Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

The place for any religious and/or philosophical discussions, treatise, absolutions, ramblings, etc...

Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

Postby Egaladeist » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:16 am

The legalization of drugs would prevent our civil liberties from being threatened any further, it would reduce crime rates, reverse the potency effect, improve the quality of life in the inner cities, prevent the spread of disease, save the taxpayer money, and generally benefit both individuals and the community as a whole. Our arguments are based on a basic appreciation of the benefits provided by voluntary exchange and the role markets play in coordinating human activities. Legalizing drugs would eliminate many inconsistencies, guarantee freedoms, and increase the effectiveness of the government's anti-drug beliefs. The present war on drugs has not and will not produce a decisive victory. We advocate a new approach to this important social problem.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... _65348069/

It stands to reason that if you legalize drugs and sell them through pharmacies at or around cost you take away the profit margin from illegal sales. No profit means the absence of illegal sales, as it's the profit that motivates the drug trade.

Should we legalize drugs, and how do we do it without commissioning the government to become de facto drug dealers itself?
User avatar
Egaladeist
I am the Eg man : Coo Coo Ca Choo
 
Posts: 18852
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 1:02 am
Location: Canada

Re: Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

Postby rapier57 » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:43 am

Well, it doesn't seem to make a difference with the abuse of, and distribution of, illegally obtained pain medication. Still a problem. Just as the Big Fat Liar, Rush Limbaugh.

Folks addicted to prescription meds don't get them legally.

Legalizing MJ or some other street drugs isn't going to be the panacea for the problems resulting from consequences legal and otherwise. All it does is remove the immediate legal threat for recreational use and possession.

The main benefit we would get with MJ, for instance, legalized is that production, distribution and sale would be managed and there would be much less risk of obtaining product that has been treated with poisons or other drugs.

We could actually get some righteous weed, dude!
Rapier57.

Jayne: Testing. Testing. Captain, can you hear me?
Mal: I'm standing right here.
Jayne: You're coming through good and loud.
Mal: 'Cause I'm standing right here.


@rapier57
User avatar
rapier57
I've posted HOW many
 
Posts: 3113
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Spokane, WA USA

Re: Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

Postby Harbinger » Sun Feb 21, 2010 2:18 am

One person has no business restricting what another puts in their body than they have restricting them on how to live within it. In a car wreck, the wreck itself is the crime/incident, not the substance use. Responsible drug use is relative to individuals as tolerance and responsibilities are highly variable. Those who wrecklessly use them and commit crimes or destructive acts because of drugs accept the risk of such when they choose to use them.

Substance abuse at home is not a crime. Substance abuse in a car wreck is not a crime. The car wreck is.
"I am never wrong. I thought I was once, but I was mistaken."
User avatar
Harbinger
Aspiring Anti-Christ
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:01 am
Location: University X

Re: Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

Postby Aspman » Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:22 am

Harbinger wrote:One person has no business restricting what another puts in their body than they have restricting them on how to live within it. In a car wreck, the wreck itself is the crime/incident, not the substance use. Responsible drug use is relative to individuals as tolerance and responsibilities are highly variable. Those who wrecklessly use them and commit crimes or destructive acts because of drugs accept the risk of such when they choose to use them.

Substance abuse at home is not a crime. Substance abuse in a car wreck is not a crime. The car wreck is.


Agree to a certain extent. But your right to abuse yourself should only extend until it affect other people.
I have the right not to have to pay to have some junkie's corpse dragged out and buried or to have to put up with the scabby bastards asking for money in the street.
The problem is the risks to the user don't stay with the user they extend to those around the user.

and that complicates the argument and it's an argument that extends beyond drugs to any behaviour.
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
- Denis Diderot (1713-1784)
User avatar
Aspman
Frustrated Mad Scientist
 
Posts: 8872
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:07 am
Location: Scotland

Re: Debate Topic: Legalization of Drugs

Postby SirDice » Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:44 am

Holland has the lowest percentage hard drug users in the world. There's a reason why. Soft drugs (hashish, marijuana) is allowed for personal use. It's still not legal but you won't get arrested for it. Coffeeshops are the only places that are allowed to sell and you have to be at least 18. Coffeeshops also pay taxes. Biggest advantage is that you automatically create a huge gap between soft and hard drugs like cocaine. If everything was illegal you can only get drugs from dealers. It's going to happen anyway. Might as well legalize it. At least you can monitor it's use, do quality control, tax it etc.

Guess what the result of the US' prohibition was? Yep, the rise of the mafia.
Oliver's Law:
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
User avatar
SirDice
I've posted HOW many
 
Posts: 4198
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 9:59 am
Location: Netherlands


Return to The Cave

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron