Poll: Should We Be Able To Use Any Substance (drug) We Want?

[Pingieking]

no I hate junkies more than anything. maby if I have the right to put an axe in my neighbour head if he/she is a substance user

That's an absolutely hilarious argument. I hate bankers! We should outlaw bankers because it my neighbor was a banker I'd put an axe in his/her head!

I vote yes. Let people take whatever f*cked-up chemicals they feel like, then prosecute the f*ck out of them when they do something stupid. Don't even screw with prison sentences, just kill those assholes. Want to do some crack? Go for it! But if you fuck over someone else's life while you're under the influence of crack, then you're a dead man/woman.

I've never bought the whole "It's my body, I do what I want." It's a poor ploy, because that is completely disrespectful to everyone who cares about you or did anything for you ever in the history of your life.

No, I don't think people should be allowed to put any sort of severely harmful substance in their body. Do I think all drugs and stuff should be illegal? Well, laws are for people who don't have the common sense to know otherwise. Loaded question that isn't necessarily necessary.

Odd argument too. First point: Are you arguing against my ability to disrespect the people who helped me? That's like trying to make being an asshole illegal; a nice gesture but a waste of time. Second point: Yes, it is a very loaded question, but that's what makes discussions fun and mentally stimulating.

If we lived in a world where we couldn't be able to kill anyone in 1000+ KG Vehicles or with a knife or even be responsible for anything, then yes ... we should be able to take whatever we want. But allas.

Another odd argument. How does killing people with 1000+ Kg verhicles, knives, or being responsible for anything have anything to do with taking substances? I'm sure that people are perfectly capable of killing people in very creative ways without the help of drugs. Also, just simply make laws that forces people to be responsible while under influence. Killing remains killing, maiming remains maiming, only thing that changes is that people who are willing to create a safe environment for taking drugs are now free to do so.

 

[Yeq]

Why I don't do drugs:

It's not an ethical issue about not getting high, it's a moral issue about not supporting the dirtbags that make the drugs.

And if they were legalised? Bam! Problem goes away.

Yeq - solving massively complex problems by short epithets that totally make him sound more clever than he is.

 

[Cavouku]

I've never bought the whole "It's my body, I do what I want." It's a poor ploy, because that is completely disrespectful to everyone who cares about you or did anything for you ever in the history of your life.

No, I don't think people should be allowed to put any sort of severely harmful substance in their body. Do I think all drugs and stuff should be illegal? Well, laws are for people who don't have the common sense to know otherwise. Loaded question that isn't necessarily necessary.

Odd argument too. First point: Are you arguing against my ability to disrespect the people who helped me? That's like trying to make being an asshole illegal; a nice gesture but a waste of time. Second point: Yes, it is a very loaded question, but that's what makes discussions fun and mentally stimulating.

To answer the first point; No, I'm not saying being an asshole should be illegal, or doubting anyone's ability to disrespect someone, and it is a waste of time. Merely flaunting the "It's my body I can do what I want" bit. Saying that; you can, yes, but that doesn't mean you should. I think the question was should we be allowed to do so, I answer no.

To your second point; Well, if people knew what all they shouldn't do, I don't know what would have to be illegal at all. There are things that if you say should be illegal carry on with good purposes of said things, or maybe there's something that's legal, so someone automatically thinks "I'm gonna' take that!" (Yes, there are people that shallow, and you know it.)

With drugs, I'd wager that most of the time, someone taking them isn't going to be taking them for many or any good reasons, and whether they are legal or not has nothing to do with it, it's all about the person. Either you take drugs because you're an asshat, you need it, or other. I don't know much about others.

 

[Isaac Dodgson]

I really do hate these kind of topics...

Don't get me wrong, it's a valid argument on both sides, but it is perhaps the reason the argument comes up is what annoys me. Most of us are young, discovering things for ourselves, and we suddenly feel the urge to question authority, be it the government or whatever..."What right do they have?" and all that. It's what we do, It's what we've always done, and we'd be damned to stop now.

Cal me insensitive, lazy, or just not caring (As my roommate did on the subject of politics), but It's not that I don't care so much I can't bother to argue about it. If i felt more visceral about the idea perhaps I would have more of a view point, but, as a casual drug user. (Marijuana, Alcohol), I don't feel the need to argue over it, as the other harder drugs don't effect me.

In a nutshell, It is what it is...

 

[Cavouku]

Why I don't do drugs:

It's not an ethical issue about not getting high, it's a moral issue about not supporting the dirtbags that make the drugs.

And if they were legalised? Bam! Problem goes away.

Yeq - solving massively complex problems by short epithets that totally make him sound more clever than he is.

Yeah, then dirtbags could do it on the grounds of capitalist government!

I'm sorta' kidding, while at the same time knowing little to nothing about the economy. What I was told could happen. I repeat, could, was that even if the government sold it, well, you can brew your own beer and sell it, and maybe not everyone likes what the government puts on the shelves.

This was from some guy though, I stay away and let you argue/talk to him.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Not all substances. Drugs that create an extremely strong dependency, such as heroin or meth could be used to influence/control masses of people, and that would be very bad.
Marijuana and non-addictive hallucinogens there is no real problem with. They may impair judgement and cause psychosis, but legalizing them would bring in millions in taxes. Sort of like alcohol or tobacco. I really detest the hypocrisy inherent in those substances being legal and readily available, yet purportedly frowned upon by governments.

 

[Riyka]

hmm i was raised to think drugs are wrong bad and never ever do them.
and for the most part i still believe that. you will never find me doing coke or heroin.
However i do drink, i have smoked and still enjoy pot every now and then.

I honestly don't see anything wrong it. i work five days a week i pay my rent, my bills. i dont do anything illegal to get money for pot (in fact i have never once paid or bought pot XD i have lovely friends...)

i smoke it on private property to relax and chill out...like having a beer.

But then thats how it effects me...
other people get violent or pass out.

its like alcohol..in one person its fine in another its not.
the problems is the harder the drug the more likely you are not to be fine.

What i find amusing is pot is illegal..from what i can work out pot makes me sleepy, happy, hungry, lazy. not really dangerous..
but salvia is legal...salvia makes you hallucinate...and god knows what you could do while your hallucinating...

 

[CoziestPigeon]

You have a computer with internet. You don't live in the ghetto.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

It's my body. It's my choice what I put into it. If I proceed to become violent, try to drive under the influence, or steal to feed my habit, then I've commited a crime in that regard anyway and should be treated accordingly. The act of taking the drug, however, should be SOLELY my prerogative.

But I think because of the mind altering effects of some drugs, cutting off the head would be the better solution than hacking at the tail. Low class drugs, fair enough, but Heroin, Crack, Meth...these are a danger to society and a constant danger to yourself.

but that kind of goes back to his original point: if people can find access to what they want, they'll do it regardless; when they start becoming a threat, that's where the problems really start adding up.

i mean, keeping heroin, cocaine (what crack is made from), and meth illegal have certainly deterred people from using it, right? ... r- right?

just as a side note, what do you consider "low class" drugs?

Tranqs, pills, cannabis, non-injected amphetamines. It's not really a case of "they'll do it anyway" because there will be a lot less drug induced crimes if it stays the way it is rather than under the counter or something similar.

EDIT: Not to mention the dependency it can lay onto someone.

 

[Chipperz]

Well personally i feel that almost all drugs should be legal and taxed. Except from stuff like meth and crack cocaine. Maybe heroine.
1) If it's legal it can be taxed, I.E more money for government
2) If it's legal it can be sold in shops, where it can be controlled for quality, so less cutting stuff with bleach or what have you. Meaning less drug related deaths
3) You remove money from the criminal gangs currently dealing the drugs, which is always a win
4) People who don't take drugs dont do it because they dont want the health disbenefits, as opposed to because it's illegal. Therefore legalising it wouldnt lead to a dramatic increase in drug use.

So yeah, i feel people should be allowed to take most drugs if that's what they want. I mean, most drugs are less dangerous than alcohol and cigarettes anyway.

This is pretty much my feelings on the matter.

Make it legal. Tax the hell out of it. Use the money to fund schools and healthcare!

 

[mindclockwork]

Should be "Yes". You could kill yourself and we'd be rid of ya'all.

 

[AssButt]

It's my body. It's my choice what I put into it. If I proceed to become violent, try to drive under the influence, or steal to feed my habit, then I've commited a crime in that regard anyway and should be treated accordingly. The act of taking the drug, however, should be SOLELY my prerogative.

But I think because of the mind altering effects of some drugs, cutting off the head would be the better solution than hacking at the tail. Low class drugs, fair enough, but Heroin, Crack, Meth...these are a danger to society and a constant danger to yourself.

but that kind of goes back to his original point: if people can find access to what they want, they'll do it regardless; when they start becoming a threat, that's where the problems really start adding up.

i mean, keeping heroin, cocaine (what crack is made from), and meth illegal have certainly deterred people from using it, right? ... r- right?

just as a side note, what do you consider "low class" drugs?

Tranqs, pills, cannabis, non-injected amphetamines. It's not really a case of "they'll do it anyway" because there will be a lot less drug induced crimes if it stays the way it is rather than under the counter or something similar.

EDIT: Not to mention the dependency it can lay onto someone.

Drugs being illegal is WHY crimes are committed, both by users (to fund their ridiculously expensive habit) as well as by gangs (this is where the majority of their revenue comes from). I'm of the belief that if all drugs were legalized, crime would be cut by at least half; but that will never happen. If drugs all of a sudden were legalized, the government would have no excuse to dump hundreds of billions of dollars into law enforcement and other government agencies.

Even from a moral point of view, it doesn't make sense. Drugs are bad for you so if you are caught using (not even selling) them, you will go to prison, which is much worse for you (and still filled with drugs).

 

[Pingieking]

To answer the first point; No, I'm not saying being an asshole should be illegal, or doubting anyone's ability to disrespect someone, and it is a waste of time. Merely flaunting the "It's my body I can do what I want" bit. Saying that; you can, yes, but that doesn't mean you should. I think the question was should we be allowed to do so, I answer no.

To your second point; Well, if people knew what all they shouldn't do, I don't know what would have to be illegal at all. There are things that if you say should be illegal carry on with good purposes of said things, or maybe there's something that's legal, so someone automatically thinks "I'm gonna' take that!" (Yes, there are people that shallow, and you know it.)

With drugs, I'd wager that most of the time, someone taking them isn't going to be taking them for many or any good reasons, and whether they are legal or not has nothing to do with it, it's all about the person. Either you take drugs because you're an asshat, you need it, or other. I don't know much about others.

For your answer to the first point, my apologies for not reading and applying the original question. I agree with your point.

Second point; laws are there to punish people who go against it, alerting people without common sense that they should not do something is merely a side effect. The world operate mostly under the assumption that "Yes, you're free to do whatever you want, but if you do the stuff listed in the laws, then you're going to have to deal with some of these consequences." The main purpose of laws are used to enforce an additional reaction to the original action. Warning people that there are some things they shouldn't do is still important, but it is a ssecondary effect that can be achieved without the use laws.

 

[Lynx]

I'm ok with smoking even though it's gross, mostly because you'll never find a person becoming violent or particularly intoxicated by it. However I'm very critical towards alcohol and drugs. It puts other people at risk, and most of all it puts yourself at risk of being caught in an addiction that eventually destroys your life. It's not the single drug that will destroy a society, it's a free drug market that will.
Keeping in mind especially all the young kids who will try whatever substances or dangers they can find, only to defy their parents/adults/government, whatev. Pretty soon they would be ten times more violent and stupid than they are now.
Not to mention how easy it would be to drug each other...

 

[Klepa]

The problem isn't drug use, but the stuff that happens when people are addicted, and don't have money to pay for it.

To be honest, I don't have an opinion. I have no way of telling how screwed up LSD or heroin will get me. I've been told my whole life that marijuana is of the devil, and when I finally got my hands on it, it was kind of fun and relaxing. And still is. Apart from when you take way too much, and turn all pale, and vomit. Not unlike with alcohol. Although it was the best vomit I ever had.

I've no intentions of trying hard drugs. I guess if they'd make them all legal, and really throw up the price, like one "hit" or whatever they're called, would be like a hundred euros. People would sort of know how much they can get, and buy accordingly.

Then again this kind of thinking is ridiculously childish of me.
What would happen is that everyone would get absolutely fucked up on heroin, run into traffic, hallucinate on the supermarkets, stab people in buses, order cocaine on restaurants and start fights, etc. etc.

It just wouldn't work.

 

[Sejs Cube]

That's an incredibly naive question. In a perfect world, pie-in-the-sky, where everything works out fine and no actions ever have negative repercussions, then sure it might work. But real life doesn't work that way. Bad shit happens, people don't always think about the greater good before themselves, etc.

At their core conception, laws exist for the protection of the people who make up a society, and the society as a whole.
People who irresponsibly use certain drugs put people other than themselves at risk while they are intoxicated.
Therefore, no, not all drugs should be legal.

Q.E.Fucking D.

 

[Jimmyjames]

And if they were legalised? Bam! Problem goes away.

Yeq - solving massively complex problems by short epithets that totally make him sound more clever than he is.

You are either very naive of very ignorant if you think that legalizing drugs will have any effect on the illegal smuggling, manufacture, or distribution of them.

Do you know what two of the biggest controlled substances on the black market are? Alcohol and cigarettes. Legalizing them makes them a taxable item. Something tells me drug lords aren't going to like their incomes taxed.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

It's my body. It's my choice what I put into it. If I proceed to become violent, try to drive under the influence, or steal to feed my habit, then I've commited a crime in that regard anyway and should be treated accordingly. The act of taking the drug, however, should be SOLELY my prerogative.

But I think because of the mind altering effects of some drugs, cutting off the head would be the better solution than hacking at the tail. Low class drugs, fair enough, but Heroin, Crack, Meth...these are a danger to society and a constant danger to yourself.

but that kind of goes back to his original point: if people can find access to what they want, they'll do it regardless; when they start becoming a threat, that's where the problems really start adding up.

i mean, keeping heroin, cocaine (what crack is made from), and meth illegal have certainly deterred people from using it, right? ... r- right?

just as a side note, what do you consider "low class" drugs?

Tranqs, pills, cannabis, non-injected amphetamines. It's not really a case of "they'll do it anyway" because there will be a lot less drug induced crimes if it stays the way it is rather than under the counter or something similar.

EDIT: Not to mention the dependency it can lay onto someone.

Drugs being illegal is WHY crimes are committed, both by users (to fund their ridiculously expensive habit) as well as by gangs (this is where the majority of their revenue comes from). I'm of the belief that if all drugs were legalized, crime would be cut by at least half; but that will never happen. If drugs all of a sudden were legalized, the government would have no excuse to dump hundreds of billions of dollars into law enforcement and other government agencies.

Even from a moral point of view, it doesn't make sense. Drugs are bad for you so if you are caught using (not even selling) them, you will go to prison, which is much worse for you (and still filled with drugs).

Bear in mind I said drug induced crimes rather than drug related in the sense of drug trafficking and dealing. The crime rate in terms of drug dealing and murder for acquisition and sale would drop, but the death toll would rise and the hospitals would be stacked due to substance abuse, accidents and other things.

Heavy drugs can cause many who are no longer of sound mind and body, to commit acts they normally wouldn't do, a few (and a few are all that are needed) of them dangerous. To say it would be fine for everyone to be running out to the store on crystal meth or LSD is just wrong, they are a danger to themselves and others, and the government wouldn't allow that, it's their business to protect the people.

And considering that the habit would still be expensive, what stops people from still committing drug related crimes like theft and murder? They need their fix, and they don't have the money for it, so what are they going to do? Crime wouldn't be cut in half. It would lower but not in half, and even then the trade off isn't worth it.

And prison may be a flawed deterrent, but it's better than nothing. Either way, the amount of substance abuse that would go on would mean the government would have to take measures to lower it, and eventually we would be back to square one.

EDIT: And even the trafficking of those substances wouldn't stop, now that I think about it, but Jim put it better than I would.