Originally posted by Sam The Shammany people die at the expanse of your peoples' leisure time.
Make alcohol illegal? My God.....what kind of monster would suggest such a thing? Have you never spent a leisurely afternoon drinking beer and throwing darts at the local pub? It's so wholesome, how could you deny anyone so minor a pleasure?
Originally posted by SMSBear716
Actually, I'm a staunch conservative with some libertarian views. I think all drugs should be legalised, and then lets tax the hell out of them like we do tobacco, lessen the tax burden on the rest of us.
That last bit assumes that government spending remains fixed. I don't see that happening especially given the next part of your post.
Now my proviso for doing the above is simply this, ridgid, unbending enforcement of the concept of personal responsibility. You get hooked on some drug and loose you job. Too bad.. you don't get any assistance, period. You cause injury or property damage while your enjoying you drug of choice, stiff penalties, automatically
There's gonna be a huge (costly) surge in the inmate population. I'm all for personal responsibility as well as individual freedom, but I think you're getting carried away. Like the following . . .
You kill someone while your drugged up, you experience the same fate. no questions asked.
What does "no questions asked" mean? I presume that the accused would still stand trial (again quite costly). Otherwise, how do you know that the accused actually killed someone?
If some charitable organization wants to help you get unhooked, fine, just don't the government state or local for any help. After all, when liberals say 'let the government pay for it' , they forget every legal citizen of the country is the government.
Sounds like fantasy "liberals" to me. Anyway, everyone, liberals and conservatives desires that the government spend money. It's what they want the government to spend it on that causes the fighting. You for instance are proposing that they spend more money policing, prosecuting, and penalizing intoxicated junkies.
You want to give people a choice (which is fine), but your proposed solution is to throw away the key on people. The government, and by that I mean all US citizens, have some interest in maintaining a healthy, productive workforce. Having a large fraction of your workforce addicted to drugs that sharply reduce labor effectiveness and then throwing that fraction (inevitably) into prisons would drastically diminish the growth of national income, making everyone poorer. Sort of the inverse of "a rising tide lifts all boats."
If my above suggestions ever took place (which they won't), it be interesting to see how many rational people would use drugs of any type.
Probably a great many. Ever done anything stupid in your life?
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomInteresting site, I'll admit it. There was much I didn't know.
http://www.av1611.org/drug.html
However, look at the first sentence on the site. "Who claims 50 times more lives than all the illegal drugs combined?"
I'm still fairly confident that alcohol does not kill as many as tobacco.
Anyway, that's not the real debate here. I do think more restrictions could be implemented to stop deaths caused by alcohol, but I do not think it should be completely outlawed.
Originally posted by telerionThe jails would clear out if drugs were legalized, not fill up. Do you realize how many people are in jail for drugs?
Originally posted by SMSBear716
[b]Actually, I'm a staunch conservative with some libertarian views. I think all drugs should be legalised, and then lets tax the hell out of them like we do tobacco, lessen the tax burden on the rest of us.
That last bit assumes that government spending remains fixed. I don't see that happening especially giv ny type.[/b]
Probably a great many. Ever done anything stupid in your life?[/b]
Nearly 50% of all people in prison and jail are serving time for nonviolent drug charges. There are thousands of people in prisons for 5, 10, 50 years--even life--for possessing marijuana or cocaine! The average rapist is set free after serving only 3 years in prison, the average murderer is set free after serving only 9 years in prison! To house just one prisoner for one year costs the taxpayer $40,000! The result of these harsh penalties? Drug use has increased! (Tough laws have not stopped me from using marijuana--nor will they ever!)
http://www.hoboes.com/html/FireBlade/Editorials/Guests/Legalize.html
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomObviously you didn't read my entire post, go back and read what I wrote about personal responsibility and the consequences that would be swift and non-negotiable
if we legalize drugs for taxes, then the death rate caused by accidents will shoot up. do you think money can be traded for lives?
By the way we already had probition in this country and it was a miserable failure... Made bootlegger's and rum runners like Joseph (John, Teddy and Robert's dad) Kennedy rich and alot of other people dead
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomWho says anything bout locking them up? Or jury trials, your found with drugs in your system, there be no need for a trial...
well here is the only thing i could find, keep in mind i didnt see any sources listed and it looks very biased but it is better than nothing:
http://www.av1611.org/drug.html
Originally posted by SMSBear716Here's a question for any US constitutional scholars in the house:
Obviously you didn't read my entire post, go back and read what I wrote about personal responsibility and the consequences that would be swift and non-negotiable
By the way we already had probition in this country and it was a miserable failure... Made bootlegger's and rum runners like Joseph (John, Teddy and Robert's dad) Kennedy rich and alot of other people dead
If it required constitutional amendments to ban (18th) and then re-allow (21st) alcohol, how did the Feds get away with implementing prohibition of other drugs?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWhat fraction of those currently incarcerated on drug charges are addicted to drugs or would be addicted if permitted to consume them without fear of punishment? What fraction of that would break the law under the influence of drugs or in order to fund a habit? Given that they've already been busted for drugs, I would guess that the fraction would be pretty high (bad pun), so I doubt that the prisons would empty out much. Add on the large number of new criminals from the greatly increased population of addicts, and I think we would see a very sizeable increase in the prison population.
The jails would clear out if drugs were legalized, not fill up. Do you realize how many people are in jail for drugs?
Nearly 50% of all people in prison and jail are serving time for nonviolent drug charges. There are thousands of people in prisons for 5, 10, 50 years--even life--for possessing marijuana or cocaine! The average rapist is set fr ...[text shortened]... or will they ever!)
http://www.hoboes.com/html/FireBlade/Editorials/Guests/Legalize.html
Of course, either way we really can't say. We'd need to get good data from countries that have implemented the policy (everywhere, not just in one district), or we'll need better economic models of addiction.
Rather than make alcohol illegal, I would say it makes more sense to legalize all drugs -- starting with marijuana. Although, it has been suggested that the reason why tobacco is legal and marijuana is not is because nobody would be able to make a decent profit off of selling marijuana legally. The marijuana plant is basically a weed that anyone could grow on their own property with minimal expertise and equipment (so the idea of taxing it would come to naught). On the other hand tobacco plants are extremely labor-intensive and require a sizable amount of capital to grow. Of course, there's a lot of hysterical misinformation floating around in the mainstream media about marijuana that helps keep it outlawed. And now, because softer drugs are not so easy to get ahold of, kids are being destroyed by the bushel by meaner stuff like meth. Consider them casualties of the inane "War on Drugs" -- no more winnable than the equally inane "War on Terror". America sure loves its wars.