Why the war on drugs will never be won

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
3 weekends in a row (intraweek use as well) up to half oz per day.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are so full of [censored]. Half an ounce is 15 cubic centimeters, or about 15 grams (assuming LSD has the same density as water, which isn't too bad). The LD50 of LSD is 12,000 micrograms. Thus half an ounce of LSD is over a thousand times the 50% lethal dose, and would kill you immediately.

[hmkpoker]

I'm pretty sure he was talking about shrooms. No one's takingn half an ounce of acid.

lol, Borodog, what did you just look that up or something? Either way by assuming I meant acid when referring to half an oz, youve made it clear you have no real life experience or knowledge with drugs whatsoever.

I completely agree with your abstract economic models that show equilibrium and demand and supply and prices yada yada yada. I completely disagree with your head in the clouds logic that more use of heroine, crystal meth, and PCP is a desirable thing for individuals, neighborhoods, and society.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
I completely disagree with your head in the clouds logic that more use of heroine, crystal meth, and PCP is a desirable thing for individuals, neighborhoods, and society.

[/ QUOTE ]
Another strawman (if I understand Borodog's position). The actual use may or may not be a "desirable" (no subjectivity there [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]) thing for society, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
lol, Borodog, what did you just look that up or something? Either way by assuming I meant acid when referring to half an oz, youve made it clear you have no real life experience or knowledge with drugs whatsoever.

I completely agree with your abstract economic models that show equilibrium and demand and supply and prices yada yada yada. I completely disagree with your head in the clouds logic that more use of heroine, crystal meth, and PCP is a desirable thing for individuals, neighborhoods, and society.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your head in the clouds logic that government should restrict anything which can lead individuals to do harm to themselves (intentional strawman here).

Wait, you actually don't think that. You are arbitrarily designating which substances/activites individuals should not be allowed to possess/engage in, while at the same time allowing other self-destructive substances/activities. This makes no sense.

[hmkpoker]

Riddick, it's not about the drugs, it's about freedom. That's the whole point. Yes, there's a little danger, but I'd rather live in a society where bob the neighbor is allowed to buy a gram of ice at the store than a society where violent criminals market the same stuff.

Also, I don't see why people think that just because a drug becomes legal, everyone's going to do it. I don't think legalizing heroin will make people who wouldn't otherwise do it say "hey, let's go shoot up!" There are a lot of drugs out there that are legal that people don't do because they realize that, despite their legality, they're still drugs, they're still potent substances, and maybe they're not for them.

(last post on this thread)

hmk,

My two dissenting opinions:

As a rather libertarian minded thinker at heart, I am still willing to make sacrifices so that my State can protect me (Patriot Act for example, as I have no problem getting searched head to freakin toe before getting on a plane, as I expect everyone else to be since there is nothing to hide) Drugs are another, and here is why

#2 - Normal people dont say "hey lets shoot up this weekend!", but tragic things happen to normal people who then no longer think "normally" or "rationally". If normal Joe just lost his son to juvenile cancer thats gonna be a tough time, but normal Joe doesnt know any drug dealers and never has - enter the problem: now otherwise normal Joe is tempted to stroll into his local store and induce some euphoria to ease his pain - uh-oh, it consumed his life now and ruined himself and his whole once normal family. Then throw in the other side, youthful experimentation. I even once asked my regular dealer if he came across any meth or mescaline to let me know, out of sheer idiotic curiosity. Had I been able to stroll into my store and "check it out" one weekend since its legal, who knows, theres a chance it could have consumed my life (goodbye job/school, girlfriend, friends, family, etc) Fortunately for me, there was no "supply" to be found so I stuck with the weed.

I see and understand the two main angles - the ill-fought "drug war" and the freedom from state issue, but I and probably most Americans are comfortable sacrificing the $$$ spent, the lowlifes who resort to dealing, and the freedom to keep the supply as limited as humanly possible.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
As a rather libertarian minded thinker at heart, I am still willing to make sacrifices so that my State can protect me

[/ QUOTE ]
This statment is contradictory. How can someone who claims to be "rather libertarian" (Note the "Liberty" part of that word) also claim that they have no problem forcing others to have less liberty?

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a rather libertarian minded thinker at heart, I am still willing to make sacrifices so that my State can protect me

[/ QUOTE ]
This statment is contradictory. How can someone who claims to be "rather libertarian" (Note the "Liberty" part of that word) also claim that they have no problem forcing others to have less liberty?

[/ QUOTE ]

That'd not at all contradictory. The word "rather" would mean he has a tendency towards libertarianism. I don't think anyone in that movement agrees with no government whatsoever.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a rather libertarian minded thinker at heart, I am still willing to make sacrifices so that my State can protect me

[/ QUOTE ]
This statment is contradictory. How can someone who claims to be "rather libertarian" (Note the "Liberty" part of that word) also claim that they have no problem forcing others to have less liberty?

[/ QUOTE ]

That'd not at all contradictory. The word "rather" would mean he has a tendency towards libertarianism. I don't think anyone in that movement agrees with no government whatsoever.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's the definition of libertarian from dictionary.com:
lib·er·tar·i·an Audio pronunciation of "libertarian" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lbr-târ-n)
n.

1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will.

To believe as fervently as he does that drugs should be illegal moves more towards maximizing the role of the state and minimizing individual rights. Thus his opinion is anti-thetical to the concept of libertarianism.