This, and the millions who use (or abuse) drugs would not have to be labelled criminals. I hope it can be true sometime, though it seems unlikely. Unless you go to Amsterdam of course...Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
Printable View
This, and the millions who use (or abuse) drugs would not have to be labelled criminals. I hope it can be true sometime, though it seems unlikely. Unless you go to Amsterdam of course...Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I completely agree with you here, but I have trouble grasping the idea of all narcotics becoming legal without any regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterL
I understand that people should have the freedom to do what they want with their body, but you have to sympathize with the teen and/or adult who wants to experiment and dies because the proper steps weren't taken to prevent a fatality.
There is a stigma that seems to be spreading here about tobacco smokers, and I am not speaking of impending laws regarding non-smoking restaurants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chava
People are beginning to snub their noses at smokers in general; whether or not they are smoking in their vicinity. Strange.
It would be nice, if there would be regulation as to the purity of the substances. As far as dosage goes, people would decide for themselves. Fatalities happen now, but most of the fatalities now are from adulterated drugs. There are people who will killed themselves with drugs regardless of the regulations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariamosis
Completely false, I see the analogy from a poetic point of view. But slaves were forced to work for nothing. Being free includes the option to kill oneself and become addicted. Sure you can argue that we're all slaves to an imaginary economy, but that's a bit far, I want tobacco, and so Philip Morris provides it for me. Supply and demand.Quote:
Originally Posted by amarna
Well, I think it's hard to tell who should handle freedom and who shouldn't. I guess the route which society has taken now is that of freedom for nobody, so that no one feels left out. I on the other hand want freedom for everybody, so that no one is left out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Endon
{edit}
Things like pot..no biggie. Even if you don't like it, it doesnt result in rehab and abandoned children and all that.
But when you look at something like speed, for example, that does result in all of those things.
True, it's not fair for anyone else to have to pay for treatment programs and jails and all that, but should we really make it a free for all?
And what about people who have made a mistake? Not all druggies are bad people. Some of them just made stupid choices they can't get out of. At least not without help. But I know and work with reformed addicts (both of drugs and alcohol) who are doing extremely well in life now after intervention and rehab programs
That's the biggest problem I have with legalization. Cocaine is just so damn addicting, for example in her younger years a friend of mine tried cocaine and liked it a lot. when you are on cocaine all you want is more cocaine. Now this friends was able to control the habit because of two things - lack of money and it was a little hard to get. Now, speed up 15 years and legalize drugs, both of those obstacles are gone. I would worry that my friend would become addicted the day after it became legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterL
For the most part I'm for legalization, but I would worry about the impact of anything other then marijuana and maybe I would even say just legalize marijuana and maybe mescaline (are the kids still doing that?).
{edit}
No I'm not for any decriminalization. None. We are trying to push cigarettes out of the culture and reduce alcohol and people are thinking of adding more harfmful products to the list? That's working toward the wrong direction.
How can a gov't allow harmful products out in the open market? We require people to wear seat belts and you want them to put those products on a supermarket shelf?Quote:
Things like pot..no biggie. Even if you don't like it, it doesnt result in rehab and abandoned children and all that.
But when you look at something like speed, for example, that does result in all of those things.
I have no idea what you mean for a free for all. I don't want to pay for anyone's stupidity. They get high and get their jollies and I can't afford certain things? I was raised right. I went to school and graduated, didn't get into trouble, got a job and get up at 4:30 AM every morning, and I have to pay for some punk? Sorry, that's not too cool in my book.Quote:
True, it's not fair for anyone else to have to pay for treatment programs and jails and all that, but should we really make it a free for all?
Well, good for them. I hope their paying society back somehow. But you said it best: they made bad choices. If drugs were legal, would it any longer be a "bad" choice? It's legal. It's becomes an option. Another choice. Any drug choice is a mistake. Any. Legality sets a line of demarcation of what is acceptable and what isn't. If it becomes legal, I definitely don't want to pay for it. That's their choice. My moral obligation is through.Quote:
And what about people who have made a mistake? Not all druggies are bad people. Some of them just made stupid choices they can't get out of. At least not without help. But I know and work with reformed addicts (both of drugs and alcohol) who are doing extremely well in life now after intervention and rehab programs
R e m i n d e r
Please do not personalise your arguments.
Posts containing such comments will be deleted without any further notice
and
lead to thread closure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
I've never heard of anyone doing mescaline. Aside from Hunter S. Thompson :P
Cocaine is a scary one due to it's extremely addictive quality. I don't think it would necissarily become easier to get as I think people would still operate illegally. They'd get more money that way. But with jail/prison overcrowding, having people in for drug offences fills up incarceration space/time/money and then violent offenders get out way too early and way too easily. An individual's addiction or potential for addiction (as cruel as this may sound) is thier own responsibility, or the parents in the case of minors. Government can't and shouldn't control that, nor should citizens be financially responsible for preventing/treating that. Outside of drug education, that is.
My crabbiness come through. :p Sorry. Some things hit a nerve. I have no patience for those who choose to do the wrong things in life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
It was popular in the late 80's.:alien:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stargazer86
I was speaking about legalization. I don't know if my friend would be able to walk in a store that had cocaine next to the marlboros. On the other hand I never thought in terms of decriminalization. Now that might not be a bad idea.... Ya know a while back there was in article in Atlantic monthly (and we've had this conversation before) about the war on drugs being 30 years old and the amount of drugs coming into this country are greater then ever before.Quote:
Cocaine is a scary one due to it's extremely addictive quality. I don't think it would necissarily become easier to get as I think people would still operate illegally. They'd get more money that way. But with jail/prison overcrowding, having people in for drug offences fills up incarceration space/time/money and then violent offenders get out way too early and way too easily. An individual's addiction or potential for addiction (as cruel as this may sound) is thier own responsibility, or the parents in the case of minors. Government can't and shouldn't control that, nor should citizens be financially responsible for preventing/treating that. Outside of drug education, that is
Why should it be the government's responsibility to educate minors about drugs, but they're not allowed to have any control over the substances? Seems like that's just pawning off parental responsibility a bit there (and I don't mean that as an accusation to you Star, just the general idea :))Quote:
Originally Posted by Stargazer86
If it's the government's job to teach minors that cocaine can have serious negative consequences, then they reserve a right to have some control over the availability of said substance.
Also, how far do we take this legalization? What about prescription drugs like painkillers or controlled drugs such as Ketamine? Are we just going to start handing those things out as well? In that case, prescriptions become irrelevant if you can get whatever you want over the counter and then who's going to bother to see a doctor anymore. The world would be overcome with self-medicators. That's no longer a healthy society.
So you're saying legalize it and let the parents and the druggie pay for it? Well, you know that won't happen. They can't afford it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stargazer86
And still, gov't mandates wearing a seat belt, and you're going to allow gov't to put out on the open market things that are directly harmful to people? What about the person that would never try drugs if they were illegal and now sees it on the supermarket shelf (or where ever it is) and says let me give it a try? Studies have shown (that I've read, and have no idea where they are so don't ask me to pull them out) that when you make something legal, more people will partake.
It is merely wrong from your perspective, which is based on your personal moral standard. Based on this view, it can be argued by some that living healthy is wrong too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Well, when drugs lead to job losses, bankruptcy (sp?), broken families, addictions, I think any moral relativism goes out the window. I think society has an obligation to set moral standards. I have no idea how living healthy can be viewed as wrong. Frankly like I said, if someone chooses to do the wrong things in life, don't come crying to me. I have a family to support.Quote:
Originally Posted by AimusSage