would never ever have shoved coke up my nose if i knew how it was made, who made it, how it gets here and how many people died over it on its way to my blood stream. i think that kind of thing would be even more relevant now that the cartel war in mexico is all over the news. the typical 1990 "drugs are bad, mkay?" commercials that were on when i was kid seem completely impotent.

sure, maybe PSA's don't hurt. but i think a very serious cost/benefit analysis should be made.... is this making enough bang for the buck?? is there another, more productive, method of outreach we could use these funds for?? maybe keep the PSA because it undoubtedly gets the message out to the greatest amount of people, but maybe the PSA could be about signs of poorly managed stress and the importance of coping skills and where to get the tools to deal with out of control feelings. or some shit. i don't know. just my 2 cents.

In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
Um, my comment was about the 30% who grow up to be abusers. It wasn't directed to the 70% who didn't.

And you're right, there are other things to do.

The PSA is just a tactic. One tactic.

It certainly doesn't hurt, and it might help.

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
The idea that the abused grow into abusers is kind of.... meh.... Only about 30% of people who were abused as children grow up to abuse their own kids. Because 70% of us grow up to see ourselves in the eyes of every frightened child ever.

Abuse is about anger and it's about power. It's the inability to cope with stress or feelings of powerlessness. It's rampant in areas of high poverty, but certainly isn't non-existant in the homes of the wealthy.

Sure, I like the IDEA of PSA's.. but generally find them targeting the wrong side of the issue. This PSA targets the symptom, but not the root. If the root cause of domestic violence is power and an inability to cope with stress productively, then why can't we have a campaign to teach positive coping skills and educate little people and big people and even bigger people how to productively manage stress and take control of their own lives? ..... oh, right.. because that might actually EMPOWER people instead of just scare and depress them.

Making hard drugs illegal solves nothing. It makes drug usage harder, but in doing so creates a problem much worse: a black market and the lives and resources that are destroyed trying to dominate or prevent it. It truly is no different from alcohol prohibition. Instead of dying of drugs because of parental neglect, now your children will have an opportunity to die:

1. in a gang from a cop or other gang members
2. from a gang as a cop
3. from a gang as a citizen who gets caught in the crossfire
4. from a gang as a citizen who was going to testify against a gang member
5. as a citizen who otherwise might have had a cop in the area to help them if not for their being busy with anti-drug enforcement

It also increases the chance of corruption within the police force because the confiscated substance are of such high market value from the artificial scarcity. Of course, we saw all of this from the 30s with alcohol prohibition, yet don't apply the same logic to all drugs. People are dumb when it comes to weighing cost/benefit ratios. Look at marijuana, marijuana is 1% as dangerous as even alcohol, and people still cling to its prohibition as being worth the costs incurred.

Then there's the philosophical part, which is that you should have the right to do to your body as you wish because you own your body from the day you're born. All rights derive from property. If you can be incarcerated against your will for doing something to yourself, then you are a slave of the state.

this entire video should be part of those d.a.r.e / scared straight anti-drug campaigns

The standard cry against it: "But the children!", gateway drug, and the slippery slope of suddenly legalizing all drugs.

The first and last are extremely silly and I have no desire to address them.

I think that marijuana is a gateway drug, but not in the standard definition. Peggedbea bring up a good point of people being exposed to other illegal substances. I also think another thing is the bullshit realization factor. People are told about all the evils of pot, etc, etc. And yet once they have tried it, the majority of people realize that the propaganda was just... propaganda. "What other bs has been spread out about other drugs?" It's too bad that some anti-drug groups have used falsehoods in trying to promote their side - which in my view is horrific; there are valid health issues that should be addressed, but they destroy their trustworthiness by using lies. I was listening to a person speaking at HempFest who was cautioning the pro-marijuana groups to make sure the acknowledge the health risks while promoting their side. What side am I on? I'm on the side of truthful information about the benefits and risks. Give people good information and let them make their choices.

Best anti-drug PSA ever.

It's hard to take a group of people seriously when they make up ridiculously wild claims to scare people into believing them. It's a crusade of the small-minded.

Obviously public schools are indoctrination, but the "Limbaughs" (like my father, too!) don't seem to mind when the social engineering favors their down home pro-American nationalism, pro-church and anti-drug propaganda.

And when did Marxism become associated with homosexuality? "To each according to his abilities; to each according to his fabulous style, girlfriend."

Anybody else hear the giddy laughter at 25 seconds? Either someone's downwind or an anti-drug advocate just popped a boner.

So when do they start burning huge piles of Vioxx and Ambien?

>> ^burdturgler:
I have to tell you all something.
I have composed several very long answers to all of this bullshit here .. which I'm sure that a LOT of this is .. just misunderstandings. But to be compared as a racist by someone I stupidly .. stupidly looked up to and thought was some sort of .. distant friend here. Took the wind right out of me. And people are telling me I'm wrong for not wanting kids exposed to sex for money on the street .. yeah .. I'm just done. It was a mistake to come back to this site. Obviously, if I can be called a racist by someone I idiotically thought was my friend than never will anyone get anything I ever say here. I have no friends here. Oh well.
I was damned active getting things done during the last election cycle so at least I accomplished that and I have made hundreds of posts extolling the virtues of freedom, individual liberties, gay rights, anti drug war legislation and, right in this thread, pro prostitution.
Nice knowing I could come back and rock out the votes for a week .. take care and good luck. Tired of fighting 5 on 1.


Boo. Cop out.

I have to tell you all something.

I have composed several very long answers to all of this bullshit here .. which I'm sure that a LOT of this is .. just misunderstandings. But to be compared as a racist by someone I stupidly .. stupidly looked up to and thought was some sort of .. distant friend here. Took the wind right out of me. And people are telling me I'm wrong for not wanting kids exposed to sex for money on the street .. yeah .. I'm just done. It was a mistake to come back to this site. Obviously, if I can be called a racist by someone I idiotically thought was my friend than never will anyone get anything I ever say here. I have no friends here. Oh well.

I was damned active getting things done during the last election cycle so at least I accomplished that and I have made hundreds of posts extolling the virtues of freedom, individual liberties, gay rights, anti drug war legislation and, right in this thread, pro prostitution.

Nice knowing I could come back and rock out the votes for a week .. take care and good luck. Tired of fighting 5 on 1.

Doc_M, there is absolutely no hard evidence that psychedelic drugs leave holes in one's brain, that's just an anti-drug propaganda myth. They work by altering the balance of neurotransmitters in the brain leading to all kinds of changes in perception and introspection.

>> ^Shepppard
1) I don't think i've ever been called crotchface before.
2) I never said I disagree with the statement, and I'm not sure where you pulled that out of..
3) The sentence structure doesn't make sense. It can be about as effective as the first one, because the first one set the bar and the second is unable to pass it, Therefore stating "The first one didn't work, and neither did/will this one."
If it was as ineffective as the anti-drug commercials, that would be correct, because you're directly stating how ineffective the object was in comparison to something else.
Therefore stating "They both didn't work"
"About as ineffective as" means "the first one didn't work, but this one is doing better then it" which in this context, doesn't make sense, because the original intended statement meant that they are both ineffective.


Hey, Sheppard, you're wrong. Just shut up already. If you're describing something as being roughly as effective as something that has a low degree of effectiveness, that = low degree of effectiveness. And "about" is not equivalent to "under" or "over" like you are assuming, an approximation doesn't specify anything other than its close. There is no bar being set here.