Drug Legalization: For or Against?

Confusion wrote:against liberalization of Marihuana.

ouch comrade that hurt my soul, may i ask why you are aginst it?

Hippies are decadent.

Also, people who are pro-pot tends to forget all the important things, and focus only on the liberalization-issue.

1. i am in no way shape or form a hippie

2. i realize that that the issue is capitalism, and only after that is taken care of will people have time to fully establish libertarian values(as in the actual definition of libertarian, not the fantasy land Ayn rand lived in)

I don't like hippies either, but I don't see the need to outlaw marijuana. I don't use it either. Outlawing it creates an absolutely unnecessary (and annoying) subculture in which the youth think they are rebelling. I could care less if someone likes to smoke it and loosen up once and a while, but creating an entire subculture around it is as silly as creating an entire subculture around yogurt.

With that said maybe this status will lend some humor to the situation (not me):

I would like to state that i am in no way like the people he is referring too in that hilarious segment , and i agree that it does creates a useless and obnoxious subculture around it, that leads to

1.use of it anyway

2. a pointless and unnecessary conflict that will just become a pain in the ass.

I understand the pro-arguments, but I think there will be more smoking with legalization.

I also realize that it is possible to be pro-legalization without being a hippie;)

Confusion wrote:I understand the pro-arguments, but I think there will be more smoking with legalization.

I also realize that it is possible to be pro-legalization without being a hippie;)

My thing is that the pro-legalization activists are kinda selfish;they don't care about ending the drug war,if they cared about it at all,they wouldn't smoke weed.All they care about is getting blazed.

Confusion wrote:I understand the pro-arguments, but I think there will be more smoking with legalization.

I also realize that it is possible to be pro-legalization without being a hippie;)

What's wrong with more weed smoking? It's better than people turning to alcohol or more dangerous illegal drugs for a start.

Anarcho-Edge wrote:My thing is that the pro-legalization activists are kinda selfish;they don't care about ending the drug war,if they cared about it at all,they wouldn't smoke weed.All they care about is getting blazed.

That must be the dumbest thing I've heard all week. Even if that were true, how would it be selfish? If legalising marijuana gives a bunch of potheads the freedom to smoke weed without the law interfering, you call that selfishness? Sure, maybe they care more about getting stoned than reducing crime or government spending, but if the outcome IS reduced crime rates and/or government spending as well as hippie liberation, I don't see where the word "selfish" fits into the story. Are vegetarians selfish for using the destruction of the environment as an argument against the meat industry?

DSN wrote:That must be the dumbest thing I've heard all week. Even if that were true, how would it be selfish? If legalising marijuana gives a bunch of potheads the freedom to smoke weed without the law interfering, you call that selfishness?

OK,maybe "selfish is a bit of a stretch,but look,marijuana and other drugs come from drug cartels,who wage war on other cartels.This kills several innocent people who did nothing wrong but stand in front of the cross-fire.

Sure, maybe they care more about getting stoned than reducing crime or government spending, but if the outcome IS reduced crime rates and/or government spending as well as hippie liberation, I don't see where the word "selfish" fits into the story.

The outcome ISN'T reduced crime rates.The crime rate doesn't really change a whole lot;the cartels still make money.

Are vegetarians selfish for using the destruction of the environment as an argument against the meat industry?

THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!How do you compare pot smoking (an activity that harms you and people around you), and vegetarianism (a lifestyle that actually helps people and animals)?

Anarcho-Edge wrote:OK,maybe "selfish is a bit of a stretch,but look,marijuana and other drugs come from drug cartels,who wage war on other cartels.This kills several innocent people who did nothing wrong but stand in front of the cross-fire

Oh yeah, I forgot about all the medicinal marijuana users who die in the crossfire at their local dispenseries. Legalising it for everyone worldwide would just make it even worse.

The outcome ISN'T reduced crime rates.The crime rate doesn't really change a whole lot;the cartels still make money.

This is what I keep telling those mean potheads. Last time we legalised marijuana for medicinal and recreational use across the globe it ended in disaster.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!How do you compare pot smoking (an activity that harms you and people around you), and vegetarianism (a lifestyle that actually helps people and animals)?

Why must people always take the examples I use to explain my points so seriously? I was using it to explain what nonsense your claim was. If you'd like to continue, I think everyone else would appreciate it if we started a separate thread for it.

Confusion wrote:Hippies are decadent.

Also, people who are pro-pot tends to forget all the important things, and focus only on the liberalization-issue.

This is a massive generalization.
The only thing that is remotely accurate is that a marijuana interest group would solely focus on legalization, the same as any other interest group.
I support legalization under government regulation. This isn't an important issue, it is a luxury just like cigarettes.

What do hippies even have to do with this? I have yet to meet a single person that smokes marijuana that was a hippie. If anything the large majority adopt the wannabe gangster lifestyle if you want a generalization. If you want the truth, they remain normal people with the exception of a minority that cannot understand moderation.

Obviously with legalization there would be more smoking, because of its illegal status many people try to avoid it out of fear of being caught. A larger reason is because in the United States for a significant portion of jobs, drug testing is mandatory.
Honestly I don't quite understand what is supposed to be bad about more people smoking marijuana anyways, are you also opposed to cigarettes? I dread the day that that luxury is also taken away.

My thing is that the pro-legalization activists are kinda selfish;they don't care about ending the drug war,if they cared about it at all,they wouldn't smoke weed.All they care about is getting blazed.

Another generalization.
Because of the drug being illegal, this helps the cartels and petty criminals since they are the only ones whom can aquire the drug. Unless of course you take the risk of growing yourself.
Seeing as I am not an activist though, and merely a supporter of legalization I cannot speak for how activists feel.

Balkan Beast wrote: If anything the large majority adopt the wannabe gangster lifestyle if you want a generalization. If you want the truth, they remain normal people with the exception of a minority that cannot understand moderation

But I don't like wannabe-gangsters either, so it would be a win-win situation

I don't quite understand what is supposed to be bad about more people smoking marijuana anyways, are you also opposed to cigarettes? I dread the day that that luxury is also taken away

Yes, I believe that cigarettes will be banned in Europe in a few years, five maybe. A more problematic thing is that they (The EU leadership) want to ban snus/dip, which is less harmful to everything in your body except your teeth.

But... We all have to make our sacrifices for the common good. Did you know that Castro stopped smoking cigars 20 years ago because he wanted to be a role model for his nation?

I'm in favor of heavy taxation but not banning outright, for all "vice" products. People should be able to maintain their freedom of choice while respecting the wishes of the community; I feel that complying with a tax would serve the function of accepting the community's views without eliminating individual choice.

In another thread, I came to think about Portugal, and what I have heard about the new and liberal drug-policy on that country.

Does anyone here know more about it? What it is, exactly (Rumors on the street is that they have legalized heavy drugs) and positive/negative effects?

And in the Netherlands, the breeze blows towards anti-liberalization, or so I have heard.

Now I am just repeating newspaper-articles that I have picked up bits and pieces from while hastily scanning through them.

Do we have an expert on the board? A good debate on drugs need examples on different policies on the substances in question, and - off course - the outcome of those policies.

Hopefully, I will gain some good arguments against pot (I my self am almost allergic to that stuff, so quite logically, I don't want anyone else to smoke either)

Confusion wrote:Hopefully, I will gain some good arguments against pot (I my self am almost allergic to that stuff, so quite logically, I don't want anyone else to smoke either)

That is not logical, in fact it's infantile. By that logic people that can't eat chocolate or smell flowers should try to prevent others from doing so. Keep your personal preferences on petty matters in your own life. Don't try to force them on me.

I'll give you some data in regards to the policies later but had to address your authoritarian bs first.

Confusion wrote:Does anyone here know more about it? What it is, exactly (Rumors on the street is that they have legalized heavy drugs) and positive/negative effects?

This is not true, altough consumption is not criminalized per se. Drug addicts were treated, instead of imprisioned, so heroin and other heavy drugs dependencies mostly disappeared from the streets, mostly due to the intense propaganda against them in the last twenty years.

Red Aegis wrote: That is not logical, in fact it's infantile. By that logic people that can't eat chocolate or smell flowers should try to prevent others from doing so. Keep your personal preferences on petty matters in your own life. Don't try to force them on me.

Ok. So I am infantile, and I have also voiced my opinion on the matter.

Retreating carefully towards the exit, I will never the less continue to watch this thread, looking for statistics and hard facts on the matter, and the different policies available.

EDIT! (So glad I got back to this before anyone replied)

It IS possible to be against all forms of recreational drugs and stimulants, and be of the opinion that the government should help the people become as healthy as possible. That would not be directly infantile, would it? To only be against pot because I don't like it, would be infantile, I agree.