It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
When I was 11, when used to hang around the local shops asking parents to buy us fags. And a lot of them DID!!! That blows my mind now!
What's it gonna be like if the shops are stocking all sorts of additionals?
It’s also true that with taxation comes the opportunity for criminals to undercut the legal market, just as they do with alcohol and tobacco, but it’s nowhere near as profitable. *Nothing* is as profitable to criminals as the current model for drugs, or even remotely close. Taking it away would destroy organised crime almost completely and remove the vast majority of the low-level crime which pays for it at the user end. And illegal production couldn’t compete with properly legal supply either - once big legitimate companies get involved the economies of scale would be huge.
It’s not because I’m a free-market libertarian or a drug user that I think this way, it’s because I can see what the prohibition approach has resulted in, and that going on doing the same thing and expecting different results is more or less the definition of insanity.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
Just because prohibition has issues - and it does, it does - doesn't mean we should resort to a blanket all drugs are now legal and purchaseable rulebook. That's why I called it utopianism, because I truly don't think you've thought this through. The reason I said you're more free market capitalist on this issue than I am, is because not once have you talked about the potential dangers of your solution. You've only espoused the imagined and unproven benefits.
It's completely untested waters. To make grand claims about the efficacy of XYZ approach when it hasn't been tested is a classic example of utopian thinking.
Whereas I'm at least encorporating something of human nature into my viewpoint - some humans want to get fucked up. Whether that's because of escapism or not is neither here nor there (and for the record, I'm not convinced by that argument either!) the bottom line is... humans are going to do what they want to do; and the role of government is to ensure that a minimal amount of harm is perpetrated upon it's people as possible.
Some humans can handle their drink and drugs, and some cannot. Some turn peaceful and chilled out when mashed off their face, and some do not. It's anecdotal, but I used to know a guy that would cause fights any time he got super high. I know one guy who jumped out of a window on cocaine and broke his leg. I remember a friend at uni fantasizing about jumping out of a window when she was high on shrooms; she's lucky we all laughed at her instead of going "woaah dude... deepppp... let's do it!"
RE: Off-licenses not being the same as corner shops .... well.... I don't know what it's like where you live... but where I live you generally have one of two things - a Tescos/Morrisons/Sainsbury's supermarket.... or an off license that also happens to sell bread and milk and Polish cupcakes.
On the profits thing ... what do drug cartels and their organisations do when they lose money? They look for something else. They go off and invent the next designer drug to maximize profits, and the legal and social framework doesn't move quick enough to keep up. It's not prohibition that gave us spice, pcp, meth, and bath salts. It's human's propensity to try and fuck themselves up, and drug dealers propensity to push and capitalize on human suffering and weakness.
I'm sounding like a just say no advocate, and maybe on some level I am. The point someone else made about escapism... okay.... let's roll with that for a moment..... why do people have to be so weak? Why can't they face their challenges head on? Why do they need to blot out all of the pain? Why escape? Why not get some help? Are they thick? Is it IQ? Are they actively malicious? Do they want to hurt themselves and others around them? Does misery love company?
There are lots of branches to this tree and you could really go deep on this topic. Deeper than "legalise it all lol" really takes you.
One thing I'm reasonably sure of; we're not going to get rid of drug dealers by making all drugs legal. It doesn't work that way. Never has, and never will.
It's mostly a life choice.
When I was a heroin addict, I consorted with criminals, people who were highly unlikely to choose a wholesome, honest lifestyle if drugs were legalised. They'd just move on to the next criminal endeavour.
From a criminal point of view you couldn’t invent a better business if you tried - it has extremely high value-to-bulk ratio, insatiable demand that’s largely unaffected by price, and no legal competition.
Of course organised criminals would try to find another opportunity - but there isn’t one that even comes close to what they can generate from drugs, and without the overpricing at the user level there would be far less low-level crime to pay for it as well.
It’s not utopian or libertarian, it’s simple logic. Prohibition has utterly failed, and will always fail because by the very nature of it, the more effective you try to make it the greater the incentives and rewards for the criminals.
If you honestly think the solution is more of the same then you’re simply irrational.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
I did say ‘largely’ as well. Of course it wouldn’t completely, and nor would it completely remove low-level property crime, but it would drastically reduce both, and be easier to police.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
That's actually a serious question. If it was available free, on prescription, to users then you would eliminate all the problems of the current way it's supplied and reduce it to simply managing the health problems of the drug itself, which we already have anyway now.
Look at it rationally. Prohibition doesn't work, it only causes more harm - there's a century of evidence that conclusively proves that. Perhaps it's time to think about how to minimise the harm, rather than keep on banging our heads against the same wall and expecting it to stop hurting.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
I think it would need to be something like that and that's going to be difficult. A lot of people wouldn't agree with giving addicts free drugs. It would be complicated. Obviously for whatever reasons methadone is generally the drug of choice for maintenance treatment.
It's interesting and I definitely don't know what the answers are.
I believe that during alcohol prohibition in America alcohol related illness was greatly reduced. I may have heard that on QI or something though so don't know how true it is. Would be interesting to hear the facts.
I think that's the problem most heroin users aren't functioning members of society. It's different to alcohol and cannabis.