Drugs claim 2 more lives...

[3CATSAILOR]

Are positions are different how?

So, lets say you legalize bank robbery just because a lot of people are doing it. What does it accomplish other than your bank being empty? Anyhow, its foolish to think legalizing drug use will make us a better World. Show concrete evidence that can back it up. There isn't any. Enough said.

 

[officeguy]

So, lets say you legalize bank robbery just because a lot of people are doing it. What does it accomplish other than your bank being empty? Anyhow, its foolish to think legalizing drug use will make us a better World. Show concrete evidence that can back it up. There isn't any. Enough said.

Legalizing bank robbery would affect me. Legalizing drug addicts offing themselves with whatever poison of their choosing would not affect me.

 

[Monello]

I'm for the legalization of marijuana. Tax it and sell it. People are using it already but society doesn't get a monetary benefit from it's sale. The criminal element in selling it is a net negative to society. Colorado's 2016 tax revenue was around $200 million. That is just for 1 state.

The state of Colorado pulled in nearly $200 million in tax revenue last year thanks to its $1.3 billion in marijuana revenue.
The Colorado Department of Revenue announced Thursday the state’s revenue had pushed past $1 billion. Colorado legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, along with Washington state, and this was its third year of regulated sales.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ma...n-colorado-as-sales-pass-1-billion-2017-02-10

 

[vraiblonde]

Legalizing bank robbery would affect me. Legalizing drug addicts offing themselves with whatever poison of their choosing would not affect me.

It affects you when they rob you to pay for their addiction. It also affects you when you have to pay for their treatment with your tax dollars (which you will) and it affects you when your insurance premiums go up to cover the myriad health related problems these folks have. When a pack of addicts moves in next door to you, you will absolutely be affected. When addicts neglect and abuse their children - which is pretty much par for the course - you will likely be affected in some way.

Like I said, if druggies want to kill themselves that's A-OK with me, but it's almost impossible for them to leave you and me out of it.

 

[officeguy]

It affects you when they rob you to pay for their addiction.

Most illegal drugs are just plant extracts, really cheap to produce. Even synthetic drugs like fenta are dirt cheap when bought directly from the pharmacy rather than the illegal diversion market. If you could buy heoin at the liquor store, it wouldn't be more than a couple of bucks a day.

It also affects you when you have to pay for their treatment with your tax dollars (which you will)

Why should I pay for it? Somehow politicians have decided that burning money on drug treatment is the right thing to do. Given that 97% of optiate addicts fail drug treatment, I don't know why we even bother. The 3% who are going to kick the habit will do so without treatment.

and it affects you when your insurance premiums go up to cover the myriad health related problems these folks have.

That is only because we currently have 'guaranteed acceptance' health insurance. If health insurance was sold like any other type of insurance and was able to exclude customers who willfully harm themselves, it would have no influence on my premium.

When a pack of addicts moves in next door to you, you will absolutely be affected. When addicts neglect and abuse their children - which is pretty much par for the course - you will likely be affected in some way.

And that would be different from how it works currently how ?

I dont think making drugs of abuse legal and accessible would fix all problems, but it could reduce a number of them. Most of the negative effects of drug addicts on the rest of society are the result of political decisions. Without laws like EMTALA and medicaid, individual decisions would not have societal consequences.

 

[Larry Gude]

So, lets say you legalize bank robbery just because a lot of people are doing it. What does it accomplish other than your bank being empty? Anyhow, its foolish to think legalizing drug use will make us a better World. Show concrete evidence that can back it up. There isn't any. Enough said.

How does that not make you feel dumb? You don't intuitively, see the difference between you wanting to get high, growing or buying some weed or other drugs, consuming it in a responsible manner, like, I dunno, at their HOME, and me taking other people's money against their will?

 

[Larry Gude]

People drink themselves to death on liquor store booze all the time. Do you still have my Mom's cellphone number? Call her and ask her if you don't believe me.

People eat themselves to death at the grocery store. All the time. People work themselves to death at stress filled jobs. They die, all the time, on the road, to and from these jobs. They slip and fall, all the time, at home. And die.

Grab a news paper if you don't believe me.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well, maybe they will kidnap little children and sell them as sex slaves. Then, when we legalize that, they will move on to something else that we can decide to legalize because we're too lazy and corrupt to enforce the law and protect our society.

Good grief, you even said it yourself:



So when the profit falls out of heroin, then what will they do?

You don't intuitively, see a difference between you wanting to grow your own or go buy some drug of choice and consume it in a responsible manner at, say, oh, I dunno, home and me taking other people's money against their will? Or kidnapping? Or what have you?

You constantly equate crime with drug use but excuse it when it comes to alcohol or stress or poor diet or the myriad other things that contribute to people harming themselves. I get that it's personal for you but drug use no more = robber or child slavery than alcohol does. For crying out loud, Apple abuses children in their sweat shops more than your local dope head. The point isn't to legalize drugs so people can harm others. It's so that the business of it and the harm it cerates...goes away. Just like it did last time we thought our way out of prohibition.

You hold dear to a false equivalency for personal reasons. Someone in a car crash could be expected and understood to be fearful of roads and cars for the rest of their lives but people driving doesn't cause wrecks. People driving poorly does.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

You constantly equate crime with drug use but excuse it when it comes to alcohol or stress or poor diet or the myriad other things that contribute to people harming themselves.

Larry

You were the one that claimed that all the corruption and crime associated with drug use would go away if drugs were legalized. Yes it will not any longer be associated with drug use, but bad people are bad people and crime and corruption will still exist, just associated with something else. The corner drug dealer is not going to become a pillar of the community because he has no market any more.

 

[Larry Gude]

Let me suggest that it becomes non-entertaining for you when you are asked a question that you cannot answer. You have made many proclamations on this subject, but to my knowledge you have not one time answered the rebuttal questions that are put to you.

So here's a simple one:

What will all those dealers and hoppers do for money once drugs are legal? What will the cartels do for money?

That's crap. I haven't answered it to YOUR satisfaction because you have a conformational bias answer locked tight in your mind; to you, legalization means violent, corrupting dealers WILL go on to the next crime. Period. That leaves a whole #### ton of questions unanswered; what did drug lords do BEFORE drug prohibition? Also, you're suggesting a surge in sex crimes because, I guess, magically, the demand for sex crimes will go UP with the cartels get tight for money. People will want MORE sex slavery then? Basically, what you're arguing is that the violence and crime and corruption comes from people who do it FOR the violence and crime and corruption; not because people wanna get high. You're saying corrupt cops and judges will just move along with the criminals and be bought off by the next big thing. You're argument is that the cartels are the driving force, not people wanting to get high. That they'll just go, what, into making cells phones with child labor?

 

[Larry Gude]

Larry

You were the one that claimed that all the corruption and crime associated with drug use would go away if drugs were legalized. Yes it will not any longer be associated with drug use, but bad people are bad people and crime and corruption will still exist, just associated with something else. The corner drug dealer is not going to become a pillar of the community because he has no market any more.

Ok, let's play this stupid game that CRIME drives demand and not the other way around.

The end of alcohol prohibition, they move to drugs, right?

OK, so, end of drug prohibition, now what? Robbing banks has been suggested as though that is remotely equivalent. Sex slavery is, supposedly, gonna explode if the poor dopers don't have their drugs to keep them occupied.

Now what? They gonna sell extra large sodas in Philly? That's illegal. What are they gonna do when drug money goes away? Demand for prostitution is NOT going to suddenly explode because cartels need a new gig. That is NOT how it works. People WANNA get high be it alcohol or weed. Some people have problems and want worse drugs.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

Ok, let's play this stupid game that CRIME drives demand and not the other way around.

The end of alcohol prohibition, they move to drugs, right?

OK, so, end of drug prohibition, now what? Robbing banks has been suggested as though that is remotely equivalent. Sex slavery is, supposedly, gonna explode if the poor dopers don't have their drugs to keep them occupied.

Now what? They gonna sell extra large sodas in Philly? That's illegal. What are they gonna do when drug money goes away? Demand for prostitution is NOT going to suddenly explode because cartels need a new gig. That is NOT how it works. People WANNA get high be it alcohol or weed. Some people have problems and want worse drugs.

Shakedowns, loansharking, illegal weapons trade, human trafficking, plain ole theft.

So is Ser'Charles on the corner no longer going to commit crimes?

 

[Merlin99]

That's crap. I haven't answered it to YOUR satisfaction because you have a conformational bias answer locked tight in your mind; to you, legalization means violent, corrupting dealers WILL go on to the next crime. Period. That leaves a whole #### ton of questions unanswered; what did drug lords do BEFORE drug prohibition? Also, you're suggesting a surge in sex crimes because, I guess, magically, the demand for sex crimes will go UP with the cartels get tight for money. People will want MORE sex slavery then? Basically, what you're arguing is that the violence and crime and corruption comes from people who do it FOR the violence and crime and corruption; not because people wanna get high. You're saying corrupt cops and judges will just move along with the criminals and be bought off by the next big thing. You're argument is that the cartels are the driving force, not people wanting to get high. That they'll just go, what, into making cells phones with child labor?

I see no reason to disagree with this statement, ####bags are going to be ####bags no matter what.

 

[Larry Gude]

Shakedowns, loansharking, illegal weapons trade, human trafficking, plain ole theft.

So is Ser'Charles on the corner no longer going to commit crimes?

So, criminals drive crimes, not market demands?

 

[SamSpade]

It affects you when they rob you to pay for their addiction. It also affects you when you have to pay for their treatment with your tax dollars (which you will) and it affects you when your insurance premiums go up to cover the myriad health related problems these folks have. When a pack of addicts moves in next door to you, you will absolutely be affected. When addicts neglect and abuse their children - which is pretty much par for the course - you will likely be affected in some way.

Like I said, if druggies want to kill themselves that's A-OK with me, but it's almost impossible for them to leave you and me out of it.

I really don't see how legalization would lessen any of those things. Unless that was your point. The only thing that might be different is the first one, and most people are only talking about legalizing *weed* - in my personal experience, always people actually using it and hoping it was legal, so they might have easier access to a legal drug. Only libertarians think that it all should be legal - meth, heroin, coke etc.

I don't know of a solution. Unhappy people use. HAPPY people use. Desperate people use. Wealthy people use. If someone managed to completely poison the world's supply of drugs, people would STILL use them because some of them are just that addictive, and some people are strongly genetically disposed to addiction to them. Legalizing them would not erase the cartels and the awful people who deal in them, it would not end their violence or their reach into corrupt nations of the world. It would not end the cycles of addiction, it would not solve any of those problems but I submit that legalizing them would *add* new problems, as people stupid enough to ruin their lives with drugs when they are illegal are not going to pace themselves sensibly if it's legal.

 

[vraiblonde]

I really don't see how legalization would lessen any of those things. Unless that was your point.

That was my point.

We can sit around and noodle over "solutions" until we foam at the mouth, but unless we go all Stalin with it and start systematically executing people, we will never be able to eradicate destructive human behaviors. Your second paragraph sums it up nicely:

I don't know of a solution. Unhappy people use. HAPPY people use. Desperate people use. Wealthy people use. If someone managed to completely poison the world's supply of drugs, people would STILL use them because some of them are just that addictive, and some people are strongly genetically disposed to addiction to them. Legalizing them would not erase the cartels and the awful people who deal in them, it would not end their violence or their reach into corrupt nations of the world. It would not end the cycles of addiction, it would not solve any of those problems but I submit that legalizing them would *add* new problems, as people stupid enough to ruin their lives with drugs when they are illegal are not going to pace themselves sensibly if it's legal.

Legalizers are all over the place when you ask them what specific problem they are trying to "solve". What it usually ends up boiling down to is that they want to bake without getting busted, or they have a kid who can't get their chit straight and they're sick of paying for legal bills. Or they're some dingbat who hasn't really thought about it in any depth and is just parroting something they heard someone else say.

 

[vraiblonde]

People eat themselves to death at the grocery store. All the time.

You just made my point nicely and refuted your own self. Legalization clearly doesn't prevent death due to destructive behavior, as you tried to make the case for.

 

[vraiblonde]

You hold dear to a false equivalency for personal reasons.

?

What personal reasons would that be? I am not an addict, nor are either of my kids. I have never been married to an addict, unless you count yourself who is addicted to arguing and making silly scenarios to support your erroneous positions because you can't admit that you're wrong.

 

[Larry Gude]

The b and e.

 

[vraiblonde]

That's crap. I haven't answered it to YOUR satisfaction because you have a conformational bias answer locked tight in your mind; to you, legalization means violent, corrupting dealers WILL go on to the next crime. Period. That leaves a whole #### ton of questions unanswered; what did drug lords do BEFORE drug prohibition? Also, you're suggesting a surge in sex crimes because, I guess, magically, the demand for sex crimes will go UP with the cartels get tight for money. People will want MORE sex slavery then? Basically, what you're arguing is that the violence and crime and corruption comes from people who do it FOR the violence and crime and corruption; not because people wanna get high. You're saying corrupt cops and judges will just move along with the criminals and be bought off by the next big thing. You're argument is that the cartels are the driving force, not people wanting to get high. That they'll just go, what, into making cells phones with child labor?

And STILL you did not answer my question, which was:

What will all those dealers and hoppers do for money once drugs are legal? What will the cartels do for money?

Nice blathering redirect, though, but you forget that I'm not a novice at dealing with your tactics.