Signed a billion times if i could.
72 hours to end World's most senseless War! - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Nizaris
Belgium2230 Posts
Signed a billion times if i could. | ||
|
SilentCrono
United States1420 Posts
![]() | ||
|
Morteth
United States59 Posts
On June 01 2011 05:40 Haato wrote: Maybe we can poll our fellow TLers, really interested in what the general consensus is: I personally don't have much faith in the UN, but being apathetic to an issue that is very real and has taken lives all over, removes good, earned money from circulation, imprisons people who aren't criminals (a strong majority over marijuana), and empowers illegal drug / arms / human trades world wide is worse. | ||
|
manawah
123 Posts
| ||
|
Xpace
United States2209 Posts
Meanwhile, countries with less-harsh enforcement -- like Switzerland, Portugal, the Netherlands, and Australia -- have not seen the explosion in drug use that proponents of the drug war have darkly predicted. Instead, they have seen significant reductions in drug-related crime, addiction and deaths, and are able to focus squarely on dismantling criminal empires. Much, much respect. Signed. | ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
On June 01 2011 05:43 PanN wrote: How about you look at the benefits instead of just going off your emotions? If you really care about people dying from drugs, then you need to read up on the benefits of decriminalization, or legalization. More lives would be saved from having factory produced drugs when compared to the street garbage so many users are subjected to. If junkies want to get high, they'll get high; and I think its better getting it from the government, then some asshole outside of a school. Also, guess what? That asshole wouldn't be making money. Instead, your government could be making money off users, and put that money to good use, like better schools, libraries, hospitals, whatever. Also, who are you to tell people what they can, and cannot put in their bodies? I think that's very rude and selfish. If you want it banned to prevent more injuries or needless death, then we need to put more effort on education, not the prohibition; seeing as that isn't working at all. Also, so the person above me, your poll is pretty biased. I don't think it's rude or selfish to be concerned about substances that can adversely affect peoples' judgment or behavior. I'm sure most people here are sensible enough to realize that there are drugs out there that would not benefit society at all to legalize. Sure, marijuana may be fine as it has relatively low addictive potential, but I can't think of any good reason a drug like heroine or cocaine should be legal, even if it was regulated just because of their destructive nature and high potential for addiction. The "war on drugs" certainly has taken a huge toll in lives and resources, but it can't simply be stopped because all illicit drugs just don't fall into the same category. To think so is just being ignorant of reality. At best we can try to look for more efficient methods to manage the problem, but it's not a cookie cutter problem and there's certainly no cookie cutter solution. Also, the "it's my body, I can do what I want" argument is pretty weak because a person who is suffering from impaired judgment presents a potential risk not only to themselves, but also to those around them. The influence of any mind altering substance (yes, even alcohol and prescription drugs) extends beyond the user himself. We have enough of a problem with people not following regulations when drinking alcohol (such as not drinking and driving). Given our failure to even control alcohol with regulations, what on earth would make anyone think simply regulating currently illicit drugs would encourage people to use them responsibly? And if we can't ensure that, why would we compound the problem of irresponsible behavior by allowing access to more problematic substances? | ||
|
staplestf2
United States147 Posts
| ||
|
Retgery
Canada1229 Posts
| ||
|
Mangemongen
Sweden125 Posts
On June 01 2011 01:54 DisneylandSC wrote: So the politicians aknowledge that this is the reasonable thing to do but don't do so because they think the public does not understand? In other words they abstain from implementing sound policy because they are worried about their re-election? I thought politicians were into politics for the people, being involved etc? : D This is the biggest problem in our modern democracies. | ||
|
abominare
United States1216 Posts
The thing to remember though, is that the UN doesn't operate in the real world and this means absolutely next to zero. Zip zilch nada. Giant Time Waste | ||
|
RoyalCheese
Czech Republic745 Posts
On June 01 2011 01:27 Morteth wrote: I know we gamers are a great community in general and this will be receptive here! Thank you TL! Live on Gamers!! Please don't generalize like this. I'm a huge gamer and i don't want to be associated with any of you on this matter. I'm sure there is quite a lot of people with same position. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
HansK
249 Posts
On June 01 2011 04:36 Zeburial wrote: and do you think that's a fair penalty for someone who just smoked some weed? You really think thats a good penalty? "Do as we want, else we will kill you!", kinda sounds like north korea I don't know if it's fair, but if our goal is to not allow anyone to do drugs by law then why not employ an effective means to make that happen rather than waste money and accomplishing next to nothing? If thats not our goal than why not legalize it and collect tax from it and so forth? It's not so simple but clearly other places have found ways to make strict laws and still have a normal society. I assure you Singapore is nothing alike North Korea and is actually one of the best places to live on the planet. | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On June 01 2011 06:00 LegendaryZ wrote: I don't think it's rude or selfish to be concerned about substances that can adversely affect peoples' judgment or behavior. I'm sure most people here are sensible enough to realize that there are drugs out there that would not benefit society at all to legalize. Sure, marijuana may be fine as it has relatively low addictive potential, but I can't think of any good reason a drug like heroine or cocaine should be legal, even if it was regulated just because of their destructive nature and high potential for addiction. The "war on drugs" certainly has taken a huge toll in lives and resources, but it can't simply be stopped because all illicit drugs just don't fall into the same category. To think so is just being ignorant of reality. At best we can try to look for more efficient methods to manage the problem, but it's not a cookie cutter problem and there's certainly no cookie cutter solution. Also, the "it's my body, I can do what I want" argument is pretty weak because a person who is suffering from impaired judgment presents a potential risk not only to themselves, but also to those around them. The influence of any mind altering substance (yes, even alcohol and prescription drugs) extends beyond the user himself. We have enough of a problem with people not following regulations when drinking alcohol (such as not drinking and driving). Given our failure to even control alcohol with regulations, what on earth would make anyone think simply regulating currently illicit drugs would encourage people to use them responsibly? And if we can't ensure that, why would we compound the problem of irresponsible behavior by allowing access to more problematic substances? I agree with most of what you said. I don't think my argument about it being my body is weak though, I am not mentally disabled, I am an adult, I should be allowed to do substances that I am educated about, and I think the same should apply to everyone under those conditions. I also agree that regulating drugs wouldn't necessarily enforce users to be responsible, I don't think I said or implied that, maybe someone else did. But thats not the point. You really think people need the government to supply drugs? No. They're going to get them anyway, and most people get them VERY easily. The point of having government regulation is providing a safety standard for producing said substances and hopefully reducing a lot of gang and criminal income. No more ecstasy cut with meth, no more impure heroin, no more laced drugs, no more people selling heroin in schools etc. | ||
|
DrBoo
Canada1177 Posts
| ||
|
ggrrg
Bulgaria2716 Posts
On June 01 2011 05:18 Deadlyfish wrote: Strongly disagree with this. I've lived in Panama for a long time, where drugs are a huge part of everyday life, i've even lost a friend when he committed suicide after starting to use heroin. The drug dealers literally stand outside of the schools selling their shit. We should be as hard on them as possible, and continue the war on drugs. It might be easy to say when you are from a place where you dont even notice drugs, but when you see peoples lives destroyed by it you might change your mind. Decriminalizing drugs? Worst idea ever. I'm sorry about your friend. However, heroin, meth and similar shit is not exactly at the top of the list for anybody, who supports decriminalization of drugs (In fact, I'd argue that such drugs are not even "on the list"). The decriminalization of weed alone would be a huge step towards peace, social stability (see US prison population on weed related charges) and weakening criminal organizations. There are similar rather "harmless" and "barely addictive" drugs for which there is no rational reason to be banned (e.g. hallucinogens, ecstasy). Personally, I'd like to see a decriminalization of soft drugs, since I believe that it would relieve the police of the expensive, unnecessary and contra-productive burden of chasing and locking up teenagers for what is essentially harmless stuff. On the other hand, I would never support the decriminalization of heroin, meth and similar poisons. I believe this to be an interesting graph (even if it might not be 100% accurate). Please see the location of tobacco and alcohol: | ||
|
rickybobby
United States405 Posts
| ||
|
Insanious
Canada1251 Posts
On June 01 2011 06:00 LegendaryZ wrote: I don't think it's rude or selfish to be concerned about substances that can adversely affect peoples' judgment or behavior. I'm sure most people here are sensible enough to realize that there are drugs out there that would not benefit society at all to legalize. Sure, marijuana may be fine as it has relatively low addictive potential, but I can't think of any good reason a drug like heroine or cocaine should be legal, even if it was regulated just because of their destructive nature and high potential for addiction. The "war on drugs" certainly has taken a huge toll in lives and resources, but it can't simply be stopped because all illicit drugs just don't fall into the same category. To think so is just being ignorant of reality. At best we can try to look for more efficient methods to manage the problem, but it's not a cookie cutter problem and there's certainly no cookie cutter solution. Also, the "it's my body, I can do what I want" argument is pretty weak because a person who is suffering from impaired judgment presents a potential risk not only to themselves, but also to those around them. The influence of any mind altering substance (yes, even alcohol and prescription drugs) extends beyond the user himself. We have enough of a problem with people not following regulations when drinking alcohol (such as not drinking and driving). Given our failure to even control alcohol with regulations, what on earth would make anyone think simply regulating currently illicit drugs would encourage people to use them responsibly? And if we can't ensure that, why would we compound the problem of irresponsible behavior by allowing access to more problematic substances? You do realize that two of the most dangerous drugs are already legalized... Nicotine is the most addictive substance on earth. It is legalized and in cigarettes. Even drugs like heroine and crack cocaine are less addictive than Nicotine. Then we get into something that is dangerous, lets talk about alcohol. Easy to overdose on, causes a massive amount of impaired judgment, and is the drug tied to the most deaths annually. Legalizing and regulating these drugs are similar to the legalization and regulation of alcohol and nicotine. Not only will legalizing reduce the amount of crime (as it will remove the black market aspect of drugs), but it will make the drugs safer (as in, they will be of a certain purity and will not kill people due to accidental overdoses or being cut with something that shouldn't be ingested.) We also can end up creating business whose jobs are responsible for helping people who are on these drugs. Where you end up with a society that people can do what they want, and can get help when they need it, while being a lot less in danger and having more help available... Legalization and regulation > making it illegal. | ||
|
AMaidensWrath
Belgium206 Posts
| ||
|
ampson
United States2355 Posts
On June 01 2011 05:17 travis wrote: Firstly why would it have to be heavily taxed for you to support it? Secondly, you are against decriminalization of harmless hallucinogens like mushrooms and LSD? Perhaps with regulation but nevertheless decriminalized. It would have to be heavily taxed for me to support it because it is a good opportunity for the government to pull in a lot of cash as opposed to spending money to enforce a ban. And we all know the government could use more money and less spending. Secondly, I am against the decriminalization of the hallucinogens because of "bad trips" and that they affect judgement more than cannabis, so the user is more likely to hurt themselves or others while on it. | ||
| ||
