"Prohibition has failed"

[lord of flies]

So life-long criminals who traffic drugs, guns and slaves will suddenly get white-collar jobs as pharmaceutical representatives lead exemplar lives and start paying taxes?

Can't say I share that outlook.

The strategies used in black market capitalism and the legal form of capitalism are completely separate. Further, any modern high-ranking drug dealer can leave the business if he so chooses to already, since he is raking in simply ludicrous profits off of the lower-ranking dealers.

[RPGmasterBoo]

We should also legalize murder and rape because we can't prevent them. No sense in all those murderers and rapists having to clutter our legal system and jails, when we could just tax them per deed...

[Orogun01]

We should also legalize murder and rape because we can't prevent them. No sense in all those murderers and rapists having to clutter our legal system and jails, when we could just tax them per deed...

This argument sounds familiar. Didn't someone said the same thing on a previous thread? I think it was LoF

Edited December 19, 2010 by Orogun01

[RPGmasterBoo]

Its nothing more than common sense really.

[Orogun01]

Its nothing more than common sense really.

Nah, it kind of seems more like an offshoot of Godwin's law. Whenever we argue about legal matters long enough there is rape and murder bound to come up.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Because using drugs in most cases and in most times falls squarely into the illegal territory, like rape and murder.

 

Drugs aren't illegal out of someone's lack of appreciation for hedonism but because they make people who can't handle them (and most people can't after a while) into useless zombies, unlike tobacco and alcohol which, while bad - don't prevent people from working, except in extreme cases.

 

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

 

I'd rather pay the police to put them behind bars you know.

 

And what are you going to get, if you make drugs legal and perscription based?

A society of useless drones, who spend half of their lives high?

[Thorton_AP]

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

 

A large part of why it's related to criminal offenses is because it is already criminal.

 

There was a large spike in crime rate when alcohol was made illegal too.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

 

A large part of why it's related to criminal offenses is because it is already criminal.

 

There was a large spike in crime rate when alcohol was made illegal too.

 

Do you suggest that making drugs legal would not result in more drug related offences, in the long term - as the number of addicts increases?

[cronicler]

Social stigmata is the only effective way to control substances. It is actually similar to the segregration or gay or smoking issue. The unless the public is ready to accept or reject it, artificial controls just have the opposite effect.

 

Sure maybe there will be more suffering in the short term but once the recreational drugs are in the open, it will loose it's mystique and most of it's appeal.

*I do however agree that the line should be drawn at the syntethics. Designer drugs are made to frack you up, no disputing on that.

 

Hate to sound darwinian but soft living lets the rot set in. If you choose to throw your life away (gambling, drinking, drugs or any other recreational thing taken too far) then you should suffer the consequences.

 

 

 

Another aspect of drugs is their role in financing the unlawful groups (terrorists, organised crime, rogue nations) by the artificially inflated prices on these weeds. (and most of them are weeds. they are bloody hard to destroy)Probably about 1/3 of the crime in the world stems from them. Wouldn't some direct hands on control be better than leaving it to "naked capitalist scum" ?

[Orogun01]

Because using drugs in most cases and in most times falls squarely into the illegal territory, like rape and murder.

 

Drugs aren't illegal out of someone's lack of appreciation for hedonism but because they make people who can't handle them (and most people can't after a while) into useless zombies, unlike tobacco and alcohol which, while bad - don't prevent people from working, except in extreme cases.

Homeless people addicted to alcohol, people whose life goes out the drain because of their addiction to gambling, they are no different than the ones living in an abandoned house with only their next fix to look forward to. Basically every drug has the kind of extreme cases you mention and if you want to be really utilitarian about it, legal drugs have more of those cases. Namely, alcohol.

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

Criminal takes drugs therefore drugs are the cause of crime not the criminal. Normal person takes drugs therefore he will become a criminal, that's a very flawed logic. Then you fall into speculation, a junkie will rob you to get drugs. Aren't beggars already begging for drug money? Or trading their food coupons for alcohol. Most of the casualties on the drug trade come from the dealers and not the addicted consumer, doubt that we will have an army of crazed junkies robbing convenience stores considering that all their money goes into feeding their addiction and not towards getting a gun.

I'd rather pay the police to put them behind bars you know.

 

And what are you going to get, if you make drugs legal and perscription based?

A society of useless drones, who spend half of their lives high?

The problem is that most of the people behind bars aren't the ones out robbing and killing, the great majority is made up from those caught under possession charges. The legalization of drugs is going to be the next "DNA technology" of law, a wave of appeals on cases where the accused was sent to prison because of a drug that it's now legal.

 

I also would like to clarify that I believe that drugs should still be illegal, in no way or form legalization is a solution for the drug problem.

[Thorton_AP]

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

 

A large part of why it's related to criminal offenses is because it is already criminal.

 

There was a large spike in crime rate when alcohol was made illegal too.

 

Do you suggest that making drugs legal would not result in more drug related offences, in the long term - as the number of addicts increases?

 

Are you saying there was not an increase in criminal activities when alcohol was made illegal?

[Calax]

Because using drugs in most cases and in most times falls squarely into the illegal territory, like rape and murder.

 

Drugs aren't illegal out of someone's lack of appreciation for hedonism but because they make people who can't handle them (and most people can't after a while) into useless zombies, unlike tobacco and alcohol which, while bad - don't prevent people from working, except in extreme cases.

 

Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate.

What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing.

And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money.

 

I'd rather pay the police to put them behind bars you know.

 

And what are you going to get, if you make drugs legal and perscription based?

A society of useless drones, who spend half of their lives high?

Way to be one sided and exaggerated.

 

Yeah, using a controlled substance does lead to increased crime rates when you're not supposed to have it, because not only do they charge you with use, but also possession of the item, and find anything else they can hit you with to be "tough on drugs". I personally would not like to live in a nation where I'm stuck paying bills to china because some bupkis decided not to go with economics and regulate and tax something people were doing anyway that (in general) wasn't worse than beer.

 

I do find it silly that you don't want to pay for somebody elses habit, so instead you pay for a million somebody elses when they're thrown into the penal system for having the habit and are unable to get back on their feet after they get out.

[Humodour]

Prohibition is such an ironic policy. Thought up to control and limit damage to society but in reality its existence amplifies such damage.

[Walsingham]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

[Raithe]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

 

That one always struck me as a bit..hm, blackly humerous. "If you've killed yourself, we're going to slap cuffs on you."

 

I always thought it wasn't so much the actual suicide that was illegal as the attempt at suicide. Or is it that just because you got caught making the attempt you get to hit the 48 hour psych ward monitoring?

[Calax]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

Yes... because somehow a dead person can be prosocuted.

[Hurlshort]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

Yes... because somehow a dead person can be prosocuted.

 

Is it no longer illegal? Here is the US, you can be prosecuted for an attempted suicide. There are some legitimate reasons for this, mostly revolving around the fact that it leads to court ordered therapy for the person.

[ShadySands]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

Yes... because somehow a dead person can be prosocuted.

 

Is it no longer illegal? Here is the US, you can be prosecuted for an attempted suicide. There are some legitimate reasons for this, mostly revolving around the fact that it leads to court ordered therapy for the person.

 

Better hope you don't fail then because if you thought your life sucked before...

[Hurlshort]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

Yes... because somehow a dead person can be prosocuted.

 

Is it no longer illegal? Here is the US, you can be prosecuted for an attempted suicide. There are some legitimate reasons for this, mostly revolving around the fact that it leads to court ordered therapy for the person.

 

Better hope you don't fail then because if you thought your life sucked before...

 

They aren't going to throw you in San Quentin. You will not serve jail time unless you endanger others. It is a rehabilitation program.

[Malcador]

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again.

 

Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

 

 

That does seem funny. Was it aimed at "assisted suicide" ?

[Rosbjerg]

Sorry for the necroposting, but this article has shed some interesting lights on the issue. Seems the world is moving towards legilization?

 

A letter from sixty major public figures, including seven former presidents, twelve Nobel Prize winners and six British MPs, has asked Prime Minister David Cameron and the UK government to consider legalizing drugs, citing that the

[Walsingham]

More importantly, the former head of MI5 - Britain Secret Intelligence Service - has also spoken out against prohibition.

 

I know there's a lot of opposed views on the board. But I really think at the point where someone like the former head of MI5 is saying it ain't working, then it's worth consideration.