DJDannyUhOh
Bluelighter
So by that logic you're telling me guns are safer 'cause they're legal?
Of course guns are safer when they're legal. Where guns are illegal, they are traded in a black market, and the only reason for obtaining a gun is to use it for violence. The existence of the black market itself can create more incidents of violence.
the black market exists for guns because guns are illegal for many people (record checks)Well the black market for guns still exists even though they're legal
, that's why I don't believe the argument that making drugs legal will do away with crime and black market selling
opiates are already present in large numbers in all major segments of societyCan you imagine what letting loose opiates on an American society of "me", "I want this", "fuck you I do what I wanna do regardless of the consequences" would be like?
Coolio said:Everything is safer when it's legal. No segment of the population who wants to do something is going to let legality stand in the way. You can either work with the segment on harm reduction, or you can drive them underground and build resentment, lose their respect, and create dangerous black markets and lack of educational opportunities.
i imagine you'd no longer be able to get drugs legally if you broke those rulesdoesntmatter said:you can legalize drugs, but you'd have to be strict about it.
nobody can ever be caught in public under the influence of any drug, and there must be a way to determine it.
the only way that you can legalize drugs is to have it only effect the user. if the user leaves its home, it effects other people. this is not appropriate or good for society. the penalty for being caught outside under the influence would be death. if all drugs were legal it wouldn't be safe to let people do them without guidance.
infact i'd go as far as saying that you can do any drug you want as long as you are alone in a room and the door is locked. just list the affect of the drug and its known health issues. let them know what it does and how it feels, then lock them in a room (comfortable, spacious, windows, tv, and computers.)
what would be the criteria for choosing which substances to legalize?rebo said:Short answer:
Some Yes, Some No.
you can legalize drugs, but you'd have to be strict about it.
nobody can ever be caught in public under the influence of any drug, and there must be a way to determine it.
the only way that you can legalize drugs is to have it only effect the user. if the user leaves its home, it effects other people. this is not appropriate or good for society. the penalty for being caught outside under the influence would be death. if all drugs were legal it wouldn't be safe to let people do them without guidance.
infact i'd go as far as saying that you can do any drug you want as long as you are alone in a room and the door is locked. just list the affect of the drug and its known health issues. let them know what it does and how it feels, then lock them in a room (comfortable, spacious, windows, tv, and computers.)
>>people don't smoke a joint then go walk in the park. they go drive somewhere>>qwedsa said:Of all psychoactive substances, alcohol is the only one whose consumption has been shown to commonly increase aggression. sourcesychoactive Substances and Violence by Jeffrey A. Roth, Series: Research in Brief, US Dept. of Justice, Published: February 1994, 19 pages
doesntmatter said:people don't smoke a joint then go walk in the park. they go drive somewhere.
doesntmatter said:my point is if you were to legalize drugs, you'd have to let the people that choose to use them know that if under the influence they hurt somebody else, then thats it. there can't just be a slap on the wrist system with this.
Coolio said:Uh, where did you get this idea? Most people walking around in parks probably smoked a joint first. Stoners love trees and grass and birds and all that.
No, you wouldn't. What does being under the influence of drugs have to do with someone's culpability for hurting someone? Do you get in more trouble for hurting someone while drunk than while sober? No. And you shouldn't.
We have laws against violence already. If someone breaks these laws, we can convict them for that, there's no reason to add extra laws against committing crimes while being in certain states of consciousness or holding certain viewpoints. If anything, being under the influence of drugs/alcohol tends to LOWER the culpability of an offender in the eyes of their peers.
qwedsa said:^>>if you allow people to do drugs in public that could cause them to hurt other people, why wouldn't you allow drunk driving?>>
>>people don't smoke a joint then go walk in the park. they go drive somewhere>>
to be consistent we should either A. illegalize alcohol (which is the worst when it comes to driving) or B. legalize drugs but keep driving on them illegal
btw cannabis doesnt hinder driving ability. and many people smoke while taking a walk, including at the park...
>>lets legalize all drugs and anyone that chooses not to use them should stay inside and off the streets because a car could come at you at any point>>
1. illegalizing drugs does not stop drugged driving
2. alcohol is legal and is a worse problem in terms of driving than most popular rec. drugs (excepting other gaba agonists)
3. many people are driving while emotionally troubled or fatigued. these cars have just as much chance of 'coming at you at any point.' are we going to illegalize depression and fatigue?