I Want Controlled Drugs Deregulated

[rsmith6621]

That is what I told my GUN LOVIN NRA SUPPORTING Co-Worker yesterday...

He said "your craxy those should never be deregulated"

So I said Why...If guns dont kill people,people kill people then drugs dont hurt or kill people either...RIGHT?

His brain went into sizzle mode trying to rationalize my analogy. He was tongue tied the rest of the day.

[cthulu2016]

1. And legalizing drugs would probably reduce gun violence more than

some proposed gun control measures... so he really should be doubly on-board

[ZombieHorde]

2. Awesome! *hands you a medal for being awesome* nt

[jody]

3. If drugs were not controlled, prices would go down and prison cells would be emptied. I'm for that.

Anyway the latest government report shows http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf

From 1994 to 2007, firearm number increased from 192 million to 294 million.

From 1994 to 2007, Firearms-Related Murder Rate decreased from 6.6 to 3.9.

Suicides and Accidents rates associated with firearms also declined as firearm numbers increased.

[realgreen]

4. Exactly, more guns == more violence

It's just logical.

[jody]

5. May be logical to you but the government report showed murder rates with firearms decreased as # of

firearms increased.

[Recursion]

13. Yes. The problem is prohibition != fewer guns

That's the sticking point here.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

6. Why?

I mean aside from trying to come up with (yet another) a super sophisticated analogy to prove your point (!!!) about gun control.

Do you honestly think unfettered access to heroin, cocaine, meth etc. would be a good thing for the country? For kids?

If so, I think you might have 'Anti-Gun Fever'...maybe you need some regulated medication.

[Spider Jerusalem]

7. You want to know what a good argument for decriminalising/legalising drugs is?

Look at this chart of gun ownership vs gun deaths for OECD countries. Look specifically at Mexico.



Do you know why Mexico has such a high rate of gun deaths compared to their rate of gun ownership? Because much of the country is effectively under the control of drug cartels that employ violence and murder to maintain their grip. Why is this? Because of the American war on drugs; Mexicans are dying to supply Americans with weed and cocaine, because the trade is so lucrative. Why is it so lucrative? In part, because it's illegal; the economics of the black market make it much more profitable.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

8. I agree with your comments on Mexico as to why it's such a violent place...

but I still don't see how legalizing drugs aside from pot in America would be a good idea.

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. Well...

people who want drugs can get them without that much trouble. Criminalising the possession and sale of drugs is clearly not working. The USA has the largest number of prisoners in the world, both on a per capita basis and in absolute terms; most of those are there for nonviolent drug offences. Decriminalisation and treating addiction as a medical issue would be much more sensible.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

10. Well, yeah if you want them you can get them...

but legalizing drugs for everyone still doesn't seem that great of an idea.

I don't see how being able to be legally on heroin or meth could possibly help things in this country.

I do agree that the 'war on drugs' isn't working (and has never worked), but allowing anyone to get whatever they want whenever they want isn't the answer either.

[Spider Jerusalem]

12. Which isn't what I advocated

but decriminalisation and making certain controlled substances (like heroin) available on prescription to addicts? That I don't have a problem with.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

14. Oops, I was confused by your responding to a thread entitled "I want controlled drugs deregulated'

with an argument for decriminalization and legalization.

My bad.

[Spider Jerusalem]

15. Legalisation of cannabis, decriminalisation of smack, meth and coke

which would go a long way to reducing gang violence and organised crime in many places in the US as well as Mexico and Latin America.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

16. Eek...

It may reduce crime in Mexico and Latin America and that would be a great thing, but I am not for reducing crime in Mexico if means completely destroying America with legal smack, meth and coke...people here have enough trouble with alcohol, and speaking as one who has done both meth and coke I just don't see how having legalized supplies of either could possibly be a good thing.

As I said earlier, pot is one thing but I (for one perhaps) am OK with the harder stuff being illegal.

[Spider Jerusalem]

17. Please learn the difference between "decriminalised" and "legal"

Decriminalised means: we don't send people to prison, we send them to rehab.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

18. Ah, OK, thank you...

Still (even with my new enlightenment) I don't see that 'decriminalization' is a good idea.

Do you think that if people know that they won't go to prison for the drug's use that we would end up with an awful lot more users and therefore addicts? Do you think that would be a good thing for the country? For families?

I guess one good thing would be that instead of building a shit-load of prisons there would be a lot of new employment building a shit-load of rehab centers, so maybe you're on to something.

[Spider Jerusalem]

19. Alcohol is legal, how many alcoholics are there? Enough to justify criminalising alcohol?

[OneMoreDemocrat]

20. No, but don't you think we have enough problems with alcohol?...

You want to add drugs to the mix as well?

I mean it's cool if you do, and you've explained your position; I just can't agree.

[Spider Jerusalem]

21. I think that it's frankly silly to assume that more people will do drugs if they're legal

addiction is not a criminal problem; it is a social and medical one. There is no reason to assume that people who already choose not to destroy their lives with drink (which is legal) will turn into junkies.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

22. OK, then it's silly...

No worries.

But since things don't happen in a vacuum, do you honestly think that decriminalizing drugs in America based on the already sky-high levels of addiction (to all manner of things) wouldn't have an effect on addiction to drugs?

Of course there's reason to assume that people will partake of more drugs who don't abuse alcohol; I look to myself...I don't like to drink much at all, but I love other 'illegal' drugs and if they were decriminalized I'm sure it would motivate even me to use them more often, and I doubt that I'm alone in that.

Not to mention, what about those alcoholics? You think they'd just stick to beer if coke was decriminalized?

Perhaps that's silly too.

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. Rates aren't "sky-high"

CDC figures: Percentage of persons over 12 with nonmedical use of psychotherapeutic drugs in last 12 months (including cocaine and heroin but excluding cannabis): 2.8. That's not "sky-high".

And again, please learn the difference between "decriminalised" and "legalised". Dealing would still be subject to criminal penalties. Simple possession would result in referral for treatment. It works in Portugal. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html
http://www.economist.com/node/14309861

[OneMoreDemocrat]

24. Rates of addiction in this country are in fact 'sky-high'...

Forget drugs for a minute, I'm referring to the addiction levels for EVERYTHING (drink, cigarettes, coffee, 5-hour energy, chocolate, sex, work, etc., etc.), we are the most addicted society in the world.

So, into this you would like to include drugs? No thanks, this ain't Portugal.

And stop with the 'please learn' shit; I get it, you know everything there is to know about decriminalization and legalization...I just disagree with you. That OK?

[Spider Jerusalem]

25. That's just absurd

Caffeine and tobacco are legal everywhere. Your argument is stupid. And you clearly don't know what you're talking about. You had no idea that "decriminalise" doesn't mean "legalise", and you seem to think there's any correlation at all between say drinking coffee or smoking and using heroin (which is silly). Given your evident ignorance I'm not really sure you're in any position to offer an opinion on the question.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

26. Well, now that YOU'VE called the argument stupid and me ignorant...

I guess that settles that.

I'm terribly sorry I've wasted your precious time.

You can now go back to knowing everything there is to know and feeling REALLY good about it.

Happy Holidays.

[Recursion]

11. Ending the War on Drugs would do more to end gun violence than anything I can think of

And, yes, our experience trying to ban drugs is 100% why I'm leery of our trying to ban guns.

[jody]

27. "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results." No one knows

the author but it certainly explains efforts to prohibit anything especially firearms.

[Jamaal510]

28. Drugs (both soft and hard) should be legalized,

but they should also be sold and regulated like alcohol. Driving under the influence is dangerous and it's not a good idea for children to get into the habit of doing drugs, so that's why I disagree on total deregulation.