Drug Policy

[Napoléon]

Hmmm so? Why should I respect or even allow people's personal choices? Am I supposed to allow any personal choice, specially when it requires my tax money?

Are you serious? One of the best reasons to legalize drugs is that it's a trillion (yes, trillion) dollar industry that isn't already being taxed, and you're worried about your own tax money? You're a moron.

And how does gambling relate? Playing cards, or whatever game you want to play in the casino is not addicting itself, what's addicting is playing too much and putting too much effort. Now, you can say that heavy drugs used once or twice may not make you addicted, but scientifically your body will become addicted regardless of how much you try, after a short usage.

Shows how much you know.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...-gambling/

Research to date shows that pathological gamblers and drug addicts share many of the same genetic predispositions for impulsivity and reward seeking. Just as substance addicts require increasingly strong hits to get high, compulsive gamblers pursue ever riskier ventures.

You brought the regulation part.

And what you were talking about wasn't relevant to regulation. You were talking exlusively about prices. The reasoning behind regulation (in this instance at least) has very little to do with controlling the cost of what you're actually regulating.

Someone addicted to heavy drugs isn't certainly concerned about safety otherwise they wouldn't be doing drugs in the first place. Damn, people just don't get the consequences of legalizing all drugs. I can start by asking the following question - If the government is providing drugs, will it be with my tax money? If so, how to deal with the fact most people don't want to pay and the high price itself? If it's a private enterprise doing it, does that mean it will be pro-profit and thus drug consumption will be marketed like beauty products and clothing shops do? How will the state acquire drugs? South America is one of the places where it's easy to produce, so will it import? Who pays the costs?

Replace "drugs" with alcohol.

I'm not saying I have all the answers on how legalisation would be achieved. I'm sure it would be complicated, but other vices and potentially damaging substances are already legal. How the state would go about implementing legalisation doesn't have much to do with whether it should be legal in the first place IMO.

Also, you keep saying this thing: "if the government is providing drugs". That's a straw man. Nobody is even remotely suggesting the government would have a crack stand on street corners. So your argument about "hurr durr my tax money is paying fuurr drurgs", is a completely bullshit one.

If you don't believe me, try this - Go out and when you see a junkie talk to him/her and tell that person that you have drugs to sell - You'll see how much they ask for quality If it was about rehab I'd understand but I see no reason to fund people's addictions with the government's money. There's more productive stuff to do, seriously. There's rehab clinics for those who want.

Again, not relevant to the question of whether drugs should be legalized.

Actually it's observable empirical data that a large number of people I've met used to smoke weed with me quite frequently and we never got hooked

No, that's not 'observable empirical data'. That's your personal testimony.

Meanwhile here's some actual empirical information on the topic:

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/re...-addictive

And most of us smoked cigarettes as well, so trust me when I tell you that weed isn't addicting.

Demonstrably false.

I think the comparison with alcohol is not appropriate. Alcohol is like sex, if done with moderation you won't get hurt - Sex is an addiction for some people, but it's not unhealthy itself, just like alcohol.

Lol, you have a go at me for comparing drug use to gambling but you then go on to compare alcohol to sex? Wow.

I posted some questions above and I'd like to see some replies - I'm not picking on drug users or people's rights, I'm just being skeptic and it is a healthy approach to claims. I want to know how these measures of legalizing all drugs would work, who pays, who provides the service and why it would work.

I'm not claiming to know how legalizing drugs would work in reality. All I know is that other harmful substances are available and are regulated by governments worldwide, so I don't think it's impossible. The bottom line is that criminalizing drug use does absolutely nothing to prevent people from taking them anyway. Instead what you have is people with mental health issues treated as criminals, and you have one of the biggest industries in the world going along untaxed.

Flip the question around, what good reason is there to criminalize drug use? You say you're a skeptic but I don't see much skepticism from you about the obviously flawed system we already have in place.

[Excited Penguin]

I am the only one who voted for legal age 16, Heroine and sedatives. Maybe I'm wrong about heroine and sedatives but what's wrong about letting a kid who is legally allowed to drive to smoke some weed?

I was an adult since I was 12-13. At least I haven't changed much since then. And I'm think I'm pretty smart now. jk jk, chillz.
But yeah, I think legal age should be more like 14.

[Napoléon]

I was an adult since I was 12-13. At least I haven't changed much since then.

That explains so much.

[Excited Penguin]

That explains so much.

This explains a lot. Like why you also missed the point on many other things I said, you clearly can't seem to comprehend either humour or certain parts of my replies in particular. This might be because of either bias or other such fallaciously facile ground.

[Napoléon]

This explains a lot. Like why you also missed the point on many other things I said, you clearly can't seem to comprehend either humour or certain parts of my replies in particular. This might be because of either bias or other such fallaciously facile ground.

[Excited Penguin]

This explains a lot. Like why you also missed the point on many other things I said, you clearly can't seem to comprehend either humour or certain parts of my replies in particular. This might be because of either bias or other such fallaciously facile ground.

Actually, see, it's funny, because I seem to always predict what you will say to me next based solely on what I say myself. This means to say, I anticipate your attitude by putting myself in your shoes.
This does not bode well for your overall intelligence,   .

[Napoléon]

Actually, see, it's funny, because I seem to always predict what you will say to me next based solely on what I say myself. This means to say, I anticipate your attitude by putting myself in your shoes.
This does not bode well for your overall intelligence,   .

Oh pray tell, what am I going to say now then little doggie?

[Excited Penguin]

Actually, see, it's funny, because I seem to always predict what you will say to me next based solely on what I say myself. This means to say, I anticipate your attitude by putting myself in your shoes.
This does not bode well for your overall intelligence,   .

Oh pray tell, what am I going to say now then little doggie?

This is too easy. Anyone who didn't expect this next reply is surely not paying attention.

You are too easy to read because your actions don't leave much to the imagination.

Of course, I can't tell you what you're going to say next, seeing how once you acquire this information you would change your own wording or statement altogether. For what it's worth, right now, I don't know what you're going to say. I sense that I threw you off a little from your mindless pursuit of me.
It's no magic trick. We all think alike and we can also detect this provided we allow for a certain level of focus.

Mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Romam

[Napoléon]

This is too easy. Anyone who didn't expect this next reply is surely not paying attention.

You are too easy to read because your actions don't leave much to the imagination.

Of course, I can't tell you what you're going to say next, seeing how once you acquire this information you would change your own wording or statement altogether. For what it's worth, right now, I don't know what you're going to say. I sense that I threw you off a little from your mindless pursuit of me.
It's no magic trick. We all think alike and we can also detect this provided we allow for a certain level of focus.

Mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Romam

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Go to London I guarantee you'll either be mugged, or not appreciated.