The classic battle: Marijuana should it legalized?

[PorscheNGuns]

You obviously have never seen a family destroyed by heroin (I've seen two, one my own relatives), and unlike me, you've obviously never had a family member killed in a drunk driving accident where the driver had been convicted of 3 "harmless" DUI's previously and should have been sitting in jail.

Please don't ever express your views on drugs or drunk driving again. God forbid that [censored] wad way of thinking spreads to anyone else.

-Matt

[coffeecrazy1]

Actually, I have an uncle in prison because of DWIs, but that doesn't matter.

I am sorry for your losses...particularly that of the family member killed by a drunk driver. Here's my question, though: we have laws against drunk driving, and what good did they do? Your family member still got killed by a guy who probably got an 8 year sentence for his crime...or maybe longer...but either way, this guy continues to look forward to a day when he walks as a free man. What I proposed would make it far less likely for him to do so.

As for your family member messed up on heroin, again, I am sorry for your loss. I have never claimed that drugs were anything short of terrible. But...I would much rather see them be a healthcare issue, rather than a criminal one...so your family member could have gotten some help. Either way, it was his/her decision to use heroin, and the existence of the law didn't make one bit of difference.

I understand that you are emotionally tied to the issue, so I can't really say anything against what you said. But...I tend to think that we are all pretty smart people on this forum, and I'm not too worried about my way of thinking spreading, unless others decide for themselves that I am making a valid argument.

[PorscheNGuns]

When you ask questions like "what good do drunk driving laws do?", I just shake my head in astonishment. I'm not particularly emotionally attached to either of these issues, I'm just thinking basic common sense.

Drunk driving fatalities have fallen by 41% since 1982. As laws on drunk driving continue to get stiffer, the fatalities continues to drop.

My question is: Why do you want to reverse this trend?

Furthermore, heroin and meth destroy your life and the life of everyone who loves you, no matter what, 100% of the time. If you manage to survive without getting hepatitis C or AIDS, and your family hasnt completely abandoned you, you still are never cured of heroin/meth addiction. If heroin and meth were made completely legal, fact: more people would use these drugs.

Question 2: Why do you want more lives ruined from heroin and meth?

-Matt

[nicky g]

I agree with you completely on the drunk driving thing. But don;t you think a lot of the problems to do with heroin come from it being illegal? Firstly, overdoses tend to occur because of batches of varying strengths making it difficult for users to judge what they're taking; if it were legal and regulated this would be easily solved. Secondly, why would people deliberately rish getting AIDS through sharing needles if needles were readily and cheaply available? Finally, much of heroin addicts' problems come from not having enough money to buy the next fix and having to resort to messed up things to get that money; if it were cheap and reasonably priced, this would be a lot less of a problem.

I'm not saying heroin is harmless; any addictive and behaviour altering substance is dangerous. But IMO it would be a lot less harmful, probably less harmful than alcohol, if it were legal. There's also the question of what business it is of the government/other people whether you want to take it or not.

[coffeecrazy1]

In response to question 1: The fact the laws have gotten stiffer(which I'm taking your word on...I haven't actually checked) does not necessarily explain why drunk driving has declined. Haven't public service announcements and education about the dangers of drinking and driving also increased in that period? Wouldn't those possibly be a cause, as well? Plus...with my proposal, the same line of thinking that you suggest occurs with drunk driving laws(it's illegal, I could get in trouble, so I won't do it), would still apply...but would punish the action that actually does deprive others of their rights and freedoms...and not the guy who has had one too many and drives home safely.

In response to question 2: Let me ask you this: would you do heroin or meth if it were legal? I know I wouldn't...because I know that both are terrifyingly awful drugs. The truth is, people just want to get high. But, if we are bound and determined to spend money on the problem, I would much rather see those funds going to help those who really do want to quit do so, rather than shoving people with tremendous addictions into environments with the dregs of society(murderers, rapists, etc). I don't want heroin or meth usage to increase...but honestly, I don't think the existence of laws preventing them makes one bit of difference...people still get the drugs and use them. So why not make them legal, and let some of these people who are mixed up in that stuff come in out of the cold a bit?

That...and also...it's their life to ruin, Matt. I am strongly against paternalistic government. If people want to take drugs, get high, and everything that comes with it, I think they should have the freedom to make that choice, and live with the inherent consequences.

-Bart

[ QUOTE ]

Question 2: Why do you want more lives ruined from heroin and meth?

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

Try to avoid constructing straw men when making posts.

I touched on it in the OP. This is a shame that nobody flamed me I had tons on points ready to argue. Or maybe its more ashame that most agree that pot is "basically" harmless and yet or govt. will not listen to us?!? [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[CORed]

I'm with you (to a point: I think the 0.08% blood alcohol is too low and that checkpoints are a violation of contitutional rights) on drunk driving laws. I believe that driving under the influence alcohol or drugs is entails an unacceptable risk of harming others and should be illegal.

OTOH, the fact that doing methamphetamine or, to a lesser degree, heroin or cocaine creates a significant risk of totally screwing up your life is a sufficient reason for rational people not to do those drugs. For people who aren't so rational, the law doesn't seem to deter them either. You state that if methamphetamine or heroin are legalized, more people will use them. This may be true, or it may not. You state that this is a fact. It is actually an opinion, until the drugs are actually legalized and it is proven that more people use them. I know that if heroin or methamphetamine were legalized tomorrow, I would have absolutely no desire to rush out to buy some and shoot up.

I further assert that for many drug users, the legal system does a lot more to screw up their lives, and damage society than the drugs themselves, and that the drug laws are largely responsible for many of the social evils attributed to drug use. Example: Many alcoholics support their habit by panhandling. Many heroin or methamphetamine addicts support their habits by dealing the drug they are addicted to or by burglary (or fencing stolen goods). Why? An alcoholic can support his habit for a few dollars a day. The person addicted to illegal drugs may need several hundred dollars per day. While I don't believe that either the panhandling alcoholic or the heroin addict burglarizing houses is a good thing, the panhandling alcoholic (or meth addict) is the lesser evil.

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, heroin and meth destroy your life and the life of everyone who loves you, no matter what, 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true: Not everyone who uses even drugs like meth, heroin or cocaine becomes an addict and screws up their life. Some users of even the most addictive drugs maintain control and are productive citizens. However, getting a multi-year prison sentence if they get caught with personal-use quantities (or for selling to other users to pay for the drugs they use) certainly will screw up their lives and the lives of their families.

Also, the "war on drugs", at least until the "war on terror" came along, has been an excuse for an assault on civil liberties. Property seizure (even if the person whose "drug related" property is siezed is later acquited), currency transaction reports, no-knock raids, entrapment by undercover officers, etc. all have been justified as necessary to win the "war on drugs". This IMO, is ample reason to rethink our approach to deling with drug use.

I don't want to see more lives ruined by heroin and meth. I also don't want to see more lives ruined by draconian sentences for what is, at worst self-destructive behavior. I also don't want to see more houses burned down or neighbors poisoned becuase methamphetamine is manufactured by idiots with no concept of how to handle the hazardous materials required instead of safely in a properly designed chemical plant. I don't want to see cancer patients or others with severe pain denied the use of a useful painkiller (heroin) because some people get addicted to it. IMO, in a perfect world, methamphetamine, coaine, etc. wouldn't exist and heroin wouldn't be addicitve. In the real world, illegality is not and can never be the same as non-existence. Drugs exist. Addiction should be treated as a medical problem, not a crime, and the resources of the criminal justice system should be redirected to violent crime and propery crimes, which, IMO are the only real crimes.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that "huffing paint" made it onto the list should show you the futility of drug laws and enforcement. When the next craze is hitting yourself in the head with a hammer, will hammers be considered drug paraphernalia?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, not only can people abuse hamnmers by hitting themselves in the head to get high, many people accidentaly injure themselves with hammers, and hammers are sometimes even used as weapons in assaults or homicides. We definitely need to ban them.

[CORed]

I have no problem with taxing marijuana, within reason. If growing marijuana for personal use is legal, this will put a natural limit on taxation: If taxes get too high, people will grow their own. If they are reasonable, most people won't bother because it's easier to just pick it up at the store.