What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Drug Legalization discussion (1 Viewer)

Jayrod

Jayrod

Footballguy
So, in Tim's thread where he's discussing Presidents, the war on drugs became a small side topic.

One poster equated the continued progression of the War on Drugs as "criminal" by the various Presidential candidates. I commented that essentially I thought this was a BS concept because of the complexity of the drug problem and that legalization/decriminalization wasn't some magic fix all.

And I'm not talking about pot either. Honestly, I've come around that we'd be better off with marijuana being legal throughout the US. However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.

After my post, fatguyinalittlecoat simply replied that I was wrong, but that he didn't want to hijack Tim's thread. So out of respect for that, I'm starting this thread.

My main question is, why would the legalization/decriminalization of hard drugs be better? What is the thinking there?

I'll hang up and listen. TIA, will answer yours, gllll peas.

 
Ask Portugal. 14 years later decriminalization of all drugs and they seem to be doing better than when they pursued a very draconian war on drugs. They also instituted a BIG which apparently is part of the reason for the drop in drug use.

 
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.

 
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.

 
NCCommish said:
Ask Portugal. 14 years later decriminalization of all drugs and they seem to be doing better than when they pursued a very draconian war on drugs. They also instituted a BIG which apparently is part of the reason for the drop in drug use.
Click to expand...
After reading a couple of articles on Portugal, it seems that drug use and the dangers of drug use have declined.

However, the BIG and other such socialistic type measures have put their economy in a bad place. The continued government investment in drug treatments AND basic income guarantees looks like it could be untenable. One or both or some other governmental service is probably going to have to be dealt with.

However, I am not opposed to shifting the war on drugs to a war on the results of drugs. In other words, the shift of focus from eliminating the drug supply to eliminating the drug demand could be more effective. Personally I believe a combination approach would be the best idea as neither supply or demand can ever be fully eradicated.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You say you've "come around" on pot. What was the basis for your old position and what made you change your mind?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it is a dangerous drug. It doesn't appear to have many serious health risks to the user and is no more dangerous than alcohol.

Not so with heroin and meth.

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.
Click to expand...
All? So we just let the drug lords of Mexico do whatever in this country? Or is the idea to set up legal meth labs and heroin storefronts around the country?

What does this look like?

 
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
The point is that if drugs were legal, those bad guys wouldn't exist. It's our policies that have created those bad guys.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
The point is that if drugs were legal, those bad guys wouldn't exist. It's our policies that have created those bad guys.
Click to expand...
So again, what's the alternative? Meth and opiate stores?

ETA: and :lmao: at "created". Most of those bad guys would be bad guys regardless of the law they were breaking. There would be other lucrative things like human trafficking to engage in.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrod said:
Baloney Sandwich said:
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.
Click to expand...
All? So we just let the drug lords of Mexico do whatever in this country? Or is the idea to set up legal meth labs and heroin storefronts around the country?What does this look like?
Click to expand...
Yes, you could buy meth or heroin in a store. There would be no Mexican drug lords.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
Baloney Sandwich said:
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.
Click to expand...
All? So we just let the drug lords of Mexico do whatever in this country? Or is the idea to set up legal meth labs and heroin storefronts around the country?What does this look like?
Click to expand...
Yes, you could buy meth or heroin in a store. There would be no Mexican drug lords.
Click to expand...
Well, then who is manufacturing the stuff? BASF?

You think the drug lords are bad, wait until corporations get a hold of the profit margins around recreational drugs. They'll make stuff with hooks so big, no one will get out. Maybe less dangerous to your health, but equally as damaging to a person's life.

Again, this whole idea of "just legalize it" has got to be thought through a little better than this. The number of unintended consequences are likely massive.

 
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
Baloney Sandwich said:
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.
Click to expand...
All? So we just let the drug lords of Mexico do whatever in this country? Or is the idea to set up legal meth labs and heroin storefronts around the country?What does this look like?
Click to expand...
Yes, you could buy meth or heroin in a store. There would be no Mexican drug lords.
Click to expand...
Well, then who is manufacturing the stuff? BASF?

You think the drug lords are bad, wait until corporations get a hold of the profit margins around recreational drugs. They'll make stuff with hooks so big, no one will get out. Maybe less dangerous to your health, but equally as damaging to a person's life.

Again, this whole idea of "just legalize it" has got to be thought through a little better than this. The number of unintended consequences are likely massive.
Click to expand...
Probably Pfizer, R.J. Reynolds, etc.

 
Jayrod said:
Well, then who is manufacturing the stuff? BASF?

You think the drug lords are bad, wait until corporations get a hold of the profit margins around recreational drugs. They'll make stuff with hooks so big, no one will get out. Maybe less dangerous to your health, but equally as damaging to a person's life.
Click to expand...
People could buy drugs in different strengths and they would know what's in the drugs they are buying. That's a good thing.

 
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You say you've "come around" on pot. What was the basis for your old position and what made you change your mind?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it is a dangerous drug. It doesn't appear to have many serious health risks to the user and is no more dangerous than alcohol.Not so with heroin and meth.
Click to expand...
Here's a study that came out a few years ago about the dangerousness of various drugs.: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm

If that's your criteria, we should probably ban alcohol and at least legalize stuff like LSD and mushrooms.

 
Rich Conway said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
Baloney Sandwich said:
Anyone who wants to get drugs is able to get them under our current system. We spend an incredible amount of money on the drug war and barely dent the supply coming into this country, not to mention the large amount of addicts we lock up. Our jails are chock full non-violent drug offenders. Transitioning all this money to regulation, education and treatment seems like a better way.
Click to expand...
All? So we just let the drug lords of Mexico do whatever in this country? Or is the idea to set up legal meth labs and heroin storefronts around the country?What does this look like?
Click to expand...
Yes, you could buy meth or heroin in a store. There would be no Mexican drug lords.
Click to expand...
Well, then who is manufacturing the stuff? BASF?

You think the drug lords are bad, wait until corporations get a hold of the profit margins around recreational drugs. They'll make stuff with hooks so big, no one will get out. Maybe less dangerous to your health, but equally as damaging to a person's life.

Again, this whole idea of "just legalize it" has got to be thought through a little better than this. The number of unintended consequences are likely massive.
Click to expand...
Probably Pfizer, R.J. Reynolds, etc.
Click to expand...
Purdue Pharma says hi.

 
For the "see how it goes with pot" crowd, what evidence in particular are you looking for? How long should we wait to see how it goes? Colorado has had legal pot for a few years, things mostly seem to be going well (there have been some issues with the dosages and labeling of edibles but those are being worked on). What else do we need to wait for?

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
For the "see how it goes with pot" crowd, what evidence in particular are you looking for? How long should we wait to see how it goes? Colorado has had legal pot for a few years, things mostly seem to be going well (there have been some issues with the dosages and labeling of edibles but those are being worked on). What else do we need to wait for?
Click to expand...
unintended consequences? Try it for 6-8 years and see if we create any.
 
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
That was me. Current law enforcement tactics are extremely dangerous. And they are encouraged by policies instituted by Presidents - including selling or giving away military equipment to police forces and funding local police forces for drug raids.

In the last 40 years - since the first SWAT team was introduced - there has been a massive increase in the militarization of police. This has resulted in every podunk town having a SWAT team, using those SWAT teams to serve all warrants, using no-knock warrants, serving warrants in the most dangerous way possible. Its led to a warrior mentality among cops and an us v them mentality. And its almost all done under the guise of the war on drugs.

Its a horrible trend and it has to be reversed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You say you've "come around" on pot. What was the basis for your old position and what made you change your mind?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it is a dangerous drug. It doesn't appear to have many serious health risks to the user and is no more dangerous than alcohol.Not so with heroin and meth.
Click to expand...
This isn't true. Chemically unbalanced people who take marijuana can become seriously messed up, and a lot of people don't know that they are chemically unbalanced. Pot is not safe for everyone. And alcohol can be very dangerous.

 
joffer said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
For the "see how it goes with pot" crowd, what evidence in particular are you looking for? How long should we wait to see how it goes? Colorado has had legal pot for a few years, things mostly seem to be going well (there have been some issues with the dosages and labeling of edibles but those are being worked on). What else do we need to wait for?
Click to expand...
unintended consequences? Try it for 6-8 years and see if we create any.
Click to expand...
I tried pot for more than 8 years, everything is fine.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
For the "see how it goes with pot" crowd, what evidence in particular are you looking for? How long should we wait to see how it goes? Colorado has had legal pot for a few years, things mostly seem to be going well (there have been some issues with the dosages and labeling of edibles but those are being worked on). What else do we need to wait for?
Click to expand...
I am for legalizing pot. Two days seems about long enough for me to see if I would like to add it into my back porch evening cigar rotation.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
For the "see how it goes with pot" crowd, what evidence in particular are you looking for? How long should we wait to see how it goes? Colorado has had legal pot for a few years, things mostly seem to be going well (there have been some issues with the dosages and labeling of edibles but those are being worked on). What else do we need to wait for?
Click to expand...
I'd like to legalize pot nationwide and give it a few years. Let's see what really happens. Does usage go up or down? Does drug violence really go down? Are there consequences that we aren't considering right now? I think snapping our fingers and legalizing all drugs would be the wrong way to do it.
 
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
The point is that if drugs were legal, those bad guys wouldn't exist. It's our policies that have created those bad guys.
Click to expand...
So again, what's the alternative? Meth and opiate stores?

ETA: and :lmao: at "created". Most of those bad guys would be bad guys regardless of the law they were breaking. There would be other lucrative things like human trafficking to engage in.
Click to expand...
You think the demand for foreign sex slaves is = the demand for (weed+meth+coke+H+MDMA+etc) in this country? because I don't. I bet it's not even 5%. Yes, people will always do bad things. no one is arguing otherwise. But we shouldn't be making them billionaires because of our policy.

 
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You say you've "come around" on pot. What was the basis for your old position and what made you change your mind?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it is a dangerous drug. It doesn't appear to have many serious health risks to the user and is no more dangerous than alcohol.Not so with heroin and meth.
Click to expand...
Here's a study that came out a few years ago about the dangerousness of various drugs.: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm

If that's your criteria, we should probably ban alcohol and at least legalize stuff like LSD and mushrooms.
Click to expand...
The ranking of almost no danger to others for anabolic steroids makes me question the whole methodology. Then there's Ketamine and GHB - date rape drugs that are also ranked with little to no danger to others.

 
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
WTF? Addicts and the mentally ill intersect, they are not union.

 
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
Even if we as a society aren't willing (although we should be), legalizing pot surely can't cause any problems worse than those caused by prohibition.

 
dparker713 said:
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
WTF? Addicts and the mentally ill intersect, they are not union.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out earlier, there are serious problems relating to pot and chemically unbalanced people.
 
timschochet said:
dparker713 said:
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
WTF? Addicts and the mentally ill intersect, they are not union.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out earlier, there are serious problems relating to pot and chemically unbalanced people.
Click to expand...
There are serious problems relating to anything and chemically unbalanced people. It's not a pot issue, it's a chemically unbalanced issue.

 
Good topic, and long overdue in here. I've come around on the idea of a Portugal style decriminalization, with an emphasis on getting people the help they need rather than locking them up.

But I am steadfast against legalizing hard drugs. Does any country do that? Seems like crazy talk. Keep the hard stuff illegal, but change the way you deal with people when they break the law. I believe that's what Portugal does, right?

 
timschochet said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You say you've "come around" on pot. What was the basis for your old position and what made you change your mind?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it is a dangerous drug. It doesn't appear to have many serious health risks to the user and is no more dangerous than alcohol.Not so with heroin and meth.
Click to expand...
This isn't true. Chemically unbalanced people who take marijuana can become seriously messed up, and a lot of people don't know that they are chemically unbalanced. Pot is not safe for everyone.And alcohol can be very dangerous.
Click to expand...
I know the bolded and why I said it isn't MORE dangerous than alcohol. If alcohol can be manageable when legal, then so can pot.

Heck, milk, peanuts, etc. are all dangerous to the right person. For the average person, pot isn't dangerous in and of itself.

 
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
dparker713 said:
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
WTF? Addicts and the mentally ill intersect, they are not union.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out earlier, there are serious problems relating to pot and chemically unbalanced people.
Click to expand...
There are serious problems relating to anything and chemically unbalanced people. It's not a pot issue, it's a chemically unbalanced issue.
Click to expand...
No that's not true. More info here: http://www2.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Smoking_Cessation&Template=%2FContentManagement%2FContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=152816

Apparently there are serious connections between pot and mental illness.

 
General Tso said:
Good topic, and long overdue in here. I've come around on the idea of a Portugal style decriminalization, with an emphasis on getting people the help they need rather than locking them up.

But I am steadfast against legalizing hard drugs. Does any country do that? Seems like crazy talk. Keep the hard stuff illegal, but change the way you deal with people when they break the law. I believe that's what Portugal does, right?
Click to expand...
I agree with this.

I'm not sure how we just let people make, distribute, buy and take meth. That stuff is poison.

 
AhrnCityPahnder said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
The point is that if drugs were legal, those bad guys wouldn't exist. It's our policies that have created those bad guys.
Click to expand...
So again, what's the alternative? Meth and opiate stores?

ETA: and :lmao: at "created". Most of those bad guys would be bad guys regardless of the law they were breaking. There would be other lucrative things like human trafficking to engage in.
Click to expand...
You think the demand for foreign sex slaves is = the demand for (weed+meth+coke+H+MDMA+etc) in this country? because I don't. I bet it's not even 5%. Yes, people will always do bad things. no one is arguing otherwise. But we shouldn't be making them billionaires because of our policy.
Click to expand...
No, and I didn't say anything close to that.

I just put it up as an example (it was the morally worst thing I could think of), not an exhaustive list.

 
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Anyone who wants hard drugs can get them.

If you legalize all drugs then people who want to use them can make rational decisions (cost/benefit of each one) and will be using the least physically damaging versions (pharmaceutical grade vs. street grade).

Use the tax money generated from legal drug purchases to fund educational programs and rehab for drug users.

Take the money out of the hands of criminals and reduce the prison population.

Logically, legalizing all drugs is the best decision.

 
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
dparker713 said:
timschochet said:
I am in favor of legalizing pot so long as we as a society are willing to commit ourselves to investing on treatment for the mentally ill. If we're not willing to do that then I think legalizing pot may be problematic.
Click to expand...
WTF? Addicts and the mentally ill intersect, they are not union.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out earlier, there are serious problems relating to pot and chemically unbalanced people.
Click to expand...
There are serious problems relating to anything and chemically unbalanced people. It's not a pot issue, it's a chemically unbalanced issue.
Click to expand...
No that's not true. More info here:http://www2.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Smoking_Cessation&Template=%2FContentManagement%2FContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=152816

Apparently there are serious connections between pot and mental illness.
Click to expand...
It seems like you are falling into the same trap as policy makers. "This thing is bad for people (or some people)" is not the same as "this thing should be illegal."

 
whoknew said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
That was me. Current law enforcement tactics are extremely dangerous. And they are encouraged by policies instituted by Presidents - including selling or giving away military equipment to police forces and funding local police forces for drug raids.

In the last 40 years - since the first SWAT team was introduced - there has been a massive increase in the militarization of police. This has resulted in every podunk town having a SWAT team, using those SWAT teams to serve all warrants, using no-knock warrants, serving warrants in the most dangerous way possible. Its led to a warrior mentality among cops and an us v them mentality. And its almost all done under the guise of the war on drugs.

Its a horrible trend and it has to be reversed.
Click to expand...
The militarization & SWAT teams have increased over the last 40 years as a result of increases in weapons technology. A police issue revolver and no armor is a bad way to take on bank robbers with body armor and automatic weapons.

The drug trade has no doubt given rise to the occurrence of gunfights, but it isn't the sole cause of it. Many criminals use guns, not just drug dealers.

 
Jayrod said:
AhrnCityPahnder said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Jayrod said:
However, the hard drugs like heroine and meth cannot be legal, IMO. Their results from recreational use are too damaging.
Click to expand...
Which results in particular are you talking about? Because in the other thread you mentioned drug dealer violence as a negative consequence of hard drugs, but that's not a consequence of the drugs themselves, it's a consequence of their prohibition.
Click to expand...
That point was in reaction to the previous poster's comments about innocent people being killed by law enforcement. It seemed like he was blaming the deaths solely on Presidential policy and law enforcement execution. I was trying to point out that the people they were combating are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
The point is that if drugs were legal, those bad guys wouldn't exist. It's our policies that have created those bad guys.
Click to expand...
So again, what's the alternative? Meth and opiate stores?

ETA: and :lmao: at "created". Most of those bad guys would be bad guys regardless of the law they were breaking. There would be other lucrative things like human trafficking to engage in.
Click to expand...
You think the demand for foreign sex slaves is = the demand for (weed+meth+coke+H+MDMA+etc) in this country? because I don't. I bet it's not even 5%. Yes, people will always do bad things. no one is arguing otherwise. But we shouldn't be making them billionaires because of our policy.
Click to expand...
No, and I didn't say anything close to that.

I just put it up as an example (it was the morally worst thing I could think of), not an exhaustive list.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of morally horrible things out there but I don't think any of them come close to approach the amount of money that's in drug trafficking.

And even if they did, let's not conflate other issues with the one we're talking about. Our war on drugs creates the market for these cartels to thrive.

 
i'm all for legalizing MJ, and it's incumbent upon the Fed Govt to regulate and tax it like they do for alcohol:

- legal to purchase and consume at home and in designated areas

- must be 21 to purchase

- dispensaries (and their employees) are on the hook for providing to minors

- TCH levels/% listed on all packaging (accurate to within certain tolerances)

- driving under the influence is illegal and punishable like alcohol-related offenses

- create accurate methods to test at the scene for TCH inebriation (something analogous to a breathalyzer)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
These Drug Commercials are OUT of CONTROL!!!
2 3
Replies
123
Views
3K
jhib
jhib
PlasmaDogPlasma
Seattle files motion to retroactively void all misdemeanor marijuana convictions
Replies
7
Views
261
rockaction
rockaction
John Maddens Lunchbox
U2 - Community rankings - FIN - #4 Sunday Bloody Sunday, #3 - One, #2 - Bad, #1 - Where the Streets Have No Name -Spotify links, thanks to Krista4
89 90 91
Replies
5K
Views
84K
Nemesis
Nemesis

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top