Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mathew Ourkind on March 17, 2011 at 6:07pm

I think the dealers of "hard-core" drugs should be punished like they do right now (depend on country you live in).

 

I don't think a there should be a penalty for using drugs. Only when you commit a crime, whether on drugs or not, should you be punished.

 

My philosophy is: Do what you want as long as you don't hurt others.

 

"According to the website ncvc.org, 81% of crimes are drug-related." Wow, that's a lot.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Noah on March 21, 2011 at 7:11am

"Do what you want as long as you don't hurt others."

 

Mathew, I love the idea, but it isn't all that practical. Does a drunk think he's a good driver ? Of course he does. They all do. Kill entire families anyway.

My point: who is the judge of whether or not you are hurting others ??

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mathew Ourkind on March 21, 2011 at 8:59am

I would not ban alcohol just because some decide to drive while drunk.

I would not ban drugs just because some hurt others.

 

There is a difference.

 

I would not ban weapons just because some (very few) go crazy.

If we need bans, let's ban selfishness, greed etc.. After all driving while intoxicated means you're being selfish by risking others.

 

I'd rather see the ones get penalties who make crimes (selfish).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T A A on March 21, 2011 at 5:00pm

The problem here is motorised vehicles not alcohol. Roads are a major cause of death, yet we consider those "accidents". Yet when alcohol is in the mix, it's suddenly homicide! If driver negligence was properly addressed on roadways (both behaviour and vehicle maintenance), fatalities would be much fewer. On roadways, a death is a death, we should be assessing cause of accident, and putting blame on motorists as is overdue. Most driving accidents are preventable, alcohol or not. The push by crazy MADD activists to reduce alcohol percentage to zero is little more than disguised prohibitionism.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Noah on March 21, 2011 at 7:06am

Legalize ALL drugs but increase the penalties for circumstantial things, such as providing drugs to a minor. It might work, but it will be socially difficult to pull off. There will still need to be controls, serious ones. Do you want to know that your pilot can legally shoot speed ??  That can NOT happen. So, yeah, a lot of testing will still be appropriate and folks will still end up in prison over being .. stupid.

I think it will work much better than what we have now.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arcus on March 21, 2011 at 7:20am

It's kinda already pulled off with alcohol and cigarettes...

Though due to the negative externalities, sale of intoxicating products should always be taxed and heavily regulated by the government to ensure product safety and a price level which reflects the socio-economic cost.

On a side note, I don't mind people who we depend on staying awake can use stimulants in a strictly controlled manner. As I say this I am drinking my third cup of coffee of the day...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T A A on March 21, 2011 at 4:54pm

And as was previously discussed, testing methods are heavily biased against Cannabis and other harder drug users can easily escape monitoring.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Donald Pennington on March 23, 2011 at 12:53pm

Rehab doesn't work since they rely so heavily on the 12-step bullshit. Rational Emotive Therapy is a bit more effective.

I have mixed feelings about our "War on Drugs" joke. It was based upon a God-fearing politician's desire to get more votes, and nothing more.

It seems every time the US wages "war" on something, we get more of it. E.g., War on drugs...drugs are now cheaper and easier to find.  War on poverty...poverty rates are sky-rocketing.

Why can't they wage a war on hot redhead chicks? I'd love it if we ended up with more hot redheads.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by lloydleroimiller on April 1, 2011 at 8:17pm

Wow, I been away and will be again, but.... I got a lot to say about this discussion.

81%? That is probably low.  I may have mentioned that I spent some time in the big house.  Quite a bit really, though it has been awhile.  I met only two, out of thousands of prisoners, whose crimes were not drug-motivated. Two, really. :Obviously, rehab and prison isn't working." I guess I would have to know what 'working" would look like.

If the powers that be truly wanted to improve society by attacking the drug problem,(they do not).the approach would not be as threatening, would probably not be fought with court dates and lawyers.  It is a problem, no doubt.  Intentionally misrepresented, intentionally described inaccurately. 

The idea that it is a severe social issue, is in fact, in itself a business, huge business.

The first thing would be the need to reclassify every category, from 'criminal behavior'  to....?(whatever)

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by scLovely on April 1, 2011 at 8:30pm

So do you do think that prison is a justifiable punishment for drug usage or possession?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Donald Pennington on April 2, 2011 at 1:15am

Oh, no.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd T. on April 3, 2011 at 2:51am

I would ask, if possession of a currently illegal drug should be punished with detainment, why not alcohol? For your camp to have a logically consistent platform, you need to include all intoxicating drugs that are used outside of a medical context. Most people wouldn't say alcohol should be illegal even if other intoxicants should, so the point might as well be moot until all intoxicants are included.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• 14
• 15
• …
• 18
• Next ›
• Page