your opinion: the war on drugs vs legalization

[Bruzilla]

You don't see a lot of folks in business attire at those legalization rallies, but you do see a lot of folks who look like they were just released from a time capsule that was sealed in 1972. Of course drug users want their drugs to be legalized... just like I would like to see the speed limit raised to 120. Makes it easier and cheaper for me to speed.

Here's something else to think about... if people are trying to justify legalizing drugs because they think drug enforcement is too hard or not yielding enough return, or because "all" people do it anyway, what other things should we throw in the towell on and make legal?

- Prostitution?
- Spouse Abuse?
- Truancy?
- Petty Theft?
- Drunk Driving?
- Minor Assault?
- Auto Theft?

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde Quoting SurfaceTension: "a larger long-term dependency class."
Don't you get it? That's EXACTLY what they're after.

Gimme your guns.
Here, have some drugs - they'll make ya feel reeeeeeeeeal good.
Here's the clicker - what's on the tube?
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.


Power power power. The dumber and more defenseless we are, the more powerful they are.

VB, who are the "they" you're referring to?

I don't think you truly believe that that's the platform of the Democratic party and the intent of every elected political liberal, so who are "they?"

As for me, I have no interest in taking away your guns (reading the thread, I don't even see where that came from) nor do I wish to increase the rolls of the impoverished & addicted. None of these things is present in my wish to see drugs legalized.

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by SamSpade
I have actually noticed that every girlfriend I've ever had that was FOR the legalization of drugs either took them illegally already or had a history of drug abuse. I wonder why that is?

Maybe you're just lucky. What about your male friends, Sam? What's their opinion of the issue? Are the ones who are for legalization former users, too?

(FTR, I, pro-legalization, have never taken illegal drugs, and I never will. I've never taken a hit from a joint--and I've never even taken a drag of a legal drug, although I've taken in plenty second-hand.)

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
Here's something else to think about... if people are trying to justify legalizing drugs because they think drug enforcement is too hard or not yielding enough return, or because "all" people do it anyway, what other things should we throw in the towell on and make legal?

- Prostitution?
- Spouse Abuse?
- Truancy?
- Petty Theft?
- Drunk Driving?
- Minor Assault?
- Auto Theft?

Interesting list. It's amazing what one can find on that slope, isn't it, Bruzilla?

Prostitution isn't illegal everywhere in the country. Some believe it's victimless.

Spousal abuse, theft of any kind, drunk driving, and assault all involve harm caused by one person against another or others. In this they're invalid comparisons.

Drug use of itself does not involve harm caused by one against another. Yet you have a point in that a person impaired by his use of drugs may commit crimes while under their influence. Existing laws cover such crimes; with law enforcement no longer pouring such huge resources into prosecuting the war on drugs, officers can focus on warring against criminals.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
VB, who are the "they" you're referring to?

They are the ones who are promoting a drugged up society. Who don't think people should have to suffer the consequences of their actions. Who have such little regard for human life that they think you should just be able to scrape your unborn babies out of the womb and flush them down the toilet. Who think overtly sexual and violent entertainment is appropriate for your child. Yet who also push for laws that curtail our rights under the Constitution.

If they also happen to be liberal Democrats, that's hardly my fault. If the shoe fits.....

And, yes, that is indeed their platform - they campaign on it every day. Why do you think liberal Democrats got their hats handed to them in the last election?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
with law enforcement no longer pouring such huge resources into prosecuting the war on drugs, officers can focus on warring against criminals.

Think about what you're saying: if cops didn't have to spend time dealing with criminals on drugs, they could spend more time dealing with criminals on drugs.

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Think about what you're saying: if cops didn't have to spend time dealing with criminals on drugs, they could spend more time dealing with criminals on drugs.

That's not what I've said. What I have said is that cops freed from having to fight the drug traffic trade could spend more time dealing with crimes committed under the influence of drugs.

There's more to it all--my reasons, as well as the whole stinking crock of ____ that is "the war on drugs"--than meets the eye. I'm sure you're aware of that fact. I'm sorry I don't have the answers; and none of us can possibly have a grasp on all the possibilities and eventualities of any future actions in the "war" or its abolition.

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
They are the ones who are promoting a drugged up society. Who don't think people should have to suffer the consequences of their actions. Who have such little regard for human life that they think you should just be able to scrape your unborn babies out of the womb and flush them down the toilet. Who think overtly sexual and violent entertainment is appropriate for your child. Yet who also push for laws that curtail our rights under the Constitution.

You and I see things so vastly differently, VB. We'd probably be great friends if we'd met IRL, despite our political differences of opinion. But I honestly don't understand this P.O.V.--and I used to have it myself.

How do liberal Democrats promote a "drugged up society?"

We'll never see eye to eye on abortion, given what you've written here--let's not discuss that one.

Liberal Democrats hardly have a lock on overtly sexual and violent entertainment. Had a look at the Fox primetime line up lately? You know well where I stand on this; do you really think it's appropriate to blanket liberal Democrats with this? IMO super-right conservative Republicans drink in blind pigs while rallying for temperance.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Why do you think liberal Democrats got their hats handed to them in the last election?

Not for the reason you state. IMO the people who vote Democrat are getting damned tired of being led by milquetoast whiners and womanizers. I know I am. They thought they might get a better deal from the GOB network.

 

[vraiblonde]

First of all, Ms. Venation, all of this is just debate with me. It's not personal and I don't dislike you or think you're stupid because of your views. I'm certain we'd like each other in real life, just like I know I'd like JLab and Maynard and a few others that I don't agree with politically.

I dig on healthy debate - I've changed my views many times over the course of the years because someone made a good argument that challenged me to think. I frankly admit that my goal is to help you change your mind. And I invite you to help me change mine.

On to the debate:

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
How do liberal Democrats promote a "drugged up society?"

By wanting to legalize drugs. Because that's what will happen - take away the criminal penalty, then you take away the stigma, and pretty soon we're a nation of junkies.

We'll never see eye to eye on abortion, given what you've written here--let's not discuss that one.

I've been very blatant that I have little regard for human life. That doesn't mean I'm going to run around killing people, but my thought is, if a woman is so callous that she'd kill her unborn child, that's probably better than her actually having it, then foisting it off on an unsuspecting public. So we probably agree on abortion - just for different reasons.

Had a look at the Fox primetime line up lately?

#1, why do you think Fox News is this bastion of conservativism? Geraldo, Greta, Alan Colmes, Susan Estrich, William Kristol - liberals all. I find MSNBC to be much more conservative in general than Fox News.

#2, you're confusing the Fox Channel with Fox News. Two separate channels and venues.

You know well where I stand on this; do you really think it's appropriate to blanket liberal Democrats with this?

Yes. Again, it's their party platform, therefore it's their party. If you don't agree with it, there's nothing I can do about that - it merely is.

IMO super-right conservative Republicans drink in blind pigs while rallying for temperance.

You're dealing in opinion - I'm dealing in fact. Show me one instance where some Republican has rallied for temperance while drunk. Because I can show you a zillion where Democrat politicians are trying to legalize drugs, defending the porn that we call entertainment these days, promoting abortion, trying to restrict gun ownership, etc, etc, etc.

That's not what I've said. What I have said is that cops freed from having to fight the drug traffic trade could spend more time dealing with crimes committed under the influence of drugs.

But you're just trading criminals. There are LOT more users than there are traffickers and, if we legalize drugs, there will be even more users to deal with. You don't even have to take my word for it - just take a look at what's happened in countries where they've legalized.

It stuns me that liberals (and yes, it IS the liberals) are trying to banish cigarettes, yet want to legalize drugs.

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
First of all, Ms. Venation, all of this is just debate with me. It's not personal and I don't dislike you or think you're stupid because of your views. I'm certain we'd like each other in real life, just like I know I'd like JLab and Maynard and a few others that I don't agree with politically.

I dig on healthy debate - I've changed my views many times over the course of the years because someone made a good argument that challenged me to think. I frankly admit that my goal is to help you change your mind. And I invite you to help me change mine.

VB--it's all good, no offense intended or implied (Ms Venation?).

All acknowledged; will reply later.

 

[Bruzilla]

"Spousal abuse, theft of any kind, drunk driving, and assault all involve harm caused by one person against another or others. In this they're invalid comparisons."

You missed my point. They are valid comparisions because they are all problems that we have been trying to stop for decades and yet they continue to grow in scope and severity every year... just like drug use. If one of the key reasons for stopping the war on drugs is that it's ineffective, then I would say that the same logic could be used to stop the enforcement of these laws.

I don't see why anyone would need the definition of a "drugged up society." Just think about all of the people that you see smoking or drinking alcohol, and imagine them blitzed on grass.