Cocaine Nation

Discussion in 'Other Drugs' started by elongito, Mar 25, 2009.

  1. elongito

    elongito Member

    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cocaine Nation is on discovery, its about the american coke epidemic
     
  2. lucjl volcin

    lucjl volcin Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    I watched that earlier today
     
  3. blitz7341

    blitz7341 Banned

    Messages:
    1,904
    Likes Received:
    1
    yeah that was kindof a letdown
     
  4. white_magic

    white_magic Member

    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mostly yes, but it could have been worse. At least you didn't have the narrator didn't sound like he was talking about Holocaust, unlike in other drug documentaries (like the one about cocaine from the History Channel). And I really liked that at the beginning it was said that 'some experts think that we're losing the war on drugs'. Sure they showed the raids, but they also admitted that they stop only 2% of the all the border drug traffic.

    I think the tone of this documentary is definitely in the right direction. Also, they talked about developing medications to treat cocaine addiction and how FDA has been resisting it (something along those lines). I have to give props for all the little touches like that.
     
  5. -_-HitMan-_-

    -_-HitMan-_- Member

    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just watched something called National Geographic Situation Critical: Hunting Pablo Escobar

    Pretty cool
     
  6. AmericanEthics

    AmericanEthics Member

    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah it did have a pretty nice tone to it, but it was just so uninformative. But I suppose that they probably had to gear it towards the layman to some extent. Discovery channel is like that most of the time from what I've seen. Is the Nat Geo show any better? Or do they just seem like it because they're narrowing the subject matter down to something more managable for a hour show to cover?
     
  7. white_magic

    white_magic Member

    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's how I see it as well. Although from their names you might get the idea that channels like Discovery and History would really want to teach you something, usually they just tell you something you probably know already. Or they'll pick a popular subject or common interest. How much WW2-focused content have you seen on the History Channel already? Some call it the 'Hitler Channel' :D. What about 'Dirty Jobs' and 'Ice Truckers'? Very educational and necessary? I don't think so.

    So it's no surprise that when it comes to drugs, they're not likely to bring anything new to the table. They hardly want to challenge the common perception and they certainly don't want outrage. That's why most of the drug documentaries are so eager to demonize drug users, label them as criminals and dregs of society.

    I dare anybody to watch just 30 seconds of this History channel show about Cocaine:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrd5xtyfjFw

    Then compare it to 'Cocaine Nation' :).
     
  8. StonedAge

    StonedAge Member

    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haha i totally agree with you. Thanks for the link, i forgot what it was callled.
     
  9. Silverbackman

    Silverbackman Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    1
    Both the history and science channel documentaries were biased of course, but honestly at least the history channel one mentions why cocaine was banned in the first place. In the discovery channel documentary they just mention it was banned in 1914 without telling any reasons why the ban took place......which was of course because of racist "cocaine negroes" scares, and not so much about its dangers. Both documentaries don't seem to mention that using cocaine at a party or whatever isn't much different than using alcohol at a party. Sure coke has its dangers but to only show the negative when you have something like alcohol being promoted otherwise shows a real bias.

    They had one on heroin too called "Heroin Nation".....a lot of the same problems there.
     
  10. AmericanEthics

    AmericanEthics Member

    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    It actually did mention the reason the government prohibited it. Said they linked it to increases in violent crime. Which is itself just a p.c. way of saying black crime like you said. But yeah heroin nation actually made me kind of mad. It was the EXACT same format as cocaine nation but since I don't know as much about h I couldn't even tell where to draw the line with my skepticism!
     
  11. Silverbackman

    Silverbackman Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well they said violent crime but this is a misnomer. Cocaine wasn't really causing violent crimes.....the reports of cocaine-crazed black people were mere propaganda to demonize both blacks and cocaine. The reality is there wasn't much violent crime to begin with....it was a similar thing in the american southwest who linked mexican marijuana use to violent crime.
     
  12. greensky

    greensky Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    1
    Are you guys watching a completely different documentary or what?

    The "Hooked: Illegal Drugs and How They Got That Way" is a PHENOMENAL documentary series.

    They slash and burn the government propaganda that got us into this drug war in the first place. I'm confused?

    Is it because they show both sides of the coin or something?
     
  13. greensky

    greensky Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    1
    ...and the "Hooked" series does an excellent job of pointing out how in almost every case when a drug has been made illegal it has been done so with erroneous claims, false information, and an almost complete lack of credible scientific data.
     
  14. white_magic

    white_magic Member

    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, it's been a long time since I saw it, but I do remember that they did show the true reasons for the drugs being banned, which is a bonus, certainly. However, what I remember more than anything is the insanely grim tone and I'm sure that's also what people will remember more than anything. I'm gonna guess that a majority of people who don't know much drugs will end up more resentful and scared of drugs than before. Again, it's been a long time since i saw that show.
     
  15. wildwood55

    wildwood55 Member

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda... my gawd.. you'd think that 35+ years after 'LSD, Insight or Insanity" and 40+ years after "Reefer Madness", this country would have realized that half-truths and misleading information does more damage than good.

    The inaccuracies, half-truths and misleading information in "Heroin Nation" is too numerous to list; suffice it to say it discredits the entire series. One of the 'highlights':

    ~"methdone satisifies the cravings in the brain without the high.." HA!... never been so effing loaded as when I did methadone. It's nastier to kick than H, easier to OD on - the only redeeming quality of methadone is it's cheap.

    After 40 years, I've realized that, for the gov't, it's all about the high. (Can't let anybody feel a chemical euphoria - wouldn't be right.) If the pharma companies tell them there's no high from a drug, it gets the green light in a heartbeat. The most recent one I've run across is Ultram - generic: tramadol. http://www.drugs.com/ultram.html It has a nasty, almost identical pharmacological to an opiate, including OD capability, nasty, physical withdrawls and synergistic effect with opiates. They say there's no high to it.

    For 30+ years, I've been taking opiate pain meds for the effects of numerous severe injuries and also for nasty chronic pain from nerve injuries. A year or so ago I got a Rx for tramadol. My new primary care doc had incorrectly interpreted an entry-level urine screen I took for a pain treatment program. She proceeded to accuse me of taking morphine and dilaudid because she didn't know that codeine shows positive for morphine and hydrocodone shows positive for dilaudid, (oxycodone) - drugs SHE was prescribing to me.

    Before I got the incorrect urine test interpretation straightened out, she cut off my pain meds, but gave me tramadol. Mind you, pharmacologically, its' no different than an opiate, just no 'high.' (If she thought I was abusing, why'd she give me the pharmacological equivalent of an opiate, but never even offer or suggest drug treatment?)

    After I got the Rx filled, I found Ultram was a horse-shit pain med. Strangely, it had none of the normal physical effects of opiates: dry-mouth, gravelly voice, constipation, etc, but what was funny as shit was I got higher than a MF'er on it - more of a buzz than oxycodone, hydrocodone or codeine. I laughed my ass off about that one, but that wasn't why I was taking it, so it sucked. Had the same effect on my pain as the oral morphine my previous doctor had tried on me - I was taking enough oral morphine to kill two horses and it was doing nothing. As I remember I got up to a big ER tablet twice a day and then got up to another 80-100 mgs of IR morphine 3-4 times day with NO effect. My doc kept telling me to increase the dosage until there was an effect; it was weird. Come to find out, oral morphine doesn't work well with a lot of people - even though IM or IV morphine will work well, (makes me puke something fierce when I've gotten it post-surgically.

    The failure of the morphine was why I'd changed doctors and was entering a pain treatment program, so the goofy bitch knew I wasn't an abuser. But God forbid a doctor will EVER admit a mistake or ignorance.

    (I never did get a chance to try tramadol WITH an opiate, it might be a good combo. The reality of sever chronic pain is that when the pain is really effing bad, there's no real relief from the pain meds; at times like that, the opiate buzz is the only thing that keep's you sane - or from eatin' a gun.)

    ==========

    The truth about the US War on Drugs is it IS an abyssmal failure and ALWAYS has been an abyssmal failure. I met my first DEA agent in the early-70's. He was honest enough to admit that less than 10% of the drugs smuggled into the US are stopped - LESS than 10% - AND it's never been better than that.

    We stigmatize our youth by calling them 'alcoholics' and 'addicts' when they are just children; then we tell them they will ALWAYS be addicts. How can the average kid, with a scattered source of income and not legal to by alcohol TRULY be an 'addict' or 'alcoholic'. Not that some are heading in the wrong direction and could benefit from sound intervention, but how is labeling them for life be productive.

    Look at what some of the 'addicts' said on these crappy programs: "good students, honor roll, popular kids" not necessarily the same ones who are 'labeled', but golly-gee look who's on TV as addicts 15-20 years later.

    We have filled our jails with drug possession 'criminals' or low level dealers. We waste millions and millions of tax dollars per year fostering and enabling a black market than has become massive. Not long ago, it was reported than marijuana, JUST marijuana would be the third largest industry in California, if legal.

    Of course, if we had sane drug laws and the millions of people who've been screwed up by drug busts still had a chance in our society, we'd need THAT many more jobs, so maybe warehousing all those people in jail is 'good for the economy', after all!

    Our archaic and authoritarian mindset and approach to drug prohibition has failed. It DOES not reduce the supply, it HAS not decreased the demand; I would even venture that our country's approach has INCREASED violent crime in our country. It's certainly fostered foreign criminality.

    Meanwhile, citizens are abused by mortgage companies, foreclosure companies, dis-honest product vendors, scam artists, etc, etc with little or no law enforcement interdiction.

    Personally, in an attempt to report crimes perpetrated against me by a mortgage company, I have called every state and federal agency I can think of - from the state Atty Gen to the FBI. The most positive response I received was from the FTC, (Fed Trade Comm) who told me to sue the company and HUD, (Housing and Urban Development - the agency with authority over mortgage companies), who recommended I try to get the local TV station to help me. I'm not talking about POSSIBLE crimes, I'm talking blatant disregard and abuse by a company Nevada state raised hell with the mortgage company for abuse of Nevada citizens. Hell, the mail fraud I have solid evidence of is minor compared to some of the other stuff. No one in law enforcement cares or will/can do anything.

    WHAT is wrong with THIS picture? What is wrong when this is the norm?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice