Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Definitely yes.

Leaning towards yes.

Maybe.

Leaning towards no.

Definitely no.

Undecided.

Other.

Don't care. / View poll.

[Neonivek]

I would say that locking up people for five years for selling a relatively harmless drug to willing and informed buyers is pretty bullshit.

Actually when I thought about it REALLY hard I just have to say... This is probably the most unusual statement when you really think about it.

The Drug Dealer in this case is dealing an obviously dangerous drug in the sense that is carries a hefty legal charge to people who despite knowing of its legal status still chose to buy it. I am starting to think this Drug Dealer is EVIL!

I never seen so much unfortunate implications in such a simple sentence in this thread.

Who are you calling bullshit?

The policemen who arrest them for breaking the law? The judges who sentence them for breaking the laws? The Law makers for not Repealing the laws? The public for not agreeing with your viewpoint?

Just wanted to include this above quote due to the "People only read the latest page" rule of the internet

[Realmfighter]

The best rule.

[fqllve]

The Drug Dealer in this case is dealing an obviously dangerous drug

pot?

in the sense that is carries a hefty legal charge to people who despite knowing of its legal status still chose to buy it. I am starting to think this Drug Dealer is EVIL!

Pot dealers aren't evil.

Crack dealers, however rely on what Burroughs called the algebra of need. They profit off the needless addiction of others. I wonder if it's not the same with cigarette companies.

(of course, the more I think about it the more I start to wonder if pot isn't really a needless addiction)

[Neonivek]

Dangerous in the sense that it carries a hefty legal charge.

The pot dealer in your example is obviously ambiguous. He isn't trying to make the drug level, teaching people about the drug, or even caring about his customers.

He is risking the lives of the people around him to make money WILLINGLY. Sure the people he is selling it to probably arn't going to die... but goodness.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

And that's the price of having illegal drugs. A black market is never preferable to an open one.

[fqllve]

It doesn't really carry a hefty legal charge in most places. It's a minor crime that comes with a fine and perhaps community service. Unless you have pounds and pounds of the stuff.

Besides, the difference is that pot dealers a) don't make that much money because they're product isn't highly addictive or that expensive and b) are usually users themselves trying to support their habit.

Crack dealers make a lot of money and do not themselves use crack. If they did use crack, they wouldn't be dealers, they'd be crackheads.

[Neonivek]

It doesn't really carry a hefty legal charge in most places. It's a minor crime that comes with a fine and perhaps community service. Unless you have pounds and pounds of the stuff.

Besides, the difference is that pot dealers a) don't make that much money because they're product isn't highly addictive or that expensive and b) are usually users themselves trying to support their habit.

Crack dealers make a lot of money and do not themselves use crack. If they did use crack, they wouldn't be dealers, they'd be crackheads.

Goodness that is even worse

[Tyg13]

Dangerous in the sense that it carries a hefty legal charge.

Take this example. What if they were to criminalize the manufacture and playing of guitars. If I start operating on the black market, selling guitars to my customers, does that make me an EVIL! person?

Pot dealers aren't bad people in the sense that they sell pot. They're providing a product to their target demographic and making a profit off of it. They're no worse than, say, the proprietors of a liquor store. They sell a mildly addicting product (there's little evidence for the claims that cannabis is addicting, but let's assume) to people who know what they're getting into and are fully responsible for their actions. There's nothing wrong with that at all.

I mean, if you're using it's illegal status as a reason to keep it illegal, I can't even begin to explain how stupid that sounds.

History has proven that illegalizing any kind of drug doesn't work. They repealed the Prohibition for good reasons, mainly because people were still getting alcohol anyways and it was costing them thousands to hunt distributors down. Yet another reason they repealed it was because the alcohol being made could either be completely clean or kill-you-in-a-minute toxic. In the end, making alcohol legal again was better for everyone's health and better for the government (yay taxes.) It keeps the crime out, the people drunk, and the government rich.

Wait... what does that remind you of? A drug that's illegal, that everyone gets anyways, and would benefit from legalization?

[Shrugging Khan]

Pot dealers are dangerous because their products aren't controlled by the law, so they can mix them up with all kinds of addictive or damaging shit. This is why the government must persecute drug dealers and users as draconically as possible, to make sure that such illegal, dangerous, evil things do not harm more people than they already have.

...no seriously now. How can anyone argue for anything other than legalisation?

[Megaman]

YooOOooOOO maAnn, YoU GotTa TrY thIS WeEd.

[Neonivek]

What if they were to criminalize the manufacture and playing of guitars. If I start operating on the black market, selling guitars to my customers, does that make me an EVIL! person?

Let me see... Your profiteering off of the weaknesses of others.

I'd say yes.

"History has proven that illegalizing any kind of drug doesn't work"

History has proven that making anything illegal is a tough buisness because if people want it, they are going to somehow get it. It can be anything from Religious texts, to Firearms, all the way to blackmail and extortion. (No I am not saying Religious Texts are evil... They were supposed to be my "innocent" example but it just seems badly placed)

[breadbocks]

Thread long; didn't read.

My opinion on the topic of the OP is to not legalize it, or at least don't make it over the counter, (As in something you can just grab off a shelf. I think something like a quota would work.) but rather instead of arresting users, fine them. We gain prison space, which is a plus, and we get *some* money, not a lot, but some.

[Neonivek]

Thread long; didn't read.

My opinion on the topic of the OP is to not legalize it, or at least don't make it over the counter, (As in something you can just grab off a shelf. I think something like a quota would work.) but rather instead of arresting users, fine them. We gain prison space, which is a plus, and we get *some* money, not a lot, but some.

Yep the difference between Regulation and Legalisation.

It is interesting how the difference is rarely brought up. Though mostly because people usually either consider them the same thing or don't... It is actually quite confusing: Regulation, Illegalisation, Decriminalisation...

[Nether]

The drug should be legal, but under strict ruling. A country has to have its own farms, unless they do no criminal activity will fall, it will only rise due to new markets.
It is also highly annoying for many people, as it does enter your brain (as one of very few products), and who does not want this to happen gets it pressed upon oneself. I would say yes only on the terms that it is allowed in secluded places where the outside world has minimal damage from it.

[fqllve]

What if they were to criminalize the manufacture and playing of guitars. If I start operating on the black market, selling guitars to my customers, does that make me an EVIL! person?

Let me see... Your profiteering off of the weaknesses of others.

I'd say yes.

Or perhaps you just think guitars are beautiful and that everyone should have and play them?

For example, that's what I think.