Make all drugs legal; stop the myths~

What if we just made a separate area, apart from the rest of society, where drug addicts could go?
Just make sure no drugs go out of the area. In fact cars would not be allowed in or out, and there would be security screening at all the exit points.

Seems reasonable to me. This way hopefully it would not impact the rest of society.

There would of course be free drug treatment in these areas, available for the addicts if they ever decided they wanted to change their lifestyle and leave.

They could also have a special provision in the treatment program where, if the drug addict agreed and signed a piece of paper, they would be held inside the facility for 3 weeks and not allowed to leave, while they recovered from their addiction and were forced to undergo sobriety. This might help eliminate the problem of weak willpower, while still not infringing on choice and personal consent too much.

Maybe this city area could have buses and good public transportation and no cars would be allowed. This would eliminate the problem of automotive accidents as a result of the drug use.

It would probably be cheaper to run such a city than to house them in prison, or deal with the results of all their crime if they were in the rest of society.
They would not be out stealing as much money because the price of their drugs would be much lower. And in this area there would probably be fewer people to steal from.

There could even be two different cities, one where guns were allowed and one where guns were not allowed. The residents could choose which city they wanted to live in, with all the pros and cons.

It might also be a good idea to have gender segregated cities to avoid children coming into being in a less-than-optimum living circumstances.

 

I'm just going to play devil's advocate here and argue for the absurd using pure logic... Your argument would not necessarily apply if the government maintained a centralized data base of free child porn that was already available. So only the porn that was not already known to freely exist would be suspect. There could be a reference number on each picture for authorities to easily match them up to the registered database. This could help ensure that none of this porn was paid for, and thus no money incentivizing the creation of more new pornography.
It could still be illegal, but would be seen as a much less serious criminal offense.

 

And similar to that, devil's advocate and all, we could use people in irreversible comas as sex toys ...arguing purely from logic, of course. One of my favorite quotes: "A mind all logic is like a knife all blade- it cuts the wielder too." If humans were purely logical, we would just be machines. We are not.

 

That's a little more of a stretch because in that type of situation it is ambiguous whether they are really "dead" or "alive".
Maybe that logic should be taken into account a little bit when deciding punishment. Arguing that the actual harm caused was minimal because the person was completely brain dead, so that it was really more analogous to defiling a corpse.

 

Read post 130

 

Legalize the manufacturing of VX gas for personal use

 

I see more individual liberties being tossed out the window. Prohibition (although alcohol is no longer illegal today) ended up being what set the precedent for all sorts of other things to be made illegal.
Before that, only counterfeit money and stolen property was illegal.

Many of these things could simply fall under safety laws. For example, there might be some county ordinance against storing huge volumes of flammable gas unless it is separated by an adequate distance from surrounding land owned by someone else.

Drug possession laws set a very bad precedent as well, whether you disagree with them or not. (If that can be illegal, what other things can too?)
And it is also very important to draw a distinction between a prohibition on selling something versus a prohibition on owning something. A lot of people don't seem to be able to make any distinction there, in their minds, when talking about "making something illegal".

More and more laws always seem to get passed every year, new things become illegal. Rarely do any of these laws ever get rescinded.

 

Not true. The vast majority of it is free and shared on online communities.

 

Why would it lead to a decline?

 

Which might not result in as much death as what legalising all drugs would - death caused by the drug use. So it might be better to have the increased violent crime.

 

I doubt it. But even if true, its still evidense of a violent crime and cant exist without that violence having been commited. If violent crime is unlawful then so must be benefitting from the products dependent on it for their production, otherwise its a gross conflict of interest that undermines making the violence unlawful in the first place.

 

How is production dependent on possession if the possession wasn't achieved via a financial transaction?

 

Not all transactions are financial. Even if people are just trading images of kids being molested for images of other kids being molested, its still a market that incentivizes molesting children.

 

Well the person sharing gets charged with distribution of child pornography, a separate charge to mere possession, but what about if someone just downloads content but does not share their own stuff?

 

What is VX gas?

 

Human nature. When you deny someone something, they want it all the more. This is why black markets develop when things are made illegal. When restrictions are removed, people then indulge in what was once illegal. After that people then don't want it as much so usage drops. We have seen it with alcohol and abortion, and marijuana where decriminalized, and many other things. Mind you this is a pattern of humans as a group, not individuals, and it's what the groups tends to do, not what it always does.

 

Opium is not legal.... Unless it is in a pill from Pfizer....

The drug war is a total failure. It had changed US drug use for the worse. 50 years ago there was no crack or X or meth. The price of marijuana and cocaine is down since Reagan.

What did the drug war achieve?

It cost us $20 trillion.
It put Marxists in power south of the border.
It shipped trillions of dollars outside our borders to murderous criminals.
It stopped nobody from using
It prevents addicts from coming forward for help because first you become a felon...


Those who still support the drug war are people who completely fill out the definition of insane.

Drugs are a medical issue. Bring in cops and lawyers and you just made the problem 100 fold worse...

 

Such would.be a matter of opinion. However I would much rather have the choice to destroy my own self, that have someone else violently take that choice away from me.

 

What you are asking is why is it wrong to buy or accept known stolen goods (making a parallel). In the case of the child porn (assuming pics and not drawings), there can be no doubt that someone else has been injured in some manner.

 

Not sure who brought this dead thread back to life, but while I'm looking, how about this simple jacked up fact:

In the United States of America, the foremost nation the planet has ever seen seen since the British Empire and the Roman Empire with respect toward global domination of military strength, our troops are not generally old enough to drink a beer and smoke a cigarette. Th US floats 30 trillion dollars of debt by being the temporary fiat currency accepted around the world and it is a house of cards. Our drug laws are a miniscule example of how many opportunities we have before us to improve as a nation.

 

Fatal nerve gas, we gave a bunch of it to Saddam, why not citizens?

 

I don't think it's a good idea to be taking government down the road of criminalizing the mere possession of poisons.

This sounds like more the type of thing that could already be criminalized through general laws, like potentially endangering safety; or through local county ordinances prohibiting large storage of very hazardous materials.

Plus I was told stories of young college students making tiny amounts of mustard gas, just to show that they could, it wasn't seen as that unnormal a few decades ago.

I don't even really see the point of specifically criminalizing possession of this sort of thing. It's just yet another law and yet another liberty taken away.
I mean think about it, what are the actual chances the police are going to just happen to find this before the person who owns it uses it to kill lots of random people? It's just not realistic, it's not going to happen. There are already laws against murder and attempted murder.

Plus, did you ever think all these stupid unnecessary laws might piss people off and make more terrorists than the laws would actually prevent?

Please describe to me a realistic and likely situation where this type of law would be needed to be likely to save someone's life. (Where other laws that already exist would not be sufficient)

 

"Ten Years After Decriminalization, Drug Abuse Down by Half in Portugal"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...lization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

remember, the abuse is there legal or not, just one makes criminals of those that did not abuse

 

Well no because the goods aren't stolen.

 

What would lead to someone violently taking that choice away from you?