Give ALL drug taking scum - LETHAL OVERDOSES free !
Absolutely. Nicotine is more addictive than anything.sergeriver wrote:
But cocaine/heroin? I don't know. Close the border, but legalize it?ATG wrote:
Yes. All drugs.sergeriver wrote:
Would you legalize cocaine consumption?
The police are corrupted by the money of selling.
Our government is too crooked to do the right thing and enforce the laws uniformly.
It's also a reason why the border is open; people in power are getting rich off the illegal drug trade.
I've done my share of drugs, and none of them are all that addicting.
Legalise all of them. You may see an increase in drug users but you'll see a big drop in crime. Chances are you could actually see drug use drop after a few years, due to the fact that it would be more difficult for many teenagers to get hold of them. Combine that with reduced police corruption, reduced funding for terrorism and unpleasant drug cartels and increased tax revenue and it's hard to see why drugs haven't been legalised in many countries.
I really don't know how strong is cocaine here compare to the one that you get in EU but we don't have Cocaine production here in Argentina, so I think they cut it in Colombia, before getting to Argentina. Maybe the one here is stronger than the one you get in EU, but I couldn't tell since I never tried it.JahManRed wrote:
Big difference serge. My point is that if someone wants to harm their own body they should be allowed to, as long as it does not affect anyone around them. If you say, well it harms their family, I would say that a junkie on affordable clean drugs is a.Healthier, b.Not a thief c.More likely to come off the drugs. Which makes it better for the families Remove the stigma and the daily routine of robing to feed your habit and you give a junkie allot of time to reflect, to look in on themselves.sergeriver wrote:
I usually agree with you, but in this case I don't. You say you would legalize it all, coz it's the consumer's choice. Would you make weapons legal? It's up to the weapon owner. In fact a person under the effects of cocaine or else is as dangerous as a sober person with a gun.JahManRed wrote:
Ok for the UK/Ireland
Firstly I would legalize it all. If someone wants to get smacked out on heroin that's their choice. They should be able to buy clean shit, instantly cutting the bill to the HNS by millions, never mind the benefits of using pure heroin over mixed shite. Look at Yoko and Keef, still going strong and they have had habits for decades, they can afford clean drugs.
It will stop them robbing the rest of us to feed their habits, thus cutting inner city crime in half at least. If a junkie doesn't have to base their whole life around robing/working for their next hit, they might actually sit down and realise what they are doing to themselves and how boring sitting around all day smacked out is.
Junkies should not be put in prison were they get drugs easier than on the outside. They should go on rehab courses. Boot camp type thing. With a hard ass on their case.
Guns on the other hand are for one reason. Harming other lifeforms. Drugs harm yourself, guns harm others.
As we are talking about our own country Serge, I would imagine that Cocaine in South America is about 50 times stronger than the cocaine that is cut and re cut on its journey to the UK to up the profit margins. So I would say the cocaine in your country is much more of a problem than the UK. The watered down cocaine in the UK does not make people grab a gun and go and kill someone. Its much more of a clubbers drug these days than a junkies drug.
a) How can legalizing drugs make it harder for teenagers to get a hold of them?Bertster7 wrote:
Legalise all of them. You may see an increase in drug users but you'll see a big drop in crime. Chances are you could actually see drug use drop after a few years, due to the fact that it would be more difficult for many teenagers to get hold of them. Combine that with reduced police corruption, reduced funding for terrorism and unpleasant drug cartels and increased tax revenue and it's hard to see why drugs haven't been legalised in many countries.
b) Drug money is not the source of police corruption, corrupt cops are. They will still be corrupt if drugs became legal, it would only make them less rich.
c) Reduced funding for terrorism and increased tax revenue. True, but at what cost? Its hard enough to keep kids off drugs as it is, imagine if they could buy crack at the quickie-mart.
Anyone who thinks all drugs should be legalized probably don't have kids, or isn't thinking about crack.
Last edited by EVieira (2007-02-23 07:58:14)
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
a) Age restrictions combined with a collapsed black market in drugs. The same way it's tricky for underage kids to get hold of alcohol. Buying weed for example is traditionally easier for kids than buying alcohol. This arguement is a bit flawed, but you see what I'm getting at.EVieira wrote:
a) How can legalizing drugs make it harder for teenagers to get a hold of them?Bertster7 wrote:
Legalise all of them. You may see an increase in drug users but you'll see a big drop in crime. Chances are you could actually see drug use drop after a few years, due to the fact that it would be more difficult for many teenagers to get hold of them. Combine that with reduced police corruption, reduced funding for terrorism and unpleasant drug cartels and increased tax revenue and it's hard to see why drugs haven't been legalised in many countries.
b) Drug money is not the source of police corruption, corrupt cops are. They will still be corrupt if drugs became legal, it would only make them less rich.
c) Reduced funding for terrorism and increased tax revenue. True, but at what cost? Its hard enough to keep kids off drugs as it is, imagine if they could buy crack at the quickie-mart.
Anyone who thinks all drugs should be legalized probably don't have kids, or isn't thinking about crack.
b) Removing a highly profitable source of police corruption will reduce police corruption, as I said earlier.
c) Kids wouldn't be able to buy drugs, especially crack. They would be too young. The age restrictions in coffeshops in the Netherlands work pretty well, why not everywhere else? It's easy for kids to buy crack on the street from a young age, certainly near where I live.
Legalize "soft drugs" and sell them like pharmacy store etc. and leave police more time to hunt those hardcore criminals IMHOsergeriver wrote:
Would you legalize cocaine consumption?ATG wrote:
Easy, legalize it.
edit: didnt read whole topic if this was all ready mentioned
Last edited by ReverKeenan (2007-02-23 13:19:11)
I used to feel the same way, but I think the upfront increase in the number of addicts is probably what most people fear with regards to this approach. I wish it was as simple as legalizing everything, but it really isn't....Bertster7 wrote:
Absolutely. Nicotine is more addictive than anything.sergeriver wrote:
But cocaine/heroin? I don't know. Close the border, but legalize it?ATG wrote:
Yes. All drugs.
The police are corrupted by the money of selling.
Our government is too crooked to do the right thing and enforce the laws uniformly.
It's also a reason why the border is open; people in power are getting rich off the illegal drug trade.
I've done my share of drugs, and none of them are all that addicting.
Legalise all of them. You may see an increase in drug users but you'll see a big drop in crime. Chances are you could actually see drug use drop after a few years, due to the fact that it would be more difficult for many teenagers to get hold of them. Combine that with reduced police corruption, reduced funding for terrorism and unpleasant drug cartels and increased tax revenue and it's hard to see why drugs haven't been legalised in many countries.
Legalize the less addictive stuff, but keep the other stuff illegal.
The best way to deal with the drug problem in the U.S. is to attack its source--that is the drug cartels in Columbia, Argentina, Peru, etc.
No drugs = No drug problem.
No drugs = No drug problem.
Production would just move elsewhere. Wherever there is demand for a product, there will always be a supplier somewhere. It would probably start coming from Afghanistan - they have a booming drug economy apparently.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
The best way to deal with the drug problem in the U.S. is to attack its source--that is the drug cartels in Columbia, Argentina, Peru, etc.
No drugs = No drug problem.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-23 17:03:16)