|
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
what about meth? |
What about it? Do you need me to list off every single hard drug out there?
| quote: | can you explain to me the difference?
whatever it is your advocating one thing will be true; increasing availability would increase the the number of addictions. whether that sees a drop in violence, which i can't see that happening, that then becomes moot in the larger picture. |
The difference is, a drug user is not arrested just because they use drugs. TA DA!! Decriminalization does not increase availability because it would still be illegal to produce hard drugs. So there goes that premise.
| quote: | | youre not really saying anything then. you want to keep meth, coke and opiates where they are, you just want to be able to smoke a doobie? wtf are we arguing about then? |
I actually don't smoke anymore. If you agree that there should be a distinction btween hard and soft drugs, then this is unprecedented. We actually agree on something...
| quote: | thats not regulating a market. thats addressing the symptoms the market causes.
answer the question. how are you going to regulate the drug trade? how are you going to reconcile with responsible communities that want nothing to do with the drug trade? force them?
i'm all ears about how youre going to apply this libertarian-at-all-costs and individual freedom bullshit with real people that aware of the real problems that come with addiction. |
Regulation of soft drugs in the form of taxation, safety standards, and licensing suppliers. Communities would do as they always have. Ever heard of "public intoxication" or "DUIs"? If they don't want a cannibis shop, there is some called an "ordinance" to prevent it. It's not rocket science.
| quote: | | no. i don't care about socialism or any ism associated with drugs. |
Trying to limit the free exercise of liberty is authoritarian socialism.
| quote: | the same assholes that already do. you mean to tell me that if we decriminalize all class-A narcotics the Columbians are just gonna pack it up and sell used cars for a living?
get a clue dude. the addict doesn't give a fuck who he buys from as long as he can buy it. you said it yourself, demand begets supply. the Columbians and the Afghanis of the world are still going to want to move product regardless. if they see demand shoot through the roof from decriminalization, nothing would stop them. |
It is fallacy to assume decriminalization leads to higher demand. Do you have any evidence for that?
| quote: | | it's so is not in the same way. alchol and tobacco growers aren't violent psychopaths that want complete control of a multi-billion dollar market. |
It so is. Understand the economic-side of the black market. If you are not ruthless in how you deal with your competition, competition overtakes you. Anyways, I don't want to legalize production of hard drugs.
| quote: | | you said "Corporate competition turns to violent competition in an underground market." which may be true to an extent, but any competition in a drug market has it's social downside regardless of who's doing the competing. you can't guarantee that you can eliminate all or any of the downside through "corporate competition" |
What you would do is take the market out the hands of criminals. What does this do? There would be no question as to the quality of the product, no violent competition, legal and regulated production.
| quote: | | again i'll refer to my original statement that you don't care what the negatives are, you want it despite all the negatives. you want cartels and manufacturers to have their way with the market at the expense of your fellow man. it's selfish and destructive. it's shallow to the point of idiocy. |
Wrong. I want authoritarians such as yourself to stop enforcing your social code on the rest of society. There is something called "liberty", which this country was founded on. You have no right to tell me or anyone else how to exercise their free will. So I'de suggest you stop telling me what I want, because you hardly know.
| quote: | first off you haven't the slightest clue what neocons are, otherwise you would have never brought it up in this context so f**king can it. from the sound of it i'm not sure you even know wtf "hardline socialism" is |
You are a self-admitted neocon, so explain to me how I am wrong? You are also advocating stifling millions of people's free exercise of their liberty, which is hardline socialist. Authoritarian conservatives are just so full contradictions:rollseyes:
| quote: | | second when you start refering to "freedoms" in the abstract never, ever, apply that to drug use. there is no "freedom" in addiction. addiction is diametric to "freedom" |
You have no right to limit anyone's free exercise of their liberty. No one forced the addict to try drugs. So please don't forget that point.
| quote: | | if you have ever personally watched someone destroy themselves through addiction you would have thought twice about saying stupid shit like that. |
I have watched people I know destroy themselves on drugs. I'de suggest you stop assuming I'm a sheltered well-to-do college kid, because you're assumptions are completely wrong. You can't force someone who does not want to stop using drugs, to stop. And if you do, you're on an authoritarian power trip. Put them jail, huh? Guess what? There are drugs in jails too. Did you know that?
| quote: | | you said "If there is a demand, there will be suppliers, and those suppliers will compete for demand". if you decriminalize, you automatically increase demand. therefore, how could you not be increase supply? you would have to, otherwise we come back around to to the problem of competition and the inherent violence associated with it. |
Your assumption is wrong. Prove that decriminalization leads to higher demand. You keep throwing this out there, but I still have not seen one study or statistic proving it. Holland, which does have decriminalization policy has lower drug use rates IN ALL CATAGORIES compared to the USA.
| quote: | | youre going to have to do better or elaborate on that. |
A crime is when a free person violates the life, liberty, or property of another free person. If I smoke weed, I am not killing anyone. I am not forcing anyone to anything against their will (liberty). I am not violating anyone's property rights (i.e. stealing). It is a victimless crime, and to prosecute victimless crimes is authoritarian, anti-democratic, and against the ideals of so-called inalienabe rights.
___________________
|
