Opinions - Refute This: Yes alcohol is harmful, but legalizing more drugs adds fuel to the fire.

[BLTC]

Side question : How come this forum is pretty much devoid of prohibitionists ?

[doggy_hat]

Originally Posted by BLTC

Side question : How come this forum is pretty much devoid of prohibitionists ?

Because they'd rather go to scaremongering websites about how pot induces paranoid schizophrenia and leads to heroin addiction. Although I think there are a few LE officers on here, I don't think they post too often.

It'd be nice to have a few though, because then we could have a debate, instead of just pointing out flaws in prohibition with no one to defend it.

[Euthanatos93420]

Originally Posted by doggy_hat

Because they'd rather go to scaremongering websites about how pot induces paranoid schizophrenia and leads to heroin addiction. Although I think there are a few LE officers on here, I don't think they post too often.

It'd be nice to have a few though, because then we could have a debate, instead of just pointing out flaws in prohibition with no one to defend it.

We need to devise a universal pseudonym, rather like Swim, but to specifically denote a an argument supporting prohibition. It may be abused for entertainment and it will have no ego to become inflammatory (Perhaps aside from humorous mock of such) but will also lend itself to making intelligent, well researched arguments.

Or...where the hell is the devil's advocate?

[doggy_hat]

Argueing that Alcohol can be kept legal while others will land users in prison because their use is not as ingrained into our society as heavily as alcohol is an absurd reasoning.

That's basically saying my culture is better than yours, so you deserve less rights. If we should keep drugs illegal because they're not as socially acceptable, then why not make it illegal to practice any other religion besides christianity? I mean after all, the majority of Americans are Christians, and those Muslims, or Hindis, or Jews, or whatever would just be trouble.

[Euthanatos93420]

Yes, DOC discrimination is as absurd as racism, religious discrimination, sexism and many other forms of discrimination. It doesn't prevent it from happening.

Case in point: Pot doesn't make Swim violent, in fact it makes him become rather peaceful; however, the next person to preach to him about the evils of dope with likely be chewing on his knuckle.

[CuriousJOE]

Addictive drugs should not be legalized.

[Routemaster Flash]

Originally Posted by CuriousJOE

Addictive drugs should not be legalized.

I can see where you're coming from, but this is a rather simplistic view I think. It's by no means the case that everyone who ever tries an 'addictive' drug gets hooked on it - SWIM's tried loads of supposedly addictive drugs (speed, coke, various OTC opiates, opium itself...) and is yet to feel any urges he couldn't control. Hell, he can even smoke cigarettes whenever he likes without feeling compelled to, and they're meant to be 'worse than heroin' for addiction potential. On the other hand, some people mess themselves up by using acid or mushrooms too often, and they're drugs that are so often held up as a paradigm of non-addictive psychoactives. Someone SWIM knows had a daily ecstasy habit for a while, and I'm sure we all know people who've smoked weed every day for years to their overall detriment...

[Euthanatos93420]

I rather like to think of it as that ignorance cannot stand the light of day and all corruption is purified by the light of knowledge but hey, I've been studying this shit for way too long now.

[oracularspectacular]

Criminalising alcohol obviously is not realistic, it is thoroughly ingrained in society and if it was criminalised it would take about 3 seconds before a black market set up.

There are problems with legalising marijuana too, though on the whole I would be in favour of legalisation. A compromise might be to keep it illegal, but with a tap on the wrist as standard punishment for anyone carrying less then an ounce.

[Sven99]

Originally Posted by oracularspectacular

There are problems with legalising marijuana too, though on the whole I would be in favour of legalisation. A compromise might be to keep it illegal, but with a tap on the wrist as standard punishment for anyone carrying less then an ounce.

Thats what most countries do at the moment (you'll rarely get a custodial sentence for possession for personal use). But what is the justification for it? Its like saying that you can have alcohol, but you can't buy it, and if you get caught with more than one bottle of spirits or give your friend a drink you face arrest.

It certainly prevents some of the problems of a prohibitionist approach (incarceration and stigmatisation of non-violent offenders) but it ignores the much wider issue of an unregulated market. Users would be much safer buying their cannabis from a regulated source than from an unregulated dealer, and it means that you stop throwing people in jail for selling something that isn't considered immoral to possess. It also means that you have police wasting their time arresting people for crimes that they then won't be punished for.

[doggy_hat]

Originally Posted by Sven99

Thats what most countries do at the moment (you'll rarely get a custodial sentence for possession for personal use). But what is the justification for it? Its like saying that you can have alcohol, but you can't buy it, and if you get caught with more than one bottle of spirits or give your friend a drink you face arrest.

It certainly prevents some of the problems of a prohibitionist approach (incarceration and stigmatisation of non-violent offenders) but it ignores the much wider issue of an unregulated market. Users would be much safer buying their cannabis from a regulated source than from an unregulated dealer, and it means that you stop throwing people in jail for selling something that isn't considered immoral to possess. It also means that you have police wasting their time arresting people for crimes that they then won't be punished for.

I also think it'd be a bit ridiculous to not punish people with personal quantities while throwing people in jail for production or distribution. If there are users then someone has to produce the drug and someone has to distribute it. It'd be illogical for a government to say personal use is ok, but selling it still a felony. In such a system, In order for the drug to be consumed a crime must be committed.

And the addictive drug aproach is also absurd. The government should just fuck off and stop being everyone's mother. If I get addicted to a hard drug and fuck up my life, that's my own problem. And they can throw me in jail when they catch me stealing car radios to pawn off for drug money. Someone shouldn't suffer because they indulge in a drug once in a blue moon, because someone else got carried away and resorted to crime to fuel an addiction.

[Euthanatos93420]

There are problems with legalising marijuana too,

Like?

[TheFamousSpacewhale]

This argument would make sense to me if prohibition eliminated drug related problems rather than inflated them...