The Drug War

[OmegaAlpha]

This post in no way endorses use of drugs. I want to see
where people stand on the issue of legalization of drugs.
I'm sure this has been done before but I want to know
what people think of the Drug war especially.
So drug war? Thoughts?


My opinion on the entire matter is :

I think drugs should be legalized because I believe a person should be allowed to do what they see fit unless it takes away the freedom of others to do the same. The drug war is an epic failure. People want to do drugs. Supply and demand. I won't argue the part where it hurts people and kills people. I will give you that. Drugs are nasty and bad for you. That shouldn't even be part of the discussion. A lot of things are bad and nasty for you. The question should be :
Is a man free to ingest what he wants into his own body? Are you free or are you not?

The argument about a man being a poor father or anything similar because of him taking in drugs is a poor one too because this happens with alcohol all day long and we have that legal.

Abuse, and people dying are things that are going to happen.
To me it's worth that to be as free as possible.

[Eris]

I'm for legalization. It is utterly anti-capitalist to ban any product group, and it will never be successful. If there is no open trade, there will always be black markets that fund groups that are on the other side of the law anyways, such as organized crime and terrorists, with an endless stream of easy money.

If drugs were legal, they could be subject to safety controls and managed to minimize all those unnecessary deaths from drugs that have been tampered with, or are stronger than advertised today.

[kamaaina ^_^]

its the drug users that cause all the violence. if there were no users then there would be no suppliers. i say keep it illegal. our economy is bad enough. the last thing we need is for the public to have access to drugs.

[OmegaAlpha]

I'm for legalization. It is utterly anti-capitalist to ban any product group, and it will never be successful. If there is no open trade, there will always be black markets that fund groups that are on the other side of the law anyways, such as organized crime and terrorists, with an endless stream of easy money.

If drugs were legal, they could be subject to safety controls and managed to minimize all those unnecessary deaths from drugs that have been tampered with, or are stronger than advertised today.

I agree. A little consistency from the Government would be nice too.
It's not like they hate drugs and want to keep us safe. They are more than willing to sell us drugs if the FDA approves it!:banghead:

[Eris]

its the drug users that cause all the violence. if there were no users then there would be no suppliers. i say keep it illegal. our economy is bad enough. the last thing we need is for the public to have access to drugs.

If banning drugs was an effective way to deter drug use, why is drug use so common now when drugs are banned?

[OmegaAlpha]

its the drug users that cause all the violence. if there were no users then there would be no suppliers. i say keep it illegal. our economy is bad enough. the last thing we need is for the public to have access to drugs.

This is an appeal to fear.

[kamaaina ^_^]

If banning drugs was an effective way to deter drug use, why is drug use so common now when drugs are banned?

well with any 1 situation there is the opposite/underground. just like in the prohibition. there will always be those who find/grow/manufacture illegal things. it will only grow more commoner if it gets legalized.



This is an appeal to fear.


Not nessaserly. freankly i do not like drug users. knowingly taking something that is unhealthy, to me, shows lack of self respect. i wouldnt want my kids taking drugs or raising them in a society were its acceptable

[OmegaAlpha]

well with any 1 situation there is the opposite/underground. just like in the prohibition. there will always be those who find/grow/manufacture illegal things. it will only grow more commoner if it gets legalized.




Not nessaserly. freankly i do not like drug users. knowingly taking something that is unhealthy, to me, shows lack of self respect. i wouldnt want my kids taking drugs or raising them in a society were its acceptable

1. So drugs (the ones the FDA does not support) should be illegal because they (drug users) commit crime. There will always be people who break those laws because they want to do drugs, but let's keep it illegal because it deters drug use? Prove it. and even if you could prove it.. I've given you that one. Drugs are bad. but...

2. Self Respect to you. You would not want your kids doing this or that..
This is you imposing your morals on others. You can control your kids and yourself..but
let the rest of us be.

[Eris]

well with any 1 situation there is the opposite/underground. just like in the prohibition. there will always be those who find/grow/manufacture illegal things. it will only grow more commoner if it gets legalized.

But the prohibition ended, and it turned out it wasn't so bad after all. You certainly don't see people gunning each other down on the street over a keg of beer (like they did during the prohibition).

[3pleT]

imagine the world where most people use a quick fix of heroin when they're depressed.
imagine the world where some kids ask you to buy them k instead of booze.
imagine the world where you always see the bums lying with needles in their arms instead of bottles in their hands.
imagine the world where the waitress in a restaurant serves you with a few white lines instead of appetizer.

cause that's the world you get when you make drugs completely legal. i guess some would call that dystopia.
i personally wouldn't mind it, cause we do have a problem with overpopulation.

some illegal substances (like thc in any form), on the other hand, don't deserve to be illegal as long as the more dangerous ones (like alcohol and tobacco) are legal and available to everyone.

[kamaaina ^_^]

But the prohibition ended, and it turned out it wasn't so bad after all. You certainly don't see people gunning each other down on the street over a keg of beer (like they did during the prohibition).

no. but there is an increase in under age drinking, drunk driving deaths, alcohol poisioning


1. So drugs (the ones the FDA does not support) should be illegal because they (drug users) commit crime. There will always be people who break those laws because they want to do drugs, but let's keep it illegal because it deters drug use? Prove it. and even if you could prove it.. I've given you that one. Drugs are bad. but...

2. Self Respect to you. You would not want your kids doing this or that..
This is you imposing your morals on others. You can control your kids and yourself..but
let the rest of us be.

1.) Im not sure wat your point is
2.) i understand its my morals that i think drugs are bad but i also base my beliefs on emperical facts meaning drugs are unhealthy and harmful. besides why waste money on drugs when you can use that money for some new anime/hentai/manga:D

[OmegaAlpha]

imagine the world where most people use a quick fix of heroin when they're depressed.
imagine the world where some kids ask you to buy them k instead of booze.
imagine the world where you always see the bums lying with needles in their arms instead of bottles in their hands.
imagine the world where the waitress in a restaurant serves you with a few white lines instead of appetizer.

cause that's the world you get when you make drugs completely legal. i guess some would call that dystopia.
i personally wouldn't mind it, cause we do have a problem with overpopulation.

some illegal substances (like thc in any form), on the other hand, don't deserve to be illegal as long as the more dangerous ones (like alcohol and tobacco) are legal and available to everyone.


Imagine a world where we have Prozac and Zoloft
Imagine a world where adults lose all morals.
Imagine a world that exists right now.
Imagine businesses selling what the supply is.

Cause that's what you get right now. The stuff about some things being dangerous is garbage. People die daily from consuming alcohol. Where do you draw the line and let the government say "this is okay for you" and "this is bad, don't take it". You tell me the exact line.

[OmegaAlpha]

no. but there is an increase in under age drinking, drunk driving deaths, alcohol poisioning



1.) Im not sure wat your point is
2.) i understand its my morals that i think drugs are bad but i also base my beliefs on emperical facts meaning drugs are unhealthy and harmful. besides why waste money on drugs when you can use that money for some new anime/hentai/manga:D


1. My point was that your idea that things are dangerous is a moot one.
and we have no consistency with the drug policy. They are all for drugs, if it's their drugs. The problem is that it's not the governments job to tell you what you can and cannot do with your body. If we are willing to give them that job,(we have, and should not have) let's at least keep it consistent.

2.Yes, I have given you drugs are harmful to people. Where do you draw the line here? Do we ban all things that cause harm?
I agree with having more money for Anime, that rules. :)
But we can assume that some people just..like getting high and destroying themselves. As long as the demand to get high is there..the supply will be there too. The drug war is unwinnable. (word?) lol

[Saint Seiya]

i say no since i dont use drugs and i mean all harmful drugs like alcochol, cigars, cocaine, etc i think the world would be a better place without them :\

[OmegaAlpha]

i say no since i dont use drugs and i mean all harmful drugs like alcochol, cigars, cocaine, etc i think the world would be a better place without them :\

If only this added up. Making something illegal does not make it go away.
Everything you named that you believe makes the world a worse place
(I agree with you actually on that point) is a huge demand.
The supply will be met, If the demand is there.

[Memento Mori]

Why do we waste jail space on people who are doing nothing wrong to anyone else? They're destroying themselves, it's their choice. Drugs should be legal.

Alcohol is deadly. And has killed millions of people, some of whom didn't even drink alcohol. Why is that legal?

Cigarettes are deadly. Just like alcohol, they kill people who didn't smoke the cigarette. Why are cigarettes legal?

[kamaaina ^_^]

i say no since i dont use drugs and i mean all harmful drugs like alcochol, cigars, cocaine, etc i think the world would be a better place without them :\

I agress. get rid of all drugs counter and perscription. only use drugs that treat specific symptoms/disease/infections. there's my line ^_^

[OmegaAlpha]

Why do we waste jail space on people who are doing nothing wrong to anyone else? They're destroying themselves, it's their choice. Drugs should be legal.

Alcohol is deadly. And has killed millions of people, some of whom didn't even drink alcohol. Why is that legal?

Cigarettes are deadly. Just like alcohol, they kill people who didn't smoke the cigarette. Why are cigarettes legal?

Even though I said in the first post that I don't even care about the argument about safety because I believe something being dangerous should have no influence on if it's legal or not.. I like this. I agree. If you're going to make the point about things being dangerous you have to be consistent. If we ban drugs we might as well ban cars. Cars have a practical purpose some might say and drugs do not!.. before someone replies with something like that consider that taking drugs is a personal choice and though I think its bad for you it's not MY job to play nanny for you. Besides, some could even make the argument that drugs can have positive effects on creativity (I won't make that argument because like I said the "effect" argument of the drug war issue is boring to me compared to the idea of being free and being able to make your own choices)

[OmegaAlpha]

I agress. get rid of all drugs counter and perscription. only use drugs that treat specific symptoms/disease/infections. there's my line ^_^


Define this. Draw the line where something is good for you or bad for you.
More people die a year from safe "tested" drugs than you'd believe.

Also, this isn't the issue when you talk about making something illegal.
be CONSISTENT. Are we really going to leave the FDA to decide what's best for us? Slippery slope my friend.

[kamaaina ^_^]

lol in all reality its my side (keeping drugs illegal) that has won and hopefully keep winning. I have no real reason to argue with you because the drugs your are wanting to be legal are illegal. and as far as who chooses what is and what isn't legal does rely on the governemt. if you dont like it get out. simple as that

[3pleT]

People die daily from consuming alcohol. Where do you draw the line and let the government say "this is okay for you" and "this is bad, don't take it". You tell me the exact line.
that is true, but consider this: look at how many more lives alcohol has destroyed than heroin. then look at how much greater percentage of lives heroin has destroyed among its users. now, if it became legal, things would seem fine for a while, but it would take just about two generations for people to adjust to it and would probably become widespread as alcohol is today and governments would terminate most of the anti-drug campaigns for the sake of their own profit.
i do think that most of currently illegal drugs should be legalized, but not all of them. what they should definitely do is change their attitude towards addicts, cause they seem to be the only ones to suffer here.

[OmegaAlpha]

lol in all reality its my side (keeping drugs illegal) that has won and hopefully keep winning. I have no real reason to argue with you because the drugs your are wanting to be legal are illegal. and as far as who chooses what is and what isn't legal does rely on the governemt. if you dont like it get out. simple as that

What did you win? Really? Full jails. Prisons with druggies sharing cells with killers. The government restricting your freedom.

I'm glad we got to the heart of your argument :
If you don't like it, GET OUT!

Enjoy your "win."

[Memento Mori]

that is true, but consider this: look at how many more lives alcohol has destroyed than heroin. then look at how much greater percentage of lives heroin has destroyed among its users. now, if it became legal, things would seem fine for a while, but it would take just about two generations for people to adjust to it and would probably become widespread as alcohol is today and governments would terminate most of the anti-drug campaigns for the sake of their own profit.
i do think that most of currently illegal drugs should be legalized, but not all of them. what they should definitely do is change their attitude towards addicts, cause they seem to be the only ones to suffer here.

More lives have been destroyed by alcohol.

Period.

[OmegaAlpha]

that is true, but consider this: look at how many more lives alcohol has destroyed than heroin. then look at how much greater percentage of lives heroin has destroyed among its users. now, if it became legal, things would seem fine for a while, but it would take just about two generations for people to adjust to it and would probably become widespread as alcohol is today and governments would terminate most of the anti-drug campaigns for the sake of their own profit.
i do think that most of currently illegal drugs should be legalized, but not all of them. what they should definitely do is change their attitude towards addicts, cause they seem to be the only ones to suffer here.

This is a an interesting point of view. I really just want consistency.
If we're going let the government decide what's good or not for us to take into our own bodies then I want them to play by the rules too. If it's about safety I want everything as dangerous as cigars to be banned. If we're going to do the restriction of freedom to keep people safe, let's go all the way. This pick and choose of what is okay and what isn't is annoying.

If the government was consistent with their drug policy nothing would be legal.

[kamaaina ^_^]

What did you win? Really? Full jails. Prisons with druggies sharing cells with killers. The government restricting your freedom.

I'm glad we got to the heart of your argument :
If you don't like it, GET OUT!

Enjoy your "win."

Well like most people, my main concern in life is my own. full jails dont bother me as long as im not in them. restricting my freedom??? look around CHINA, BURMA, nearly every Arab nation and Africa. dont think you have such a bad life. the least on my mind is what drugs the governemnt should or should not let me use.

[Memento Mori]

Well like most people, my main concern in life is my own. full jails dont bother me as long as im not in them. restricting my freedom??? look around CHINA, BURMA, nearly every Arab nation and Africa. dont think you have such a bad life. the least on my mind is what drugs the governemnt should or should not let me use.

Full jails bother me because tax payers pay to keep them full and healthy. Even the druggies, who honestly made a personal choice.

I know I don't pay taxes now, but when I move out... God.

We're not saying we have a bad life, we're just pointing out a flaw in the system.

[OmegaAlpha]

Well like most people, my main concern in life is my own. full jails dont bother me as long as im not in them. restricting my freedom??? look around CHINA, BURMA, nearly every Arab nation and Africa. dont think you have such a bad life. the least on my mind is what drugs the governemnt should or should not let me use.

Okay. I almost did not even touch this because it speaks for itself.

Yes, you're right compared to some asian countries and the middle east we have many many more freedoms. This does nothing to help your argument.
that something is better does not make it perfect. No system is ever perfect.
The beauty of the western democracies is that we understand that we could be BETTER. That is MORE FREE, not less. No one here is making the case that they have a "bad life" because drugs are illegal so I won't address that.

This discussion has been good so far. Thanks to everyone that has put in their point of view.

[-akichan-]

Legalizing drugs is like legalizing the equip of guns, people think it is a normal choice to have those with them, or even use them. However, if drugs are illegalized, why can't guns be illegalized before that? Yes, using drug is a big issue, but it is not a bad as having guns, because it DID kill many people. So if gun is legalized, then drug should also be legalized. But I'm not supporting the legalization of drugs, but I'm just saying what I think it should be the right thing. Of course I won't put any agreements on legalizing drugs besides prescription-drugs, but there still could be some black markets that sells things are are illegalized secretly. Even if drugs is illegalized, is it really that easy to completely ban drugs? There could still be people using drugs. Illegalizing drugs is like illegalizing guns, so I think that would greatly cause more troubles withh this country.

EDIT: Also, if guns are illegalized , then people would go even more crazier, same goes with drugs, if drugs are illegalized, it'd still make an affection of the people, of course not as worse as guns being illegalized. However, I hope BOTH are illegalized.

Now that is just MY opinions.

[OmegaAlpha]

Legalizing drugs is like legalizing the equip of guns, people think it is a normal choice to have those with them, or even use them. However, if drugs are illegalized, why can't guns be illegalized before that? Yes, using drug is a big issue, but it is not a bad as having guns, because it DID kill many people. So if gun is legalized, then drug should also be legalized. But I'm not supporting the legalization of drugs, but I'm just saying what I think it should be the right thing. Of course I won't put any agreements on legalizing drugs besides prescription-drugs, but there still could be some black markets that sells things are are illegalized secretly. Even if drugs is illegalized, is it really that easy to completely ban drugs? There could still be people using drugs. Illegalizing drugs is like illegalizing guns, so I think that would greatly cause more troubles withh this country.

Now that is just MY opinions.


I like this post. I think you have some great ideas here.
I agree that guns are more dangerous than drugs.
If we are going to ban one first it would be guns.

Of course I think guns and drugs should both be legal and
available via the free market though.

[Eris]

I'm glad we got to the heart of your argument :
If you don't like it, GET OUT!

This is an absurd statement: There is nowhere to "get out" to. Every single square inch of habitable land in the world is under claim, and most uninhabitable land too for that matter, except for some patches of Antarctica.

[3pleT]

This is a an interesting point of view. I really just want consistency.
If we're going let the government decide what's good or not for us to take into our own bodies then I want them to play by the rules too. If it's about safety I want everything as dangerous as cigars to be banned. If we're going to do the restriction of freedom to keep people safe, let's go all the way. This pick and choose of what is okay and what isn't is annoying.

If the government was consistent with their drug policy nothing would be legal.
first of all, consistency and government don't compute. never did. they're "playing by the book" or "using a creative approach" when they see fit. i'm not talking about the US, i'm talking about any government that ever existed.

now, believe it or not, there are some things not even government can get rid of. tobacco and alcohol are just that - i think we all know what kind of mess the prohibition had caused and what kind of people exploited it. so, there's another thing you have to keep in mind: making something illegal doesn't make it unavailable, it just makes it harder and riskier to find and get, and therefore, less people will bother. if you legalize it, it will not only become available to everyone, but by time, its negative publicity will most likely be replaced with ads and small warnings that nobody ever reads: "PFIZER POWDER - Because your veins deserve better. warning: it can kill you!"

like i said, the only thing that should be changed is attitude towards the addicts. i mean, the guy gets addicted to something, his life is already in ruins and then they catch him and send him to the joint - doesn't seem right to me. drugs really are a problem and we must keep it in check, but we should also understand the truth: no matter what we do, it will never go away.

[OmegaAlpha]

This is an absurd statement: There is nowhere to "get out" to. Every single square inch of habitable land in the world is under claim, and most uninhabitable land too for that matter, except for some patches of Antarctica.

I agree, that's why I said it was the heart of their argument. I don't agree with "getting out" if you don't agree with a policy.

[Eris]

I agree, that's why I said it was the heart of their argument. I don't agree with "getting out" if you don't agree with a policy.

Ah, but there is no redundancy like superfluous redundancy.

[OmegaAlpha]

first of all, consistency and government don't compute. never did. they're "playing by the book" or "using a creative approach" when they see fit. i'm not talking about the US, i'm talking about any government that ever existed.

now, believe it or not, there are some things not even government can get rid of. tobacco and alcohol are just that - i think we all know what kind of mess the prohibition had caused and what kind of people exploited it. so, there's another thing you have to keep in mind: making something illegal doesn't make it unavailable, it just makes it harder and riskier to find and get, and therefore, less people will bother. if you legalize it, it will not only become available to everyone, but by time, its negative publicity will most likely be replaced with ads and small warnings that nobody ever reads: "PFIZER POWDER - Because your veins deserve better. warning: it can kill you!"

like i said, the only thing that should be changed is attitude towards the addicts. i mean, the guy gets addicted to something, his life is already in ruins and then they catch him and send him to the joint - doesn't seem right to me. drugs really are a problem and we must keep it in check, but we should also understand the truth: no matter what we do, it will never go away.

Yep. Drugs can kill you. I gave that one up from the get go.
I wish the free market had adds for coke or other drugs. It would be a refreshing change from the constant "male" enhancement commercials. :p

I catch your meaning with the government never being consistent but that does not mean they can't make an effort. Okay...they never will. I'll give up that one too. I don't think the drug policy will change in my lifetime. Way too many political forces at work to make sure things are kept at the status quo. It's not a bad thing to point out the flaws in the system though.
I think pot will be legal in the next 20 - 50 years in the US.
It's a start.

[Diocletian]

I don't wanna intrude into anyone's arguments so I'll make this short but sweet.

There is usually another life involved. Whether it be a daughter or wife there is someone involved. There are stoners where I live and 6/8 of them have kids involved. The kids walk around with pooped diapers, or holding their fathers paraphernalia. When there is another life involved that should be a sign to stop doing drugs.

I can't say all these things without mentioning that I have partaken in activities relating to illegal drugs.

[OmegaAlpha]

I don't wanna intrude into anyone's arguments so I'll make this short but sweet.

There is usually another life involved. Whether it be a daughter or wife there is someone involved. There are stoners where I live and 6/8 of them have kids involved. The kids walk around with pooped diapers, or holding their fathers paraphernalia. When there is another life involved that should be a sign to stop doing drugs.

I can't say all these things without mentioning that I have partaken in activities relating illegal drugs.


Great post. This is true and something we all did seem to avoid. Drugs do disrupt lives and innocent people who had no choice but to be in the cross fire of someones bad habit. I still the the enemy here is bad parents, not the drugs.

[kamaaina ^_^]

Great post. This is true and something we all did seem to avoid. Drugs do disrupt lives and innocent people who had no choice but to be in the cross fire of someones bad habit. I still the enemy here is bad parents, not the drugs.


Lol your blaming the parents over drugs? thats like saying guns dont kill people, people kill people= drugs dont kill people, people kill people. ill use guns as an example: if we remove guns then there would be no gun violence. how many people have died of a lazer death ray? None. why? because there are none to begin with. remove guns all together and you wont have a gun problem, just a knife/stick/chainsaw or what ever else people would use to kill next. My point, remove drugs=no drug problem (is that realistic? of course not but making drugs legal would only be a step backwords rather then not moving.

[OmegaAlpha]

Lol your blaming the parents over drugs? thats like saying guns dont kill people, people kill people= drugs dont kill people, people kill people. ill use guns as an example: if we remove guns then there would be no gun violence. how many people have died of a lazer death ray? None. why? because there are none to begin with. remove guns all together and you wont have a gun problem, just a knife/stick/chainsaw or what ever else people would use to kill next. My point, remove drugs=no drug problem (is that realistic? of course not but making drugs legal would only be a step backwords rather then not moving.

I'm blaming people for the drugs they take into their own body, yes.
Guns don't kill people. That's true. A man pulls the trigger.
If we removed guns? How is this possible? If we banned guns on the other hand only criminals and cops would have them. Awesome. I think we agree that it's impossible to remove guns and drugs, so yay.

We agree on a few minor points here but making drugs legal would not be a step "backwards" because it does not get any more backwards than telling a man that he cannot take a substance into his own body. I said it 12992912492 times, I agree..drugs are bad, they hurt people. You have no debate there. I think it's worth it. A free society where people can make personal choices is better than a pick and choose system we have now. Because it's a matter of fact that we don't have a policy against all or even most drugs, just the ones without corporate labels on the box.

[Diocletian]

Lol your blaming the parents over drugs? thats like saying guns dont kill people, people kill people= drugs dont kill people, people kill people. ill use guns as an example: if we remove guns then there would be no gun violence. how many people have died of a lazer death ray? None. why? because there are none to begin with. remove guns all together and you wont have a gun problem, just a knife/stick/chainsaw or what ever else people would use to kill next. My point, remove drugs=no drug problem (is that realistic? of course not but making drugs legal would only be a step backwords rather then not moving.

That's not entirely true. I'll take my friend Orlando as an example. He used to do loads and loads of cocaine before he entered rehab. Now here's where the change started to occur. His dealer was sent to jail and he was much to lazy and way too much of a skitz to go and look for another dealer. He's an employee at a K-Mart to this day and while that isn't the best job around he's clean and is with his wife.

Remember that most stoners/addicts are too lazy to look for an alternative and will probably end up clean. Getting drugs off the street all together is impossible so I guess it's all a dream.

[OmegaAlpha]

That's not entirely true. I'll take my friend Orlando as an example. He used to do loads and loads of cocaine before he entered rehab. Now here's where the change started to occur. His dealer was sent to jail and he was much to lazy and way too much of a skitz to go and look for another dealer. He's an employee at a K-Mart to this day and while that isn't the best job around he's clean and is with his wife.

Remember that most stoners/addicts are too lazy to look for an alternative and will probably end up clean. Getting drugs off the street all together is impossible so I guess it's all a dream.

Your friend should be honestly proud of himself, drug addiction is crazy hard to shake off. I believe we should have more rehabs for people who have issues with drugs. I think we could make more of them similar to AA for alcohol.
We have many programs in the states like that, NA is one.
Those who need help should be given help.

[SigmaSD]

I happen to be very liberal when it comes to arguments that may infringe on people's rights and freedoms. I find myself in support of legalizing drugs. Though I myself have never, and will never partake in consuming drugs; I still believe that it should be legalized for those that would like to use them. After all, people that don't like drugs still have the option not to use them.

Though both sides do bring up good points. By legalizing drugs, the narc economy goes down, and it might even reduce crime since drug dealers will be out of a job. It is also beneficial because jails won't be as overcrowded, since one can be sent to jail for something as simple as "possesion of drugs".

On the other side of the spectrum, drugs will be more readily available, making it easier access for kids. Some illicit drugs are really harmful to use at a young age, and may impare cerebral development in children if they consume at a very early age. Legalizing drugs will also contribute to more wrecklessness. Currently drinking and driving is the major reason why there are a lot of automobile accidents. Now imagine how much more accidents will happen now that there are more abusive substances readily available in the market.

Both sides have some valid points, but I still lean towards the legalization of drugs.

[Anpan Hayase]

Drugs.

Oh baby.


-rubs hands together and than types away.-


Well, here's what I think~

Drugs aren't good.
But even though it is illegal, people do it anyway.
My mom was out of my life for 13 years because of her addiction.

I tried weed and... kinda liked it.
So now, my defense is kinda screwed. I only say yes because I did like it, so I want it be legal so I can do it and not worry about getting in trouble. Then, considering my past; my mother being gone, I should squander any thought of legalization.

So. I'm stuck on this subject.

-asks her heart to show her the way.-

and...~

Only because of personal reasons, I would have to say no legalization and because my heart told me so.

:'D

[-akichan-]

US is so big to the point that not illegalization of drugs would really stop the whole country from using drugs, there are always black markets out there, and people who are still using drugs would probably not know that it is being illegalized by seeing how slow does people get the news.

Of course some of us would wanna ban illegal drugs, but come to think of a different possible result of that, is that people would be badly affected to the point that more mentle people would walk around at downtowns, it'd really increase the number of crimes and the bad affect on people. It'd be nice if both drugs and guns are illegalized, but I personally consider this as an American culture, that citizens may carry guns legally, and take drugs freely since the word "freedom" is coming out at many peoples' mouths. Nothing can stop drugs and guns is what I can think of.

[OmegaAlpha]

US is so big to the point that not illegalization of drugs would really stop the whole country from using drugs, there are always black markets out there, and people who are still using drugs would probably not know that it is being illegalized by seeing how slow does people get the news.

Of course some of us would wanna ban illegal drugs, but come to think of a different possible result of that, is that people would be badly affected to the point that more mentle people would walk around at downtowns, it'd really increase the number of crimes and the bad affect on people. It'd be nice if both drugs and guns are illegalized, but I personally consider this as an American culture, that citizens may carry guns legally, and take drugs freely since the word "freedom" is coming out at many peoples' mouths. Nothing can stop drugs and guns is what I can think of.

I take your meaning and appreciate your post.

The real issue of legality is a tough one and neither side is outlandish or stupid. We should never be so stuck on an idea that we forget that other people have ideas too. I try to be a pragmatist personally..as opposed to an idealist.

From what I've gathered so far is that people are not so black or white that they can only see things from their point of view which is refreshing. I think many people look at all of the bad things drug users do to families and society in general and think "well it would be much worse if it were all legal". I think this is a reasonable reaction.
I just don't agree with it. I have tried to make the case that:

1. Drugs, though bad for individuals and society should be a personal choice, like alcohol.

2. The obvious(or maybe hypothetical) danger of legalization is outweighed by freedom we should all have to choose. Crimes like DWI/DUI are examples of how we currently blame the PERSON and not the drug in question for stupid mistakes under the influence (we take the away the right to drive, we don't ban alcohol)

3. The current drug laws have no consistency. The drug war is by all accounts an epic failure. The tax payer cost of keeping addicts in prison next to killers is outstanding.

4. Supply and demand. People WANT to get high. Who is the government to tell people what state of mind they can or cannot be in? Where does this end? Really?

5. An argument could be made that making drugs legal could make society safer. A quick google search could make this case better than I can. I don't like working in strictly
"what-ifs" though. The end point is we have no IDEA what would happen if it all was legal. My point is that frankly, I don't care. A man should be free to take what he likes. I hate drugs, but that's MY choice. I am not the God of morality for everyone else.

[Sanosuke23]

I really don't want to get into this big thing like I usually do with, say, abortion threads, where we get obstinate pro-lifers and I end up just linking that one thread and giving up. I really don't. That being the case, I'll say this much:


Nothing, NOTHING on the list of controlled substances should be BANNED OUTRIGHT. At the same time, completely unfettered use of something designed for strictly medical use shouldn't be allowed either. Howsabout we go back to using them for what a lot of those "controlled" substances were created for; MEDICINAL PURPOSES.

MDMA was used in extremely small doses to help psychiatric patients with depression and to allow them to "open up" easier with the psychiatrist. Someone invariably got their hands on a buttload of it, and Ecstasy got slapped on the b& list.

Heroin was and in the UK still is legal(though under the name Diamporphine) for medicinal purposes, and I don't see the the British Isles sinking into the sea, hrm... Should we wait a little longer?

Psilocybin Mushrooms are Schedule I drugs for no real reason aside from there being no known medicinal use. They're purely recreational and they are simply banned as a result. I have no proof, but I'd assume the reason why tobacco in general and cigarettes in specific aren't banned but these are is because you can grow mushrooms a hell of a lot easier than you can tobacco, and so there's less of a chance you'd go out and buy the taxed product.

[RayCaptain]

Well, here we go on my opinions...


My opinion: NO, and I mean no, body harming drug should be taken for any reason outside of extreme medical conditions.

[XdreamzX]

i hate that the government puts young guys in jail for selling harmless plants(refering to weed) which i find quite relaxing :)

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

I agress. get rid of all drugs counter and perscription. only use drugs that treat specific symptoms/disease/infections. there's my line ^_^

Well, here we go on my opinions...


My opinion: NO, and I mean no, body harming drug should be taken for any reason outside of extreme medical conditions.

So are either of you doctors, or do you just play them on the internet? I guess I should be grateful that no one has walked into this thread barking about the "healing power of herbs" and stating that you can cure major diseases like AIDS and Cancer with the right regimen of vitamins and herbs.

[RayCaptain]

I'm sorry but uh, I think you didn't understand me. What I was saying was things like pot, speed, crack, alcohol, ect. shouldn't be taken. I'm all for something that is perscription and what not. Also, I happen to be studying some basic medical field knowledge so while I'm not a doctor, I do have some knowledge in this area.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

I'm sorry but uh, I think you didn't understand me. What I was saying was things like pot, speed, crack, alcohol, ect. shouldn't be taken. I'm all for something that is perscription and what not. Also, I happen to be studying some basic medical field knowledge so while I'm not a doctor, I do have some knowledge in this area.
It's not a failure on my part to understand; it's a failure on your part to communicate. Most prescription drugs could be adequately described as "body harming". Most medical procedures aren't extreme. Even if you do mean illegal drugs, outside of hallucinogens most of them have prescription analogs, so you're still implying that you know better then a doctor for everyday treatment.

[RayCaptain]

It's not a failure on my part to understand; it's a failure on your part to communicate. Most prescription drugs could be adequately described as "body harming". Most medical procedures aren't extreme. Even if you do mean illegal drugs, outside of hallucinogens most of them have prescription analogs, so you're still implying that you know better then a doctor for everyday treatment.
Well first off I'd like to apologize for my 'failure' to communicate. Second I'd like to agree with you that perscriptions can be used to harm the body, however if used properly, they help and heal a sick body. No matter how you ingest, snort, inject, ect. any drugs like pot, alcohol, and all the others that are considered 'bad' it will harm you in some way shape or form. Lastly, please let me say when I know better than the doctor. I don't need others to do it for me.

[XdreamzX]

I'm sorry but uh, I think you didn't understand me. What I was saying was things like pot, speed, crack, alcohol, ect. shouldn't be taken. I'm all for something that is perscription and what not. Also, I happen to be studying some basic medical field knowledge so while I'm not a doctor, I do have some knowledge in this area.
woah woah woah, pot and alchohol & crack are 3 totally different things...you never heard of anyone dying from weed or getting in a car accident because of it

the worst you probably heared is that it makes you do slighty stupider things buddy. don't ever put those 3 in the same catagory

[RayCaptain]

The reason they are together, even though extremely different in what ammount of damage they do, is because they do cause harm. Pot will kill you just like anything else you smoke will. The plant itself may not be the thing that harms the body, but instead it is the tar, smoke, ect. that you take in when you smoke it that harms you.

In other words, smoking of anykind will harm you badly so if they come out with a pot pill then I might think differently, but for the meantime I remain steadfast on the subject

[XdreamzX]

lol @ pot pill

[OmegaAlpha]

The reason they are together, even though extremely different in what ammount of damage they do, is because they do cause harm. Pot will kill you just like anything else you smoke will. The plant itself may not be the thing that harms the body, but instead it is the tar, smoke, ect. that you take in when you smoke it that harms you.

In other words, smoking of anykind will harm you badly so if they come out with a pot pill then I might think differently, but for the meantime I remain steadfast on the subject

Your points all revolve around the idea that if something is bad for you that people should not do them. That seems reasonable enough but should your opinion be law?

On another point, many of the prescription drugs that have come out in the last 10 years were fatal when taken as prescribed.
I'm sure you've heard of these recalls. How do you account for this?

Just curious

[Majugarzett]

I believe in the legalisation of drugs. Everyone has the right to make their own decisions; if they aware of the risks, then any harm that may come to them is entirely their own fault. If drugs were legalised, gang violence due to clients not being able to pay up etc. would decrease drastically, which is another key issue supporting my opinion.

[Datenshi]

I could have sworn we had this argument before.

It's frankly a surprise to me to see the amount of debate there is about this topic in the Western world. In Japan it's never been much of an issue, we have cases of drug use but nobody really questions the fact that it is illegal. Obviously this is because drug use is more widespread in countries like the United States, and because more people are sensitive about the concept of freedom and individual liberty abroad.

Anyhow. Speaking from the sidelines; from what I've perceived, the reason the issue is so controversial seems to be because the effects of drugs are inflated out of proportion by the schools and media.

On one hand there are the educational institutions and government propaganda which blows the danger of drugs, or underaged smoking and drinking for that matter, way out of proportion (like "SAY NO!" posters, horrifying "before and after" photos, and in some cases the employment of bad science, pure and simple), and the impressionable who take them seriously, and on the other hand there are those who (quite rightly) regard this with profound mistrust.

It's the same as any controversial event in history. One side, out of nationalistic interests, states the number of people dead in such or such war crime is no less than millions. The other side maintains that the fatalities are no more than a thousand, or that there was no such war crime in the first place.

The answer is probably somewhere in between. However, the interests of both sides (in the specific case of drug use, the government's concern over the decrease in productivity of it's citizens, or the maintaining of public peace, for example) has resulted in a flood of bad information to wade through, making the facts hard the discern and reasonable arguments difficult, often, it seems to me, reducing them to the sorry level of "drugs are evil because they say so" or crude stereotypes.

[Sanosuke23]

The reason they are together, even though extremely different in what ammount of damage they do, is because they do cause harm. Pot will kill you just like anything else you smoke will. The plant itself may not be the thing that harms the body, but instead it is the tar, smoke, ect. that you take in when you smoke it that harms you.

In other words, smoking of anykind will harm you badly so if they come out with a pot pill then I might think differently, but for the meantime I remain steadfast on the subject

WAY TO HAVE A SIG ADVOCATING SMOKING, THEN.

No no, that's okay, we're used to FELL HYPOCRISY around these parts.

[Cancre]

hmmmm If you want to take drugs take them , I mean if im not taking them then there's no problem , if my freinds take them thats they're choice . as for legalizing them , you do have to draw the line somewhere don't you .

[OmegaAlpha]

hmmmm If you want to take drugs take them , I mean if im not taking them then there's no problem , if my freinds take them thats they're choice . as for legalizing them , you do have to draw the line somewhere don't you .

Yeah. The line should be that as long as you mind your own business you are left alone. What you put into your own body is your own business.

[Ridana]

Quite frankly, and I'm not speaking to everyone here, but there are a lot of dumbarse arguments on the pro-Drug War side of this thread (and society in general).

Now I don't take illegal drugs, however, though rarely I do drink, I do smoke, I take aspirin for migraines, and I'm a ginormous caffeine addict, therefore, I am a drug-user. Just because I'm not an ILLEGAL drug-user doesn't mean I'm not a drug-user at all, and the same applies to all of you.
So unless you never take/use/ingest soda, coffee, energy drinks, chocolate, aspirin/acetominephin, antacids, non-organically-raised beef, OTC cough/cold/sinus medications, diet pills, prescriptions for erectile dysfunction, etc. etc. etc ... get off your frelling high horses.

Sure, we all draw lines somewhere, and that would not change if more drugs would be made legal. I wouldn't suddenly start smoking my brain into oblivion just because pot was made legal, and neither would most people who do not already smoke weed. But as it sits now, the lines that have been drawn, were drawn by those who profit from certain drugs being illegal. Do your research. Have you ever donated money to the Partnership for a Drug-Free America? Have you ever wondered where they get their money for all of those expensive television ads? The same ads which I've seen followed by ads for anti-depressants! It's the drug companies that are the primary sponsor of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America.

What would change, or could be changed, by legalization is the economics of the drug-trade. There are people/organizations that would be hurt by that happening, and there are those that would be helped. The problem is that some of the organizations that would be hurt, are good organizations that have grown financially-addicted to the War on Drugs, and are going to go through serious fiscal-withdrawl if it ends, and they are willing to corrupt themselves, spreading misinformation, lies, fear, and prejudice in order to get their next fix of capital.

Personally, I think the best thing to do is to effectively discontinue the so-called War on Drugs as it has been carried out to this point; legalize, regulate, and tax those drugs which can be safely cultivated domestically (sorry meth-cookers), and clarify the ALREADY EXISTING laws regarding DUI/DWI, public intoxication, etc., then redistribute the funding withdrawn from the War on Drugs into drug rehabilitation/treatment programs.
So in effect, make HONEST information regarding drugs available, and if people still want to use them that's fine, then if they decide they want to stop and need help it will be available.

That being said, I also believe in the right of businesses to make employment decisions based on the impact of drugs on work-performance/safety. So I don't believe pre-employment drug-testing would necessarily have to (or should) go away.

[RayCaptain]

Your points all revolve around the idea that if something is bad for you that people should not do them. That seems reasonable enough but should your opinion be law?

On another point, many of the prescription drugs that have come out in the last 10 years were fatal when taken as prescribed.
I'm sure you've heard of these recalls. How do you account for this?

Just curious

I believe my opinion, on this particular subject, should be law.

And it is true that many perscritption drugs are being recalled because they are harmful, but that's just it, they were recalled. Taken off the shelves and people were told not to take them. The medicines that are produced to heal can be deadly but as long as they are done away with ASAP there is no real problem.


WAY TO HAVE A SIG ADVOCATING SMOKING, THEN.

No no, that's okay, we're used to FELL HYPOCRISY around these parts.

Very, very mature of you. It is a cartoon for goodness sake. If you're going to attack me, please make it something worth me taking my time to respond to...see you just made me waste prescious moments of my life typing this, shame on you lol

[OmegaAlpha]

I believe my opinion, on this particular subject, should be law.

And it is true that many perscritption drugs are being recalled because they are harmful, but that's just it, they were recalled. Taken off the shelves and people were told not to take them. The medicines that are produced to heal can be deadly but as long as they are done away with ASAP there is no real problem.



They are being recalled because they are deadly. The government does not care about your health. As it's been stated many times by many people in this thread it's a personal responsibility and individual liberty issue.
I respect that you're honest and you don't beat around the bush.
You think that the government can make these choices for us.

I will be equally blunt for you.
I simply disagree. I think a man should be allowed to ruin his life. I think people might get hurt. I am fine with that. I am not willing to sacrifice freedom for safety. Respectfully, always. Thanks for the reply.

[Khanxay]

I'm mostly against drugs. (I grew up inhaling cigarette smoke most of my childhood due to two smoking parents and now have breathing problems.) But like Dio said, as long as others aren't affected I say let people do what they want to their self.


And that's all. I'll stay out the rest of this.

[LittleGirl]

I have a pretty mixed opinion on this subject. I don't do drugs, and I don't like drugs. If a person wants to do drugs then go right ahead. It's their choice.
Everyone on here seems to be saying 'if no one else is involved then it's fine'. People are going to be affected.
Anyways, I think weed should be legalized. I don't see how it's any worse than alcohol or cigarettes. It's the hard stuff I don't think should be legalized. It won't do any good.

[Sanosuke23]

Very, very mature of you. It is a cartoon for goodness sake. If you're going to attack me, please make it something worth me taking my time to respond to...see you just made me waste prescious moments of my life typing this, shame on you lol

I was just holding you up to your own standards. Are you going to denounce homosexuality and then have a signature of two drawn guys making out next? All I ask is for is a little consistency from people holding extreme viewpoints that remove choice.



Don't think it's just a little extreme to say smoking anything should be illegal? (I should now point out that you yourself mentioned that was your major gripe against marijuana for those who didn't read above:
The reason they are together, even though extremely different in what ammount of damage they do, is because they do cause harm. Pot will kill you just like anything else you smoke will. The plant itself may not be the thing that harms the body, but instead it is the tar, smoke, ect. that you take in when you smoke it that harms you.

In other words, smoking of anykind will harm you badly so if they come out with a pot pill then I might think differently, but for the meantime I remain steadfast on the subject)


Howsabout skateboarding? I think we can all agree that falling off a skateboard and cracking your head open or breaking something is a real and fairly likely possibility. Of course on top of that, all manner of delinquents and "grafitti" vandals practice it, and it is often how fresh, innocent youngsters are introduced to those harder activities like loitering and wearing their hats all willy-nilly. I would not skateboard, because I value my safety and don't want to risk hurting myself for whatever thrills skateboarding may or may not offer me. Why, I could even crash into someone and harm them, as well! WHAT IF I TRY SHOPPING CARTS NEXT?!


Skateboarding poses a dangerous threat to society, and should be made illegal. All you skateboarders out there, with your "shredding" paraphernalia, you're all going to prison. Anyone with elbow pads should be held and investigated immediately. My dislike of skateboarding MUST be put into the lawbooks immediately because I mean we have to draw the line somewhere, right? Right? Of course I'm right.*






No I'm not, and neither are you. Telling someone they CANNOT do something simply because you don't like it and making it punishable by law is incredibly arrogant of you. I understand the potential danger of leaving addictive substances unregulated, I mean look at China and Opium, but outright banning it seems an outrageous response to something that could easily be put into the hands of doctors or other licensed individuals depending on the substance.

[RayCaptain]

Well to put it simply, you kind of just made a hypocrit of yourself. Not by the skateboarding thing (I'll adress that if you'd like) but by saying that stuff, like opium, has gotten out of hands in places. Now here's the kicker, you go on to imply that the problem would be magicly cured if it was regulated by doctors. So if you mean "regulated" as in you go to the doctor and get a "safe" amount of any drug, then you are not only wrong but possibly blind to the adictive nature of most drugs.

[Sanosuke23]

Well to put it simply, you kind of just made a hypocrite of yourself. Not by the skateboarding thing (I'll address that if you'd like) but by saying that stuff, like opium, has gotten out of hands in places. Now here's the kicker, you go on to imply that the problem would be magically cured if it was regulated by doctors. So if you mean "regulated" as in you go to the doctor and get a "safe" amount of any drug, then you are not only wrong but possibly blind to the addictive nature of most drugs.

You mean like morphine? Oxycontin? Gee whiz, I sure am glad THOSE are banned instead of regulated. Not like there's any redeeming medical qualities for any of these drugs, amirite? As if Britain could possibly allow heroin to be distributed in a controlled environment like a doctor's office. Marijuana, USED MEDICINALLY? Perish the thought!

Oh wait, morphine and oxycontin(both Schedule II drugs) are indeed regulated, heroin is legal in Britain under the name of diamorphine, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin) and 13 states allow the use of medicinal marijuana, and one has decriminalized it entirely. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_marijuana_in_the_United_States#Re strictions_on_medical_use_by_state) They are prescribed by doctors to treat ailments, in most of the examples I gave pain. They are also abused by some people, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that making it illegal to prescribe them to people who genuinely need them because people that don't need them lie or bribe their way into getting some is ridiculous.

Oh, and I fixed ur post, bolded letters added. Now, please address my skateboarding analogy.

[Wio]

There are three drug problems that I see.

1) People abuse drugs and then become a mess.
2) People use drugs for trivial reasons. (Like getting the kid to be quiet or something)
3) The government is wasting money trying to fix these problems.

Man, this issue just won't go away. It's freaking' annoying.

[CrystalAce]

Taking drug is a oneway ticket to hell. Drug kills, you kill yourself, a suicide, so you go to hell. And then, it will be an eternity of rehabilitation in hell. End of story. Amen!

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

Taking drug is a oneway ticket to hell.
Hell exists why?


Drug kills, you kill yourself, a suicide, so you go to hell.Alex, I'll take Hasty Generalizations for 1000.


And then, it will be an eternity of rehabilitation in hell. End of story. Amen!
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk)

[Perpetual Specter]

Drugs should be somewhat legal, but not completely. If they were to be legal, then the minimum age limit for those drugs that are considered illegal now should be higher than that of both the smoking and alcohol minimum age limits. I say that, because the physical harm of those tend to be greater than the harm from smoking and alcohol, especially heroine.

[3pleT]

Drugs should be somewhat legal, but not completely. If they were to be legal, then the minimum age limit for those drugs that are considered illegal now should be higher than that of both the smoking and alcohol minimum age limits. I say that, because the physical harm of those tend to be greater than the harm from smoking and alcohol, especially heroine.
and what makes you think that kids won't find a way to get it just like they find a way to get booze, smokes and prescription drugs?

[Perpetual Specter]

and what makes you think that kids won't find a way to get it just like they find a way to get booze, smokes and prescription drugs?Nothing is perfect. There will always be those retards who will get those kind of things illegally. I'm fully aware of this. However, I'm certain it would prevent some underage kids from getting it. No, there will never be a foolproof way to prevent things like this. It's just about doing the most you can to decrease the number of underage users of these substances(or users in general) and the violence associated with the use and marketing of them.

[Infinita]

I don't believe that drugs should be legalized but that is my belief and what I stand for. Drugs are terrible for your health and just kill people.

But see, for those who believe in freedom and such, people have the right to do as they please if the drug was legalized. It is the users body and technically they can do what they want. We live in a democracy and such a system allows rights to man.

[Memento Mori]

Very, very mature of you. It is a cartoon for goodness sake. If you're going to attack me, please make it something worth me taking my time to respond to...see you just made me waste prescious moments of my life typing this, shame on you lol

You typed it, not us.

[OmegaAlpha]

This is going pretty well. I have to say so far that the anti drug war side has made more honest and clear arguments. Many of the points of the pro drug war side are based on emotion and not consistent
(IE. Drug X is good but drug Y is bad because it's not legal)

I did not want to go down the path of what is bad for you and what is not because like I said I'm not interested in that. I think something being "bad" for you or society is not an argument. We'd end up banning everything if we did that. I think this comes down to is if a man is free to mess himself up and make poor choices that might effect others or not? I think yes. I think freedom is more important than a false safety. But many of the people who agree with me have gone on to make VERY good arguments with the "this is bad but.." arguments so I guess you're right on. I don't even consider the safety issue when It comes to personal freedom. I think this discussion has been good so far.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

This is going pretty well. I have to say so far that the anti drug war side has made more honest and clear arguments. Many of the points of the pro drug war side are based on emotion and not consistent
(IE. Drug X is good but drug Y is bad because it's not legal)
Consistency is not necessarily a good thing in ethical arguments. "All jaywalkers should be shot" is a consistent ethical statement, even if it is also a heinous one.

500

Most things are shades of gray. Drugs are one of them. You can't ever truly get rid of them. It's the extreme markets created by the high risk on the part of the dealers and limited supply caused by police action that causes the high prices that necessitate crime more then any intrinsic property of drugs themselves. Drugs weren't illegalized because of any concern for criminality, but for baldly racist reasons.

Historical Example: In America at the turn of the century was about 1/3 filled with hard drug addicts. The drugs were illegalized not because they ruined lives, although I'm sure they did, but because the south became convinced that drugs would turn mild mannered Negroes into white-women raping monsters so filled with lust that they were immune to small arms fire. "Drug-Crazed Negroes" was the phrase of the time. They were not illegalized to protect white people from becoming criminals as they were largely considered responsible enough to consume all the drugs they wanted, they were illegalized for racist reasons. People started freaking out about Marijuana in the 50's when the remnants of the prohibitionists started running movies implying that pot would make your daughter run away from home to have sex with her local Jazz Player/Dealer who surprise, was black. Which reminds me...

Another Historical Example: Prohibition. Worked Great, eh?

The anti-drug legalization side is muttering that our feeble attempt to illegalize drugs are the only thing that is preventing our disintegration into criminal chaos, but are ignoring that that isn't why drugs are illegal in the first place and that making the only people who profit from drugs criminals encourages far more violent criminal behavior then it dissuades. AND it's extremely expensive to enforce AND it's unethical from the perspective of personal freedom. So what if it hurts people? Alcohol hurts people too, but illegalizing it actually INCREASED the amount of people hurt by it. Boy, when they said that those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, they weren't joking.

[Ridana]

I don't believe that drugs should be legalized but that is my belief and what I stand for. Drugs are terrible for your health and just kill people.

Sorry Angel, I'm not trying to flame you or anything, but your post (which appears well after my previous one) is perfectly illustrative of what I was pointing out about the pro-Drug War supporters.

Since you either didn't read, or didn't quite get, the first point I made in my post, I'll quote myself....


... So unless you never take/use/ingest soda, coffee, energy drinks, chocolate, aspirin/acetominephin, antacids, non-organically-raised beef, OTC cough/cold/sinus medications, diet pills, prescriptions for erectile dysfunction, etc. etc. etc ... get off your frelling high horses. ...

So, Angel (and everyone else on the pro-Drug War side) my first question would be ... do you take/use/ingest ANY of the aforementioned products?

If the answer is "no" then fine, you are a paradigm of drug-free virtue.

If the answer is "yes" then you are a drug-user. Just a legal drug-user.

Now, I do have to be a little more direct, and it is going to come across a little more mean, about the highlighted portion of your quote...

I dare you to tell your co-workers, your friends, and your family, that the medications and prescriptions that they take for their pains, illnesses, infections, and diseases are terrible for their health and are just killing them.
I DARE you to go to your nearest AIDS clinic and tell the patients there that the drugs they are on are terrible for their health and are just killing them.
And I most sincerely f***ing DARE you to go to your nearest cancer ward and tell the patients there, especially the children, that the drugs that they are on are terrible for their health and are just killing them.

The word "drug" does not refer to monsters hiding in your closet, under your bed, or in dark alleys. Drugs are not inheirently bad, which is why we properly refer to illicit or recreational drug-use as "drug-abuse".

There are correct ways to use drugs, and doctors and pharmacists are trained through years of education on what the proper ways to use those drugs are. They read and write papers and studies on a plethora of drugs and the conditions they are used to treat. So if a doctor says that the most humane and efficacious treatment for the pain and loss of appetite of a chemo patient is to have them smoke a joint, I'm going to believe that doctor a helluva lot sooner than I am you, or the lobbyist from a drug company that makes the legal alternative (which is expensive and riddled with side-effects), or a politician that takes hefty campaign contributions from that lobbyist, about how to help that patient.

Now I am not one to wish illness (especially cancer) on anyone... So let me say this... If, by simple statistics and chance, you happen to be diagnosed with cancer or any one of the hundreds of horrible diseases that are out there, and you are faced with the choice of accepting a drug-treatment or sticking to your guns and remaining "drug-free"...
1) I hope you appreciate the fact that you are being given a choice.
2) I hope that, no matter what you choose, you fully appreciate the consequences and implications of your decision.

[OmegaAlpha]

Consistency is not necessarily a good thing in ethical arguments. "All jaywalkers should be shot" is a consistent ethical statement, even if it is also a heinous one.


Yes and no. In this instance if you're going to be against drugs you can't stop with "but the ones the government approve are okay". This is all I mean by consistence in this instance. Otherwise I agree with you.
Also, I understand you CAN stop with that idea. The idea that the government has your best interests in mind is insane to me.. but from what I understand the difference between what I'm saying and what many are saying is that I believe a man should be able to intake what he wants into his body. If you don't and you think the risk is too much and we just can't handle it as a society then that's fine. We just agree to disagree. I don't want a society where all of the choices are essentially made for you by threat of jail time.

You said

"AND it's extremely expensive to enforce AND it's unethical from the perspective of personal freedom. So what if it hurts people? Alcohol hurts people too, but illegalizing it actually INCREASED the amount of people hurt by it. Boy, when they said that those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, they weren't joking."

I think we come to similar conclusions in the end anyway.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

Yes and no. In this instance if you're going to be against drugs you can't stop with "but the ones the government approve are okay". This is all I mean by consistence in this instance. Otherwise I agree with you.
Also, I understand you CAN stop with that idea. The idea that the government has your best interests in mind is insane to me.. but from what I understand the difference between what I'm saying and what many are saying is that I believe a man should be able to intake what he wants into his body. If you don't and you think the risk is too much and we just can't handle it as a society then that's fine. We just agree to disagree. I don't want a society where all of the choices are essentially made for you by threat of jail time.

You said

"AND it's extremely expensive to enforce AND it's unethical from the perspective of personal freedom. So what if it hurts people? Alcohol hurts people too, but illegalizing it actually INCREASED the amount of people hurt by it. Boy, when they said that those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, they weren't joking."

I think we come to similar conclusions in the end anyway.
Well I think it's better, ethically, then "All Drugs are Bad for you, and you can't have any" since that would very quickly whittle down human life expectancy 40 or so years in any given developed country. Constancy on the issue of drug use illegality would have far worse consequences then waffling on it.

And as an explanation, I wasn't disagreeing with you in general on the issue of drug legality, I disagreed with that point in particular.

[OmegaAlpha]

Well I think it's better, ethically, then "All Drugs are Bad for you, and you can't have any" since that would very quickly whittle down human life expectancy 40 or so years in any given developed country. Constancy on the issue of drug use illegality would have far worse consequences then waffling on it.

I agree with that to a point. Yes, making anything ALL illegal is a terrible idea. I would be for legalizing everything which I think is a much more honest approach. I think banning ANYTHING that does not directly take away the freedoms of others is a evil thing. If we are going to get moral with the issue..I think it's evil to tell a man what he can and cannot do with his own body. I think you agree with that, correct me If I'm wrong. I think we generally agree with some minor differences in how we go about it.
I'd make it ALL legal. I want everything legal. I want everyone to be able to make these choices for themselves. I don't like drugs personally. I don't even take asprin but I don't think what I do in my personal life should have any sway on what others do. I take a pretty libertarian stance on these things. I think a free, if dangerous society is better than a safe or would be safe society. I don't think they are always mutually exclusive. I think you can have all the drugs in the world legal and we can still be "safe'. If we can't, to be frank..oh well. People are going to die. If people can't handle themselves with things like drugs, guns and prostitutes and society just COLLAPSES because of it maybe we deserve it. I just want the choice to live life as free as possible. If you could prove to me that making drugs legal would destroy millions of families and would be horrible for society I'd STILL be for them being legal. That's consistency.

If I'm wrong about how you feel on the issue feel free to correct me. I just assume by your posts that you generally agree.

EDIT: I just saw your edit. My bad. Cheers.

[Sanosuke23]

You typed it, not us.

I also want to add that I am not ashamed, because I was obviously right enough for them to a) become offended, b) quickly cover it up with haughty amusement and feigned indifference, and c) inform me of this.

Thus, I am vindicated.