Its the primary driver of crime here in the USofA, as such its filling jails and prisons.
So what say you, take a poll and expand as you wish.
So what say you, take a poll and expand as you wish.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Since Dr Paul brought it up, what about drugs ?
- Thread starter dogtowner
- Start date
Werbung:
Me I like the last option.
Why ?
It represents a stake it the heart of organized crime by taking the lifeblood (money honey) out of it.
That helps here and everywhere else that has ties to it.
I also say NO change for any institution public or private who finds danger in stoned employees and wants drug testing. And ONE shot at re-hab for welfare seekers who fail the drug test. That is your incentive for people to make sensible choices.
Thats what I think, your milage may vary : )
Why ?
It represents a stake it the heart of organized crime by taking the lifeblood (money honey) out of it.
That helps here and everywhere else that has ties to it.
I also say NO change for any institution public or private who finds danger in stoned employees and wants drug testing. And ONE shot at re-hab for welfare seekers who fail the drug test. That is your incentive for people to make sensible choices.
Thats what I think, your milage may vary : )
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
I picked "legalize the whole shebang". I oppose the so called "sin" taxes as I believe all taxation should apply equally to all citizens, hence my support for a fixed rate flat tax or national sales tax. Besides, corporations would jump all over the chance to produce, market, and sell high quality products which would sell like hotcakes and then pay corporate taxes on their earnings.
I could live with that too. I don't believe it does much to drop crime (people still play "the Numbers" despite the readily available lottos). Can't argue the taxation basis. Sin taxes exist only because they punish a segmen t of society that can't vote it's interests due to numbers. It takes principle to avoid this and that is not in abundance in the political world.
Gipper
Well-Known Member
I picked get tough. Nothing good will come from legalizing drugs. As evidenced by all the harm to society caused by alcohol. Hell...illegal drug use currently causes terrible harm. What makes one think if it were legal, that it wouldn't be worse? Is it about eliminating the costs of enforcement? Because something is difficult and costly, does not mean we should surrender and legalize it.
Here is another hypocrisy of the Left: they have a hatred of tobacco and have worked tirelessly to prevent its use, even though it is a legal product. One can't smoke here or there...or anywhere...anymore...ie. see New York City smoking ban....all thanks to big government progressives, and I am not a smoker, but I recognize TYRANNY when I see it. If you look into the harmful substances found in marijuana smoke, you will find it is more harmful than tobacco. Yet, many on the Left want tobacco banned, while promote weed legalization. Maybe its just that they want another revenue source to feed the insatiable appetite of their beloved Big Socialist government.
But, then again, if we could just keep the leftists stoned all the time, maybe the rest of us could fix this country.
Here is another hypocrisy of the Left: they have a hatred of tobacco and have worked tirelessly to prevent its use, even though it is a legal product. One can't smoke here or there...or anywhere...anymore...ie. see New York City smoking ban....all thanks to big government progressives, and I am not a smoker, but I recognize TYRANNY when I see it. If you look into the harmful substances found in marijuana smoke, you will find it is more harmful than tobacco. Yet, many on the Left want tobacco banned, while promote weed legalization. Maybe its just that they want another revenue source to feed the insatiable appetite of their beloved Big Socialist government.
But, then again, if we could just keep the leftists stoned all the time, maybe the rest of us could fix this country.
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
I consider the expansion of freedom a good thing...
If someone wants to use drugs, and they are capable of doing so without violating the rights of anyone else, why would you have a problem with that?
WolfLarsen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 48
I'm wondering when they're going to put coffee on the list of illegal drugs. After all, coffee is addictive! The fact is, if you need your coffee in the morning you're a drug addict, and so therefore you should be put in prison!
One of every four persons in jail in the world is in jail in the USA, mostly because of drugs. If they are going to continue this war on drugs why not just put prison walls around the entire country and declare everyone a criminal?
Some of the prosecutors and judges putting people away for drugs are themselves snorting cocaine. Some of the politicians who make the drug laws snort cocaine. And smoke pot too.
But since they're not poor they don't go to jail. If any rich person gets caught for drugs they just hire a fancy lawyer
One of every four persons in jail in the world is in jail in the USA, mostly because of drugs. If they are going to continue this war on drugs why not just put prison walls around the entire country and declare everyone a criminal?
Some of the prosecutors and judges putting people away for drugs are themselves snorting cocaine. Some of the politicians who make the drug laws snort cocaine. And smoke pot too.
But since they're not poor they don't go to jail. If any rich person gets caught for drugs they just hire a fancy lawyer
steveox
Well-Known Member
I say legalize it and tax them. And then legalize prositution and tax it.
its actually a good lawyer you want, anyone can be well dressed.
seems to work out OK in Nevada but has not eliminated the "freelance" trade.
legalize all of it. tax the crap out of it. set guidelines like booze.
Along with peoples freedom to use, companies also have the freedom to not hire users, or fire people for using. It's all personal choice, which is what things should be about.
Along with peoples freedom to use, companies also have the freedom to not hire users, or fire people for using. It's all personal choice, which is what things should be about.
absolutely agree that business etc need not accept users for painfully obvious reasons.
I like the gang killing bonus of giving it away. still way cheaper that the failed war on drugs and we could sure live without the crime and the breeding of criminals. pretty good sep to reverse the damage of the Great Society.
Gipper
Well-Known Member
Therein lies the the problem. Drugged up people will violate the rights of others. There can be no question about it. It happens every day in this country with alcohol. Drunks kill and maim others on the roads and elsewhere. What makes you think those on hard drugs won't do the same?
Legalizing hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, crack, meth, etc....will destroy not only the lives of the drug user, but many others.
This is an issue where libertarians go too far. It is a fact, hard drugs destroy lives and not just the drug user's life.
Pot is one thing, the much harder drugs are entirely another thing.
Werbung:
can't argue that drugs are bad and/or destructive but those inclined are already doing bad things every day.
the only difference is they resort to crime to pbtaon the drugs which makes for the underground industry of supplying them. I would submit that this harms far more people every day that the transgressions f individual junkies. the only good solution is a time machine to see that the genii never gets out the bottle but I'm not holding my breath on that. I'm content to perform damage control.
Similar threads
