As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

FUCK the DEA!

sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
edited April 2007 in Debate and/or Discourse
~ An Argument for the Legalization of All Drugs ~

57% of the U.S. Federal Prison population is incarcerated on drug-related charges. We are spending way too much money ruining the lives of people with already pathetic lives. I say "ruining the lives of" because sending someone to prison is a pretty good way to fuck them up. Psychologically, becasue American prisons are hellholes which lack any kind of healthy human interaction, financially, because it's incredibly hard to get a job, let alone a good job after being convicted, and physically, because people get fucking stabbed in prison.

People will use no matter what. The law has little to do with this.

Yes, "hard" drugs are really bad for you. I'm sure the people who are willing to fucking go on meth are not the type to be deterred by prison, nor are people going to suddenly start saying "Hey, you know what legal substance sounds like a lot of fun to try? Fucking meth! I would love to have a paralyzing addiction to a nearly-invariably lethal substance which destroys my sanity and covers me in scabs!"

Most people do not consciously make a decision to get hooked on meth or crack or heroin (and the ones who do? Well fuck 'em. They're fucking retarded.) Therefore, prison sentences are not a deterrent.

And, frankly I'd argue that you'd see fewer people addicted to hard drugs if they were legal. Mainly because of all the people who now get involved with those drugs because they are involved in other illegal activities, or other, softer illegal substances.

Bottom line is: The War on Drugs is an apalling failure. People, throughout history, use whether the government "allows" it or not. Sending people to prison is possibly the least effective thing anyone could do to solve the problem. We could be spending the money on rehabilitation, or things like education, which keep people out of poverty in the first place.

So, why are drugs illegal again?

sdrawkcaB emaN on
«1345678

Posts

  • Options
    LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Because it would be political suicide to attempt to legalise them in any meaningful way.

    Leitner on
  • Options
    GorakGorak Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    So, why are drugs illegal again?
    Because they make people play with text formatting.

    Gorak on
  • Options
    MrMisterMrMister Jesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Yes, "hard" drugs are really bad for you. I'm sure the people who are willing to fucking go on meth are not the type to be deterred by prison, nor are people going to suddenly start saying "Hey, you know what legal substance sounds like a lot of fun to try? Fucking meth! I would love to have a paralyzing addiction to a nearly-invariably lethal substance which destroys my sanity and covers me in scabs!"

    You catagorize people into two types: crazy fuckers who will always do meth no matter what, and lovely gentlemen who would never try meth no matter what. I think this characterization is retarded.

    MrMister on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    MrMister wrote: »
    You catagorize people into two types: crazy fuckers who will always do meth no matter what, and lovely gentlemen who would never try meth no matter what. I think this characterization is retarded.

    Great. Mind explaining why? Also, I'm not sure I made it that clear cut, but you know, whatever. I think I said that people are not deterred by threat of prison. See: The Netherlands. They are not overcome by drug use, despite the fact that even "hard" drugs are technically "tolerated" by the government, in very small personal-use amounts.

    I think most people will find that the health-, financially-, and sanity-degrading consequences of meth are enough to deter them from making a phenomenally stupid decision.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    Nexus ZeroNexus Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Actually I handed in a dissertation on this very subject this morning. One of the things I found was that pure heroin, outside of the devestating addictive qualitites, is actually fairly safe. Meth, not so much. I had a bit of a pickle arguing why or how all drugs should be made legal but ultimately, everyone has the right to do the soft drugs (ecstasy, mm, lsd, cannabis etc), while the hard drugs (crack, meth) should be legalised in the name of damage prevention. That anyone taking any drug is treated as a criminal before they've commited a crime is sickening.

    Nexus Zero on
    sig.jpg
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I think this OP is not backed up by enough meaningful statistical evidence. Are people in jail because they took a drug, or are they in jail because they were in fact users and then became dealers who in turn ended up being involved in all the fun and games that tend to involve underground drug markets (prostitution, theft, murder).

    Furthermore the answer is not "legalize everything" because their are plenty of illegal narcotics which wouldn't be legal anyway if we were to look at them from the perspective the FDA views most prescription drugs.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    I think this OP is not backed up by enough meaningful statistical evidence. Are people in jail because they took a drug, or are they in jail because they were in fact users and then became dealers who in turn ended up being involved in all the fun and games that tend to involve underground drug markets (prostitution, theft, murder).

    I believe the term refers to crimes related to possession/selling/smuggling/whatever.
    Furthermore the answer is not "legalize everything" because their are plenty of illegal narcotics which wouldn't be legal anyway if we were to look at them from the perspective the FDA views most prescription drugs.

    Why would they be judged on the standard of perscription drugs? I was thinking they'd be judged more by the standard of cigarettes and beer. I.e., things that aren't good for you, and in fact might kill you (or in the case of cigarettes -- probably will kill you, if you use them long enough), but make you feel good, and since you're an adult capable of making their own decisions, we let you use, because you are not a child and it is not our job to bubble-wrap and saftey-lock the world for you.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    FallingmanFallingman Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    ~ An Argument for the Legalization of All Drugs ~

    57% of the U.S. Federal Prison population is incarcerated on drug-related charges. We are spending way too much money *SNIP*

    So, why are drugs illegal again?

    Perhaps more relevant, would be to look at the effectiveness of prisons as a mechanism of rehabilitation for people that commit crimes?

    Fallingman on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    So, you think suicide should be illegal? That's....that's weird. People should go to jail for attempted suicide (an analogue to hard drug use, under your framework, arguably)?

    I don't follow. You're saying that a human being doesn't have the right to make decisions about what they do with their own life. That's, well, that needs some backing up.

    I'm not saying it's a good decision, but I'm saying it's a decision that is not influenced by the threat of prison, and it's a decision that you as an adult have the right to make.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    So, you think suicide should be illegal? That's....that's weird. People should go to jail for attempted suicide (an analogue to hard drug use, under your framework, arguably)?

    I don't follow. You're saying that a human being doesn't have the right to make decisions about what they do with their own life. That's, well, that needs some backing up.

    I'm not saying it's a good decision, but I'm saying it's a decision that is not influenced by the threat of prison, and it's a decision that you as an adult have the right to make.
    No I'm saying that there's no controllable way to tell people what will happen when they inject themselves with heroin. It has an enormously significant effect on human physiology in the quantities people use it for effect.

    We not legalize drugs which do that, and we don't use prescription drugs which do that unless the alternative is much worse (i.e. death otherwise).

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    Nexus ZeroNexus Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    Actually the risk of heroin overdose is directly because of it's prohibition. It's exceptionally hard to die off pure heroin. Conversely, alcohol "might kill you right the fuck now" and I don't see you ragging on that.

    Nexus Zero on
    sig.jpg
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    Actually the risk of heroin overdose is directly because of it's prohibition. It's exceptionally hard to die off pure heroin. Conversely, alcohol "might kill you right the fuck now" and I don't see you ragging on that.

    Well then I retract my statements but not my position - namely, judge it based on sane criteria as the FDA does rather then "oh hey, make this legal coz I want it to be".

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    Nexus ZeroNexus Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    It should be at least controlled and regulated to stop those deaths. And by controlled I don't mean "controlled" as in "controlled substance", I mean actually controlled to save people's lives.

    Nexus Zero on
    sig.jpg
  • Options
    Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I think this OP is not backed up by enough meaningful statistical evidence. Are people in jail because they took a drug, or are they in jail because they were in fact users and then became dealers who in turn ended up being involved in all the fun and games that tend to involve underground drug markets (prostitution, theft, murder).

    Furthermore the answer is not "legalize everything" because their are plenty of illegal narcotics which wouldn't be legal anyway if we were to look at them from the perspective the FDA views most prescription drugs.

    One thing that should be abundantly clear, imo, is that no one, not the feds, not the FDA, has any excuse for being able to ban plants and fungi. You can argue in favor of some control of intentionally developed substances like lsd and ecstacy, but I have a real hard time understanding a goddamn plant being illegal.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    Actually the risk of heroin overdose is directly because of it's prohibition. It's exceptionally hard to die off pure heroin. Conversely, alcohol "might kill you right the fuck now" and I don't see you ragging on that.

    Well then I retract my statements but not my position - namely, judge it based on sane criteria as the FDA does rather then "oh hey, make this legal coz I want it to be".

    It's more like "make it legal because it's my fucking body, I'm a fucking adult, and it's my fucking right as a fucking adult to do whatever the fuck I want with my fucking body" (that was fun).

    You're not directly harming others. You're not harming society. Therefore, go for it! Believe me -- I'm all for government interference, but not when it comes to stuff like this, which only really hurts an individual. Sure, I guess society loses potential man-hours to drugs, because people become ineffective/lose their jobs, etc? But prison is in no way a solution to this. It just further exacerbates the monetary loss, and in no way helps people kick the habit. Prison just generally tends to get people more deeply involved in illegal activity, and make it harder for them to re-enter legal society.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Nexus Zero wrote: »
    As much as I oppose the legality of cigarettes, I see a substantial difference between something which might make you sick in the short term and take 20 years off your life in the end and say heroin, which might kill you right the fuck now.

    Actually the risk of heroin overdose is directly because of it's prohibition. It's exceptionally hard to die off pure heroin. Conversely, alcohol "might kill you right the fuck now" and I don't see you ragging on that.

    Well then I retract my statements but not my position - namely, judge it based on sane criteria as the FDA does rather then "oh hey, make this legal coz I want it to be".

    It's more like "make it legal because it's my fucking body, I'm a fucking adult, and it's my fucking right as a fucking adult to do whatever the fuck I want with my fucking body" (that was fun).

    You're not directly harming others. You're not harming society. Therefore, go for it! Believe me -- I'm all for government interference, but not when it comes to stuff like this, which only really hurts an individual. Sure, I guess society loses potential man-hours to drugs, because people become ineffective/lose their jobs, etc? But prison is in no way a solution to this. It just further exacerbates the monetary loss, and in no way helps people kick the habit. Prison just generally tends to get people more deeply involved in illegal activity, and make it harder for them to re-enter legal society.

    Not to mention that it's clear the reason for drugs being illegal isn't something simple like "If you do drugs, you might not go to work, and everyone loses out". If that were the case, we'd have to ban any activity that might harm productivity of hardworking Americans.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • Options
    durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Didn't Mexico actually do this already?

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • Options
    AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I think it's more along the lines of, "It is impossible to fully disclose the effects of a substance for which one use can form a lifelong dependance."

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • Options
    ShinyoShinyo Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Before the rest of this, I would just like to say I am one of the few teenagers who has never done an illegal substance. However, this is not because I think it's going to lead to worse things, this is because it's fucking expensive and I don't have that kind of money.

    Now then.

    I agree with Aemilius in that adults should have the right to take what they want to take. However, I do think that some of the harder, synthesized substances should remain banned.

    Also, my mom was a very depressed and angry person for about half my life. This was grumpiness due to near constant migraine related pain. She never wanted to go anywhere but work and home, and was just generally very unsociable.
    Last year she was prescribed medical marijuana, and now she's like a completely different person. She's happier than I've seen her in years, and now I feel like I can actually spend time with her. It's really changed her life for the better. I really hope they never take that away from her.

    Shinyo on
  • Options
    MrMisterMrMister Jesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Shinyo wrote: »
    Also, my mom was a very depressed and angry person for about half my life. This was grumpyness due to near constant migraine related pain. She never wanted to go anywhere but work and home, and was just generally very unsociable.
    Last year she was perscribed medical marijuna, and now she's like a completely different person. She's happier than I've seen her in years, and now I feel like I can actually spend time with her. It's really changed her life for the better. I really really hope they never take that away from her.

    My Mom used to spend weeks at a time incapacitated in her room with all the lights off, but Imitrex worked for her. We still have trouble getting the insurance to give her enough, though, and it's expensive. It's great that the relatively cheap drug works for your mom.

    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    MrMister on
  • Options
    ShinyoShinyo Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    MrMister wrote: »
    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    Not to some people it seems...

    Shinyo on
  • Options
    Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Shinyo wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    Not to some people it seems...

    Honestly, I don't think it's different. While yes, one has more potential for causing problems, that doesn't mean it should be illegal so much as better regulated, more education about its potential effects, etc. We have to accept that freedom in this regard *does* mean some increased risks.

    But shit, clearly Americans are fine with more freedom and more risk, just look at many sentiments on gun control.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Shinyo wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    Not to some people it seems...

    Honestly, I don't think it's different. While yes, one has more potential for causing problems, that doesn't mean it should be illegal so much as better regulated, more education about its potential effects, etc. We have to accept that freedom in this regard *does* mean some increased risks.

    But shit, clearly Americans are fine with more freedom and more risk, just look at many sentiments on gun control.
    This is about the sanest argument on the matter I have ever heard.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    ArdorArdor Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I can see drugs being legalised so we can tax it to hell and back, or because it happens to be our freedom to do what we want, or whatever comes out, as long as there are very clear direction on how to use it. Yes, drinking lots of alcohol might cause you to be in a drunk driving accident, but whether the warnings are word of mouth, what you read in the paper or see on the news, there are directions out there to help you use the product properly. This would have to apply to these drugs as well, else we could have baked/stoned people getting into accidents instead with similar results.

    Second, what makes you think the tobacco and alcohol companies would allow this to happen? Their lobbyists have a fair amount of pull in politics. Sure, they might get a share of the profits to be made, but wouldn't the stranglehold they have on that particular market be loosened? Second, imagine the liability whatever company selling said drugs would face from our law system when bad things start happening that nobody was prepared for? I think they would need quite a bit of time, since they would know well in advance of when such a law would pass, to make sure they know what they're selling before they would go out and do it, if indeed they would be a part of it at all.

    Ardor on
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    It's more like "make it legal because it's my fucking body, I'm a fucking adult, and it's my fucking right as a fucking adult to do whatever the fuck I want with my fucking body" (that was fun).

    You're not directly harming others. You're not harming society. Therefore, go for it! Believe me -- I'm all for government interference, but not when it comes to stuff like this, which only really hurts an individual. Sure, I guess society loses potential man-hours to drugs, because people become ineffective/lose their jobs, etc? But prison is in no way a solution to this. It just further exacerbates the monetary loss, and in no way helps people kick the habit. Prison just generally tends to get people more deeply involved in illegal activity, and make it harder for them to re-enter legal society.

    no one using drugs has ever done anything stupid and got someone else hurt

    never ever.

    there are laws against it because people who use them in mass quantities can do incredibly stupid things.

    edit: hell, people who don't use them en mass can still do stupid shit and get themselves hurt

    it's for the same reason you're not allowed to drink and drive or carry alcohol around in public.

    Xaquin on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    Shinyo wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    Not to some people it seems...

    Honestly, I don't think it's different. While yes, one has more potential for causing problems, that doesn't mean it should be illegal so much as better regulated, more education about its potential effects, etc. We have to accept that freedom in this regard *does* mean some increased risks.

    But shit, clearly Americans are fine with more freedom and more risk, just look at many sentiments on gun control.
    This is about the sanest argument on the matter I have ever heard.

    Sarcasm?

    Because it's two very different things.

    Drugs are made to get you high. If they hurt/kill you, it's an unintended byproduct (though often an unaviodable one, but it's still not why you buy the drugs). Also, it's all self-inflicted.

    Guns are made so that you can easily kill other people.

    Guns != drugs, basically to the same extent that babies != nuclear weapons.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    KNYTEKNYTE Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    It's more like "make it legal because it's my fucking body, I'm a fucking adult, and it's my fucking right as a fucking adult to do whatever the fuck I want with my fucking body" (that was fun).

    This is arguement doesn't stand. The only way it would is if there were not minors getting alcohol and cigarettes without any trouble at all, which obviously....
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Sarcasm?

    Because it's two very different things.

    Drugs are made to get you high. If they hurt/kill you, it's an unintended byproduct (though often an unaviodable one, but it's still not why you buy the drugs). Also, it's all self-inflicted.

    Guns are made so that you can easily kill other people.

    Guns != drugs, basically to the same extent that babies != nuclear weapons.

    I'd be willing to bet a ton of money that the number of people's live's negatively affected/destroyed by drug addiction far outnumbers those of gun accidents or possibly even gun murders by legal gun owners/carriers.

    KNYTE on
    The best defense is a good offense.

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
    - Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Sarcasm?

    Because it's two very different things.

    Drugs are made to get you high. If they hurt/kill you, it's an unintended byproduct (though often an unaviodable one, but it's still not why you buy the drugs). Also, it's all self-inflicted.

    Guns are made so that you can easily kill other people.

    Guns != drugs, basically to the same extent that babies != nuclear weapons.

    what?

    I own three guns and I've never even pointed them at a human

    am I using them wrong?

    guns are not made for the sole intent of killing people and to suggest that is laughable.

    Xaquin on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    Xaquin wrote: »
    no one using drugs has ever done anything stupid and got someone else hurt

    never ever.

    there are laws against it because people who use them in mass quantities can do incredibly stupid things.

    edit: hell, people who don't use them en mass can still do stupid shit and get themselves hurt

    it's for the same reason you're not allowed to drink and drive or carry alcohol around in public.

    Alcohol?

    I mean, honestly, this is actually possibly a legitimate argument against meth, because that drug in particular really seems to dial the crazy up to eleven. In all seriousness, it really does raise agression levels quite a bit.

    But, you know, sober people do stupid shit, too. That's why we outlaw the stupid shit.

    Also, a point which really hasn't been addressed by anyone yet -- how the fuck is prison a good solution? Thus far the law-enforcement crackdown on drugs seems to have accomplished approximately jack and shit, except for the whole "keeping people locked in a cycle of drug addiction, unemployment, and crime" thing.

    Dont' say "it should be illegal" without considering that that does nothing ot solve the problem whatsoever. Except maybe make it easier for you to not think about it/pretend it's not your problem? Or something?

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    ArdorArdor Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Shinyo wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Still, legalizing drugs recreationally and medically is different, and legalizing pot and heroin is different.

    Not to some people it seems...

    Honestly, I don't think it's different. While yes, one has more potential for causing problems, that doesn't mean it should be illegal so much as better regulated, more education about its potential effects, etc. We have to accept that freedom in this regard *does* mean some increased risks.

    But shit, clearly Americans are fine with more freedom and more risk, just look at many sentiments on gun control.
    This is about the sanest argument on the matter I have ever heard.

    Sarcasm?

    Because it's two very different things.

    Drugs are made to get you high. If they hurt/kill you, it's an unintended byproduct (though often an unaviodable one, but it's still not why you buy the drugs). Also, it's all self-inflicted.

    Guns are made so that you can easily kill other people.

    Guns != drugs, basically to the same extent that babies != nuclear weapons.

    However, a person using a gun incorrectly can hurt/kill a lot of people. In the end, it's the person who creates the situation.

    With drugs, a person can go ahead and take whatever they want, yeah. Are they not responsible for their actions in the end when they wake up and realize they ended up doing something they will regret for the rest of their life?

    How about the people who own a gun just because it gives them some sense of happiness, or power, or protection/safety etc?

    Are you saying that people who use guns to hunt animals, or for skeet shooting on for target practice are not using the gun properly or for its intended use?

    Ardor on
  • Options
    KNYTEKNYTE Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Ardor wrote: »
    I can see drugs being legalised so we can tax it to hell and back....

    Unfortunately this wouldn't work. People make the majority of hard drugs in their houses using fairly simple equipment and methods. If drugs were taxed and expensive it would not deter them from making their own stock for use and supply of others, and would likely spur them on even further.

    KNYTE on
    The best defense is a good offense.

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
    - Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    OK, yeah, @ Ardor and Xaquin -- that "Guns is fer killin'!" comment was glib.

    However, many people do purchase guns for that reason, and it is a viable reason to purchase a gun, and not a terribly uncommon one (self-protection counts). Not all, but it is definitely a purpose for guns.

    Drugs, however, are pretty overwhlemingly used to get high.

    Also, @ KNYTE -- I'd argue that drugs wouldn't ruin as many people's lives if not for the current way we prosecute users. If people felt freer to get help when they needed it, and if there were more abundant government-facilitated rehabilitation, and if people didn't get sent to fucking prison for shooting up, (talk about ruining lives!), I bet you'd actually see more people who want to recover be able to.

    We're not debating about whether or not drugs are a good idea -- that'd be a pretty fucking retarded debate. I don't think anyone is gonna say "yeah! Totally shoot up some meth! That's a great fucking idea!" What I'm saying is that overall, legalizing drugs will have many benefits to society, and even users themselves.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    no one using drugs has ever done anything stupid and got someone else hurt

    never ever.

    there are laws against it because people who use them in mass quantities can do incredibly stupid things.

    edit: hell, people who don't use them en mass can still do stupid shit and get themselves hurt

    it's for the same reason you're not allowed to drink and drive or carry alcohol around in public.

    Alcohol?

    I mean, honestly, this is actually possibly a legitimate argument against meth, because that drug in particular really seems to dial the crazy up to eleven. In all seriousness, it really does raise agression levels quite a bit.

    But, you know, sober people do stupid shit, too. That's why we outlaw the stupid shit.

    Also, a point which really hasn't been addressed by anyone yet -- how the fuck is prison a good solution? Thus far the law-enforcement crackdown on drugs seems to have accomplished approximately jack and shit, except for the whole "keeping people locked in a cycle of drug addiction, unemployment, and crime" thing.

    Dont' say "it should be illegal" without considering that that does nothing ot solve the problem whatsoever. Except maybe make it easier for you to not think about it/pretend it's not your problem? Or something?

    It should be illegal (personaly, I wouldn't care if they made alcohol illegal but I'll save it) because it affects your mind. I've seen people do the dumbest shit imaginable stoned from harmless ole mary jane. I saw a girl get high and try to get out of an attic down this little ladder (only done it a million times) but she was pretty relaxed and fell and caught her arm on a nail .... she needed 14 sitches. A guy I graduated with got wasted and drove home from his graduation party drive into a car killing the driver, but leaving his two daughters without a father (he was fine). I've seen people drive stoned over a curb and into someones fender and laugh.

    I've seen plenty of people act just fine under the influence of every drug imaginable, but for all the fuck ups I can't help but think that if they hadn't done it in the first place a lot of trouble could have been easily avoided.

    Xaquin on
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    KNYTE wrote: »
    Ardor wrote: »
    I can see drugs being legalised so we can tax it to hell and back....

    Unfortunately this wouldn't work. People make the majority of hard drugs in their houses using fairly simple equipment and methods. If drugs were taxed and expensive it would not deter them from making their own stock for use and supply of others, and would likely spur them on even further.

    Cocaine? Heroin? LSD? Ecstasy?

    I think this is more true of just crack (which requires cocaine to produce) and meth (Which is not "fairly simple" -- after all, your house can blow up).

    And I think people might be less inclined to home-brew if they had easy access at a store. People will pay for convenience. That's a fact.

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    and as for the way we treat users? .... well what did they do? how were they busted? If they were just fine sitting at home then they were probably fine .... If they were out on the streets driving all weavy then damn right they should have been arrested.

    I don't want some dipshit swerving into me because he couldn't wait to get home for his fix.

    Xaquin on
  • Options
    KNYTEKNYTE Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aemilius wrote: »
    Also, @ KNYTE -- I'd argue that drugs wouldn't ruin as many people's lives if not for the current way we prosecute users. If people felt freer to get help when they needed it, and if there were more abundant government-facilitated rehabilitation, and if people didn't get sent to fucking prison for shooting up, (talk about ruining lives!), I bet you'd actually see more people who want to recover be able to.

    We're not debating about whether or not drugs are a good idea -- that'd be a pretty fucking retarded debate. I don't think anyone is gonna say "yeah! Totally shoot up some meth! That's a great fucking idea!" What I'm saying is that overall, legalizing drugs will have many benefits to society, and even users themselves.

    You keep touting meth as the only hard drug with negative effects. All hard drugs are EXPENSIVE, which means the people who use them need a fairly sizable amount of money to pay for the addiction, which if they are not wealthly means they "need" more money, and with the claws of an addiction it's likely they'll do whatever they have to to get that money. Whether that be theft, selling their wife's car, putting their house on multiple mortgages, or whatever. The point here is that all hard drugs have negative effects on some level, period. I'm sure you're a gentlemen user of marijuana and other "party" drugs, and assume that because you have some limited control over your addiction that everyone else should be able to, but that is not the case.

    People's lives, and the lives of their families and friends, are affected/destroyed by drugs long before jail time is even a concern.

    KNYTE on
    The best defense is a good offense.

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
    - Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
  • Options
    sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited April 2007
    Xaquin wrote: »
    It should be illegal (personaly, I wouldn't care if they made alcohol illegal but I'll save it) because it affects your mind. I've seen people do the dumbest shit imaginable stoned from harmless ole mary jane. I saw a girl get high and try to get out of an attic down this little ladder (only done it a million times) but she was pretty relaxed and fell and caught her arm on a nail .... she needed 14 sitches. A guy I graduated with got wasted and drove home from his graduation party drive into a car killing the driver, but leaving his two daughters without a father (he was fine). I've seen people drive stoned over a curb and into someones fender and laugh.

    I've seen plenty of people act just fine under the influence of every drug imaginable, but for all the fuck ups I can't help but think that if they hadn't done it in the first place a lot of trouble could have been easily avoided.

    Granted. I don't think I ever said this was not true.

    I think what I said was "making it illegal in no way solves this problem." Right? That's the thing -- I try to be pragmatic. I mean, you use marijuana as an example of people doing stupid shit under the influence; it's already illegal! Obviously the illegality of it is having no effect whatsoever!

    Remember how well alcohol prohibition worked??

    Which reminds me -- drugs currently fund huge amounts of organized crime. By keeping drugs illegal, we are essentially saying "Yeah, people will do it anyway, and we could tax it for the benefit of society, and not lock people into endless cycles of crime, addiction, and poverty by sending them to prison, but we'd rather let criminals benefit dramatically from the sale of drugs."

    So. Why should drugs be illegal?

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Aemilius wrote: »
    It's more like "make it legal because it's my fucking body, I'm a fucking adult, and it's my fucking right as a fucking adult to do whatever the fuck I want with my fucking body" (that was fun).

    You're not directly harming others. You're not harming society. Therefore, go for it! Believe me -- I'm all for government interference, but not when it comes to stuff like this, which only really hurts an individual. Sure, I guess society loses potential man-hours to drugs, because people become ineffective/lose their jobs, etc? But prison is in no way a solution to this. It just further exacerbates the monetary loss, and in no way helps people kick the habit. Prison just generally tends to get people more deeply involved in illegal activity, and make it harder for them to re-enter legal society.

    no one using drugs has ever done anything stupid and got someone else hurt

    never ever.

    there are laws against it because people who use them in mass quantities can do incredibly stupid things.

    edit: hell, people who don't use them en mass can still do stupid shit and get themselves hurt

    it's for the same reason you're not allowed to drink and drive or carry alcohol around in public.

    Name me a single one of these "stupid things" that isn't a crime whether or not you're on drugs.

    you do meth and kill someone: manslaughter
    you do herion and rob a liquor store to pay for your habit: armed robbery
    you're a shitty neglectful parent because of your drug habit: neglect and child abuse

    now explain to me how these offesnes are somehow worse for society than thier sober counterparts

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    Nexus ZeroNexus Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    KNYTE wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet a ton of money that the number of people's live's negatively affected/destroyed by drug addiction far outnumbers those of gun accidents or possibly even gun murders by legal gun owners/carriers.

    Not the complete picture, but for a start, illegal drugs killed 17,000 people in 2000, while guns killed 29,000. It should be kept in mind again that many of these deaths would have been avoided had the drugs been legal, clean and regulated.


    But yeah, as Ardor said, it is the crime that should be punished, whether at the hands of a gun or a drug or anything else.

    Nexus Zero on
    sig.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.