Poll: Governments killing natural fun

[the.gill123]

I don't see why they can't legalise all drugs, Portugal did it, in about 2001 I think, and all drug related crime dropped and the amount of users dropped too.

 

[Aizsaule]

1-4 are all true, and obviously the government doesn't care about ruining your fun

 

[Wuggy]

I support legalizing all drugs for two reasons: a reason based on principal and a reason based on practicality.

Principal: Individual freedom. We should be able to do whatever the heck we want with our bodies as long as it doesn't harm other people. If you want to harm your body with drugs, you should be able to, regardless of their dangers. It may sound a bit strange, but my belief in individual freedom is fairly strong.

Practical: A massive portion of crime as a whole relates to drugs one way or another. I believe that if drugs were to be legalized, crime overall would surely take a dent. This would also save the government's money in their fight against drug related crime, and that is a fairly substantial amount of currency. Also, the government would be able to tax the drugs however they wanted: the money (that is spent regardless of whether drugs are legal or not) would not go to the pockets of pimps and leaders in organized crime, it would go to the government. There is also no indication (that I know of) that general drug-use would rise. Here in Finland during the alcohol ban, overall alcohol consumption actually rose. But the money went to smugglers, rather than legitimate markets.

 

[fenrizz]

Im not a drug user at all, but do you really want the government legalizing drugs? that means that government now gets to set prices and tax rates on legally bought drugs, which means that DFA is going to have a hand in what gets sold and made.

Also that means that you'd medically have to cover an OD, and because drugs are legal, more people wouldnt be afraid to OD and go t the hospital.

But as to it being "natural fun" I dont see it. in fact drugs arent always fun. While I've never done, i've seen those who have and its not always a fun trip, even with Salvia.

besides, I could see in areas where C class drugs are major sellers cartels would have sellers roughed up, especially if its an area where there can be a good "enforcement" of the cartel's will.

In Norway victims of OD are generally saved if possible, at virtually no cost (as we have healthcare paid by the state).
They aren't doing it for the "lulz".

...

Im simply speaking from the private health care system the US has. though I dont bleieve that anyone who does drugs should be helped in a hospital if they OD. call me a bastard, but if you're willingly choosing to do somethign harmful like this, then you should suffer through it. But thats just my opinion.

Then how about the fat people that have heart attacks and other obesity related illnesses?
Surely they are as much to blame for their own illness as that of a addict?

Should smokers not be treated for lung cancer either?

Where does one draw the line?

 

[emeraldrafael]

Im not a drug user at all, but do you really want the government legalizing drugs? that means that government now gets to set prices and tax rates on legally bought drugs, which means that DFA is going to have a hand in what gets sold and made.

Also that means that you'd medically have to cover an OD, and because drugs are legal, more people wouldnt be afraid to OD and go t the hospital.

But as to it being "natural fun" I dont see it. in fact drugs arent always fun. While I've never done, i've seen those who have and its not always a fun trip, even with Salvia.

besides, I could see in areas where C class drugs are major sellers cartels would have sellers roughed up, especially if its an area where there can be a good "enforcement" of the cartel's will.

In Norway victims of OD are generally saved if possible, at virtually no cost (as we have healthcare paid by the state).
They aren't doing it for the "lulz".

...

Im simply speaking from the private health care system the US has. though I dont bleieve that anyone who does drugs should be helped in a hospital if they OD. call me a bastard, but if you're willingly choosing to do somethign harmful like this, then you should suffer through it. But thats just my opinion.

Then how about the fat people that have heart attacks and other obesity related illnesses?
Surely they are as much to blame for their own illness as that of a addict?

Should smokers not be treated for lung cancer either?

Where does one draw the line?

Only those who did not themselves cause harm. I acknowledge there are fat people who really cant help their weight, and all tehy do keeps it at a managable level. Just as I realize that those who suffer from second hand smoke cant exactly help that they do.

In an ideal world (well, no, not ideal), in MY world, lines would be drawn that would question ethics, but would lay blame on those deserving and intentionally causing on themselves. Should you drink yourself stupid and wreck your vehicle there would be no insurance to cover you,a nd I would leave you to bleed and die in the streets. Should you eat yourself to a heart attack, best of luck to ya, if you live maybe it will get the message through the fat in your skull. I never said I agreed with all of the US health system, just I was looking at the situation from a point of view where it is the functioning health care.

 

[fenrizz]

Im not a drug user at all, but do you really want the government legalizing drugs? that means that government now gets to set prices and tax rates on legally bought drugs, which means that DFA is going to have a hand in what gets sold and made.

Also that means that you'd medically have to cover an OD, and because drugs are legal, more people wouldnt be afraid to OD and go t the hospital.

But as to it being "natural fun" I dont see it. in fact drugs arent always fun. While I've never done, i've seen those who have and its not always a fun trip, even with Salvia.

besides, I could see in areas where C class drugs are major sellers cartels would have sellers roughed up, especially if its an area where there can be a good "enforcement" of the cartel's will.

In Norway victims of OD are generally saved if possible, at virtually no cost (as we have healthcare paid by the state).
They aren't doing it for the "lulz".

...

Im simply speaking from the private health care system the US has. though I dont bleieve that anyone who does drugs should be helped in a hospital if they OD. call me a bastard, but if you're willingly choosing to do somethign harmful like this, then you should suffer through it. But thats just my opinion.

Then how about the fat people that have heart attacks and other obesity related illnesses?
Surely they are as much to blame for their own illness as that of a addict?

Should smokers not be treated for lung cancer either?

Where does one draw the line?

Only those who did not themselves cause harm. I acknowledge there are fat people who really cant help their weight, and all tehy do keeps it at a managable level. Just as I realize that those who suffer from second hand smoke cant exactly help that they do.

In an ideal world (well, no, not ideal), in MY world, lines would be drawn that would question ethics, but would lay blame on those deserving and intentionally causing on themselves. Should you drink yourself stupid and wreck your vehicle there would be no insurance to cover you,a nd I would leave you to bleed and die in the streets. Should you eat yourself to a heart attack, best of luck to ya, if you live maybe it will get the message through the fat in your skull. I never said I agreed with all of the US health system, just I was looking at the situation from a point of view where it is the functioning health care.

I see your point, and on some level I agree.

But I also believe that it is societies duty to help those who are sick, self inflicted or not.
I sincerely believe that addicts suffer from an illness, and for that they should receive treatment.

In any case, it is better for society as a whole to treat them back into productive citizens than waste resources on long prison sentences and letting them live a life of poverty and crime.

 

[klaynexas3]

First off, if there is danger then of course you're at risk.
Second, the reason drugs like that need to be banned is because people are stupid, plain and simple. Someone (no matter how well a drug is regulated) will end up either hurting/killing themselves or another person. I for one believe that it would be better to prevent such an accident happening rather than let it happen and have everyone pointing fingers at who's to blame. I'm not saying the prevention methods that are in place now are particularly effective, I'm just saying that it's great that they're there so that way the government won't take any flak just because they "allowed" it to happen. Now if someone were to die of a drug-related incident, the only one(s) to blame are the individual(s) that partook that drug/activity/what have you. Again, not saying it's a great system, but it's better than the alternative.
Thirdly, and certainly the most prominent, stupid people and mind-altering drugs do not mix well. It'd be like tossinga lit match into a powder keg that has been heavily soaked in alchohol. Maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but you get my point.

right, because when ever a drunk driver kills someone, we all blame the government.

so just because there are stupid people out there that means that people that are somewhat responsible but maybe would like to unwind with some weed. it's understandable about hard stuff like opiates that simply screw you up and screw you over, but for things like salvia or marijuana, it's not exactly going to screw you up enough that you will harm a bunch of other people. smoking and driving or stuff along those lines are, of course, not a brilliant idea and the government can make laws about that like drinking and driving(sure, it is not a perfect system, but what my sarcasm from my first statement was getting across was that not a lot of people blame the government for drunk drivers, they blame the drunk drivers themselves, and i'm pretty sure that the laws have stopped at least a few people that would otherwise have decided to drink and drive), but the point being is that just because there are stupid people, doesn't mean that all people should be lumped together with the idiots. part of what is making everyone so stupid is that we treat people like they are morons to begin with. the moment we start treating people from the beginning like they are not retarded is the moment that we'll have people growing up to not act like retards. just because some people can't be trusted with drugs, doesn't mean that everyone can't be

 

[Mcupobob]

You can't drive on saliva or even really move properly. I really can't think of any reason it should be illegal.

 

[Robert Ewing]

The government doesn't exist to ruin our fun. They are doing what is best for the majority. Not a single demographic.

If something like Cannabis was legalized, that would fucking be great wouldn't it. We'd be like that other ascended country that is going through a golden age... Jamaica was it? Oh wait, the only thing that's ascending in that country is all the high mutha's setting peoples house on fire because they're terminally stoned. Their economy is bad, their public health is bad, their unemployment is bad, their crime rate is bad, their mortality rate is bad It goes on, and on.

 

[MrLlamaLlama]

My opinion is this. Any (currently illegal)drug that has to be 'manufactured' so to speak - like, where they take natural opium and alter the chemical compound to create street heroin - should remain illegal. Plus, heroin is simply a bloody horrific drug.

Stuff like salvia and marijuana, that is essentially an entirely natural plant grown by the earth should have no laws binding their use. Of course, it would be naive of me to assume that should I go to see a fine young gentleman who sells marijuana, the fine young gentleman from who he buys his marijuana has not.... interfered with it it some stage. The solution to this of course is to home-grow.

Oh wait, the only thing that's ascending in that country is all the high mutha's setting peoples house on fire because they're terminally stoned.

I'll go ahead and assume you've never taken cannabis (I could well be wrong) because, well... where would a stoned guy ever find the motivation to burn a guys house down? Seriously, just getting up to switch the TV off is a chore far beyond the capabilities of the human body when you're high. Also, it's impossible (almost literally) to fell aggressive in any way whilst high, as long as the bastard didn't steal someone's doritos and milkshake, in which case, he deserves it anyway.

Also I'll go back to the old nutshell of Alchohol. I presume (again) you're ok with all the absolute fucking lunatics drinking these liquids which make you behave crazy running amok around your towns and BURNING PEOPLE'S HOUSES DOWN OH MY GAAWD (still finding it hard to believe you said that) and, in parallel, doing more harm to their own bodies than had they stayed home and smoked a blunt instead.

/hippy

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

I dont really know about meth and coke addicts, they get real fucked up but weed is just does nothing bad I have seen.

It makes you stupid. Just look at 90% of College kids now, or any "Gangsta".

I wouldn't say it makes people stupid, from what I can tell from all the people I know who got habits it just made them lazy and apathetic.

I don't really think it matters if it's legal. It makes no difference to the users in the end, most drugs (especially light drugs) are so easy to get hold of they may as well be legal.

But the thing is, with drugs like weed the people who take it are likely to become more aggressive

Actually, it's quite the opposite. 'Aggressive' is the last word to describe stoned people.

 

[Fbuh]

I actually selected "Legalize all drugs", even though I would never partake. However, I do think that the government has a potentially potent source of income that can be taxed and regulated. If people want to fuck up their minds and bodies, that's fine by them.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

If it was legalised and regulated, that'd solve tonnes of problems. Plus then the government can tax it to get some extra revenue.