Make all drugs legal; stop the myths~

An initial surge of increase following what?

 

Once again you fail to understand a parallel. The key point is possession of anything that you know is the result of a crime and/or injury against another person. You cannot possess photographic child porn without knowing that a child has been harmed in the process of creating said child porn.

Who knows? Look up all the reasons why violent crime occurs. There are so many. The key point is that when my body is damaged through another person commuting an act of violence against me, I don't get a choice in the matter. When my body is damaged through my use of drugs into my body, then the choice is mine. It is far better when the choice is mine.

Of whatever was banned.

 

Having grown up in gang infested Los Angeles, I know what it feels like to fear for my life. Even if deaths from overdose did increase, these people made their choice. Those living under the iron fist of gangs don't have a choice.

 

Were you involved in drugs?

.

 

Following complete decriminalization of inanimate substances and abolishment of all agencies running around loooking up peoples asses, listening in on phone calls and digging through peoples trash. Then once these drugs are available for what they are really worth the crime and prestige will decrease and children and criminals will not be so enthralled with these substances. Of course there will still be a bunch of morons who will abuse and ruin their health and sanity with these drugs, but they are already are doing this now. If they are decriminalized however, they will be cheap as dirt and people won’t be as likely to rob and steal to get them, nor will there be criminal gangs killing each other over turf wars to sell them. I say sell it at cheap liquor stores along with Ripple, Thunderbird, Tokay and other rot gut fortified wines which are produced and sold for wino losers.

 

The only reason these gangs have all that power is because of the idiotic drug laws that have made cheap crap like heroin, speed and cocaine a rare commodity worth many times the price of gold. If drugs were readily available for the cost of production which is about $5 a pound, there would be no money to be made by criminal punks.

 

Alright, that's a good point. You've given yet another reason why an 'only that which harms others' standard for what should be illegal, is insufficient, which seems to be @modernpaladin's standard. This all goes back to him saying: "legalize everything that isn't violence, murder, theft or fraud."

 

I'll rephrase: 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 associated with drug laws.

An initial surge of increase caused by what?

 

k, but then its theft...

 

How do you know?

Which would lead to an increase in use.

And why would that be such a good thing?

What's the problem with criminals killing eachother?

 

But the thing has already been stolen - the harm has already been caused by the original thief.

 

But not ACTUALLY violence?

 

Is that the argument you would make for someone driving your car that they know was stolen from you but that they didn't steal themselves?

 

Is pointing a gun at someone and demanding money 'violence' before or after they pull the trigger?

 

No, because I think that receiving stolen goods should be illegal, but that goes outside your standard for what should be illegal. So it should be the argument that YOU would make for someone driving your car that they know was stolen from you but that they didn't steal themselves!

 

According to the definition of the word, strictly only AFTER they pull the trigger.

 

I think you might be taking me a little more literally than is reasonable... knowingly obtaining stolen property is a crime because it is similar enough to theft, profits from theft and supports theft. Its a part of theft.

 

1) Logic dictates this. Most young drug dealers start out working street corners fronting for adults who are making tons of money and they are lured into the trade because of the money, bling and fancy cars. Take the profit out and that whole system falls apart.

2) Maybe for a while but once the profit is gone, less people will be attracted and lured into the use of these destructive substances as a way to make a living. Then use will decrease.

3) Less drug addicts robbing, burglarizing and assaulting people to support a $500 a day habit would definitely be a good thing. Rarely does a wino rob a store to get a $1.79 fifth od cheap wine.

4) Because many times innocent bystanders and kids get killed in a crossfire while criminal gangsters are fighting over drug turf corners by gang punks who are battling over a place to sell their overinflated drugs. Make them available cheap in authorized places and all that goes away.

 

Many states consider 'placing a victim in fear of violence' as assault. Those that don't still consider it a serious crime (outside of legit self defense) of course.

And FTR, I simply dont believe you that if someone pointed a gun at you and demanded money that you would consider that non-violent. Thats just straight up ridiculous. I think you have some sort of beef here that neither of us understand...

 

I'm just using the definition:

 

There will be no profit motive? You mean, drugs will become FREE if they are legalised?

What does the profit motive have to do with USERS?

Well we're not talking about alcohol, we're talking about drugs. When you talk about people robbing and stealing to get drugs, do you mean robbing and stealing the drugs off other drug users?

So drugs are the only thing which drives gang violence?

 

So then to revise what you said: legalize everything that isn't part of violence, murder, theft or fraud. Would you agree with that?

 

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?

 

That doesn't change answer. It doesn't matter what it is that increases violent crime. Violence caused by others to me is a violation of my rights. Violence caused by me to me is within my rights. It is never better to cause an increase in violent crime.

Of what was initially banned. Are you not paying attention?

 

What are you talking about? If you accept goods that you know are stolen, then you are knowingly participating in the harm of another, even if it's not directly. Same goes for using child porn of actual children.