Black Dynamite Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 The same principles that you do not seem to support applying to heroin, PCP, crystal meth, etc. I don't have to affiliate myself completely to one political party; my beliefs don't have to abide by every single libertarian principle. I think decriminalization is a good start when it comes to drugs, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I don't have to affiliate myself completely to one political party; my beliefs don't have to abide by every single libertarian principle. I think decriminalization is a good start when it comes to drugs, however. I'm not saying anything about affiliation to political party, I'm saying you're contradicting the use of a value you're using to argue for the legalization of one thing. If you think it's all about liberty and complete freedom, then be consistent. Nobody actually wants complete freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Alear Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) Keep in mind the gate way drug is partially caused by a black market. When you have a dealer dealing in pot, lsd, H, etc. You're more likely to try those because he'll push those drugs on you, often by giving you a couple doses for free. He can make money much easier selling harder drugs, so of course he'll want to sell you that.Obviously this doesn't apply to every dealer, your friendly college kid buying only one ounce at time probably isn't pushing black tar heroin. Yes, to some extent that was my exp. too. Acid was not pushed on me at all, nor did I take it very often, but knowing there were some harder things available inevitably lead me to consider them. Certainly, drugs have a mysticism and attraction/repulsion that many other things do not (and while legalization might actually detract from that, I doubt it'll erase it). But it isn't entirely incorrect to say that the interest in acid wasn't far off from an interest in used books when the library did their sales (though I didn't buy very many). It's probably true that a strong and enduring effort to drugs might be able to even weaken the black markets, and further decrease use. I'm not totally sure I buy that, however, from what I've seen. And, I will say that I share dynamite's view, that alcoholics seem to be hit a lot harder than stoners. Maybe that's because it's legal, and maybe legalized weed would work less well. No. Smoke a lot (half a oz of swag or 2gs of some dannnnkkk) everyday day for a couple years or so, and your gonna notice some fucking effects when you quit. That's about how much I smoked from 2009-2011 and quitting was hell. I couldn't sleep or eat for about a week. Granted I was using a "knockout bowl" to go to sleep everynight, but weed's effects can be bad if you smoke out. Not to mention that burnt out feeling you get, where everything seems harder and all that you care about is getting high. It's also not as bad as alchol, hard drug, or tobacco withdraw but it isn't fun. Also kid's shouldn't smoke, it should be 18+ only. I really wish I hadn't of starting smoking pot in high school. Ya, I will say that most of the "physically addictive" arguments usually won't discard the "psychologically addictive" aspect. And psychological actually is physically based - in your brain, which is where some of the physically addictive stuff occurs. I suspect what the words really mean (or signal a belief in) is that your mind creates the addiction rather loosely, and may never develop one in spite of use. I think is is an absolutely horrible idea. Meth and Herion change good people into absolute monsters. One of my friends got into meth/H after high school, and he had nver gotten into a fight/been arrested before. 6 months later, his grandparents were pressing charges because he had robbed them and pawned off all their family heirlooms/jewelry for a couple hundred dollars of meth. He went to jail, did a year, got out, and od'd in less than 2 weeks. His grandparents didn't even go to his funeral. (and they raised him not his parents). However should we send non-violent users (not dealers) to mandatory treatment instead of jail? Absolutely. Seems fair. However, I'm not totally sure it's necessarily right to deal as harshly with, say, dealers, as with violent offfenders, in the same way I'm not sure it's right to criminalize tobacco sellers. Is meth worse than nicotine? Sure as fuck seems like it! And can people actually smoke cigs responsibly? Seems at least plausible. So does that create a fair reasoning for harsher standards? You bet your ass it does. But it seems like when we put a dealer in prison (well maybe this would happen anyway) you just get drugs being dealt in prisons? This is probably a sweeping set of considerations far beyond my knowledge, though. Alcohol seems to turn some people into monsters, but I rarely see the negative attention paid to beer, wine, and liquor companies that's paid to tobacco companies. I guess that's because we actually weathered prohibition, and the cultural aspect, and such, and because we love our booze so much (not even for getting drunk). Edited January 12, 2013 by Mouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenrir Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Absolutely. My point is we shouldn't send people who only break the law of using hard drugs to jail. There are plenty of users who think, "Ok this is my last bag, tommorow I'm gonna get my GED/Degree after this" every time they cop. We should get those kinds of users the help they need instead of sending them to prison with rapists and murders. However it shouldn't be a, "I was high, get out of jail free card" type deal. Then suddenly every single criminal ever would have a drug problem lol. 100% agree. The results still have to be punished no matter what. And I think we both see how silly it is to put people in jail exclusively for doing drugs. Agreed. If people can handle their shit, and aren't stealing, hurting people, or breaking other laws, then treatment is a better alternative to jail. Yeah man totally. I don't completely understand the logic you're using here. On one hand you seem to be saying that people should be allowed to consume the drugs they want because it's not fair to completely illegalize them. But then you are saying that if they do they should be forced by the government to attend rehab. I understand how you can be confused. I worded tons of things poorly. But basically, in my perfect world, all drugs would be completely legal. However this isn't a perfect world and the USA(Can't speak for other countries) isn't ready for that radical of a change. They need to go to decriminalization before completely legalizing things. And maybe no country as big as the US that has a general culture of individualism will ever be able to make everything completely legal. I think cannabis should be legal, and every other drug should be decriminalized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Alear Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) Also worth saying since I don't think it's been said, that some stuff that drug users seem to think of as pretty...dangerous, or worthy of caution, are legal. Salvia for ex. Don't know a lot about it - seems like there isn't a lot of negative evidence compiled about it, but I know ppl who've used it and it seems like it's pretty intense, but very short term. That isn't to say it should or shouldn't be legal. Just that there might be things that "should be illegal" that ain't, and things that "shouldn't be illegal" that are besides pot. Edited January 13, 2013 by Mouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.