-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Should drugs be illegal?
- Thread starter john313
- Start date
KirbyFan101
Resident Ball of Fluff
Depends on the drug, really. Marijuana should most definately be legal considering there are no risks to the responsible user.
But then it raises the question, we allow people to smoke cigerettes: why not sniff cocaine? Is it because the subtle death from smoking is less confrontational?
Personally, I would put money on the fact that there is some political movement behind outlawing drugs. I believe in personal freedoms, and hence, I voted yes.
But then it raises the question, we allow people to smoke cigerettes: why not sniff cocaine? Is it because the subtle death from smoking is less confrontational?
Personally, I would put money on the fact that there is some political movement behind outlawing drugs. I believe in personal freedoms, and hence, I voted yes.
Darkdale
World Leader Pretend
I don't think that drugs should be treated as a criminal issue, I think it should be treated as a healthcare issue. If we spent the money we spend on putting people in prison and on the DEA, we could establish a national program to decrease drug use through rehabilitation; or use that money to give aid to private rehabilitation programs.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I think that marijauna should be legal, but all other "drugs" that I know of like cocaine, meth, heroin, etc pose too great a health risk. They hurt the user, their family, and pose a cost to society for their healthcare. People are going to do illegal drugs and it is going to cost us money. I vote to try and stop it and hopefully it will deter some and bring the healthcare cost down and help some people out in the process.
Mike182
Flaming Queer
i don't know what i think on this issue
i would say, that whilest under the influence of some more serious drugs, a person can be a risk to themselves and those around them, ergo they should be illegal
but, i admit some drugs do not cause such affects, and so do not merrit being illegal
i think we can all safely say that medicinal drugs should remain legal
i know id be dead without insulin
i will refrain from voting, bu ti will listen to arguments from both side of the coin
c_p
i would say, that whilest under the influence of some more serious drugs, a person can be a risk to themselves and those around them, ergo they should be illegal
but, i admit some drugs do not cause such affects, and so do not merrit being illegal
i think we can all safely say that medicinal drugs should remain legal
i know id be dead without insulin i will refrain from voting, bu ti will listen to arguments from both side of the coin
c_p
Aqualung
Tasty
As long as I don't have to pay for rehabilitating people, or stuff like that, it's really not the government's job to say that a person can't do what they want to themselves. But as soon as I have to start paying for their stupidity, I'm going to start fighting for them to be illegal. (As if that helps )
)
Darkdale
World Leader Pretend
michel said:
That depends on what you think "better" means. Is it better to allow a government, with all it's weapons and power, have the authority to tell the people what they can and what they cannot ingest; or is it better that the government, with the resources it has taken from the people, establish a culture of education, discouraging the use of harmful foods and drugs, aiding private and charitable endeavors to rehabilitate addicts and possibly (I'm not sure I like this though, as I can see it getting out of hand) establishing State run facilities to help the poor who cannot afford to help themselves and those with no support group?
Both in the case of law enforcement and rehabilitation, the same result remains: People are using drugs and they need help. Now, either we can approach this from a legalistic manner, punishing people who use and distribute drugs by locking them away and depriving them of their liberty, or we can act from compassion and as a society deal with the problem together.
Darkdale
World Leader Pretend
A favorite Sports Nite quote, "In case you haven't noticed, we're fighting a war on drugs in this country!" "Yeah, and hows itgoing so far?"
The answer, it's not going well at all. We are wasting Billions on a flawed social reaction. Making drugs illegal has done nothing to lessen our countries drug dependance. Education and rehabilitation are the only things that are proven to work. (AA & NA being excellent examples: And speaking as an ex-drug addict, I know the mentality of drug addiction and I know how little the fact that it is illegal bothers anyone).
The answer, it's not going well at all. We are wasting Billions on a flawed social reaction. Making drugs illegal has done nothing to lessen our countries drug dependance. Education and rehabilitation are the only things that are proven to work. (AA & NA being excellent examples: And speaking as an ex-drug addict, I know the mentality of drug addiction and I know how little the fact that it is illegal bothers anyone).
Oh of course, I agree with you about the rehabilitation - much better than a punishment to be incarcerated with others who will feed the addict's habit..............Darkdale said:
But I would still like Drugs to be all illegal; the Barons who peddle the stuff - often with a canny knack of selling the stuff at knock-down prices to recruit addicts, who can then be fed with the real price stuff. Let's face it; you can have it either way:-
a) all drugs are legalized, and are issued with the sanction of the Government. They will then have to pay for the rehab at a later date - at least that way, the price would be controlled, and there would be an income for the Government to put asside for the later costs to the tax payers; the drugs would also be clean and pure.
But would that be morally acceptable ? - not in my mind
b) keep carrying down the road on which we are on, where drugs are illegal, where society still has to pick up the tab for rehab and drying people out (if that is the term for weaning them off), and meantime the police of every country tries to trace the laundered money, fend off pushers, and pick up the pieces......
Is that morally acceptable ?- in my view it is more acceptable than a); just because drugs are illegal doesn't mean that we cannot show compation for the addict, and help him become clean.
Mike182
Flaming Queer
i don't want this to go off topic, maybe we should open another thread for itAqualung said:
simply, if we had no form of government, how would we regulate society? could human's live in a state where no particular institution sets the rules?
like i said, i think this is "new thread material"
MdmSzdWhtGuy
Well-Known Member
Should drugs be illegal. No. Very clearly they should not. I was just discussing this subject with a former prosecutor that I work with. I used to work at the P.D.'s office and she was at the D.A.'s office and we both had the exact same opinion. Drugs should absolutely be decriminilized. But if you commit a crime to pay for your habit, that illegal behavior should definately be prosecuted.
It is completely incongruous to allow alcohol and tobacco, which are merely legal drugs, both of which cause FAR more health and societal issues than all illegal drugs combined, but then not allow the use of other drugs such as marijuana and opium, both of which are completely natural and have been used for centuries.
If ther argument against illicit drugs is that they do harm to people's health, the argument fails there because other behaviours such as tobacco, fattening foods, and high stress levels are all accepted in our society.
If the arguement is that such illicit drugs contribute too much to society's social ills, then that argument fails as well. Ask any uniformed police officer about the domestic disturbance calls they make. They will consistently tell you that the number one substance being abused by domestic callers is alcohol, which is completelyt legal for anyone over age 21.
I have never heard a rational argument which was convincing for the current prohibition on drugs. There was at a time in this country a prohibition against alcohol. The law was quite laughable, it went largely ignored by the populace who liked to imbibe, and continued to do so, merely at speakesies and out of stills, rather than at bars and liquour stores.
Alcohol prohibition led to the rise of organized crime in the form of Scicilian based Mafioso's. The more modern prohibition against the sale and use of street drugs have led to the rise of street gangs such as the Crips and Bloods and the vast fortunes of men like Pablo Escobar.
The prohibition of alcohol was a travesty. It led to far more problems than it solved. The current prohibition on drugs is doing the same thing. We now look back on the bootleggers (like Old Man Kennedy) with a certain level of romance. Is there any doubt that there will be a day when the U.S. comes to its senses re: drug prohibition and look back on drug bootleggers with the same kind of romance?
B.
It is completely incongruous to allow alcohol and tobacco, which are merely legal drugs, both of which cause FAR more health and societal issues than all illegal drugs combined, but then not allow the use of other drugs such as marijuana and opium, both of which are completely natural and have been used for centuries.
If ther argument against illicit drugs is that they do harm to people's health, the argument fails there because other behaviours such as tobacco, fattening foods, and high stress levels are all accepted in our society.
If the arguement is that such illicit drugs contribute too much to society's social ills, then that argument fails as well. Ask any uniformed police officer about the domestic disturbance calls they make. They will consistently tell you that the number one substance being abused by domestic callers is alcohol, which is completelyt legal for anyone over age 21.
I have never heard a rational argument which was convincing for the current prohibition on drugs. There was at a time in this country a prohibition against alcohol. The law was quite laughable, it went largely ignored by the populace who liked to imbibe, and continued to do so, merely at speakesies and out of stills, rather than at bars and liquour stores.
Alcohol prohibition led to the rise of organized crime in the form of Scicilian based Mafioso's. The more modern prohibition against the sale and use of street drugs have led to the rise of street gangs such as the Crips and Bloods and the vast fortunes of men like Pablo Escobar.
The prohibition of alcohol was a travesty. It led to far more problems than it solved. The current prohibition on drugs is doing the same thing. We now look back on the bootleggers (like Old Man Kennedy) with a certain level of romance. Is there any doubt that there will be a day when the U.S. comes to its senses re: drug prohibition and look back on drug bootleggers with the same kind of romance?
B.
MdmSzdWhtGuy;
You see, that is one of the problems with society; the government makes a good income out of tobacco and alcohol - at least it does here in England, as does the goverment enjoy the revenue from the sale of gas.
To be fair, when tobacco was introduced, no one knew of the potential hamful effects on users. Society is now supoorted, to some extent, by the fabric of an employment system developed around the Alcohol and tobacco industry - and the Gas industry, which Has to continue existing while there is the heavy infrastructure around the motoring industries.
Drugs, of course, are a different matter - the government don't see any revenue from that industry - why do you think alcohol and tobacco are still legal, while drugs are a "No - no"?
Because the governement gets a slice of the tobacco and alcohol action.
You see, that is one of the problems with society; the government makes a good income out of tobacco and alcohol - at least it does here in England, as does the goverment enjoy the revenue from the sale of gas.
To be fair, when tobacco was introduced, no one knew of the potential hamful effects on users. Society is now supoorted, to some extent, by the fabric of an employment system developed around the Alcohol and tobacco industry - and the Gas industry, which Has to continue existing while there is the heavy infrastructure around the motoring industries.
Drugs, of course, are a different matter - the government don't see any revenue from that industry - why do you think alcohol and tobacco are still legal, while drugs are a "No - no"?
Because the governement gets a slice of the tobacco and alcohol action.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Drugs should be legal. If I want to get stoned, and start trippin, why not?
I do feel meth labs should be outlawed though. If they blow up, then many people can be harmed and lose thier home and everything else they have.
I do feel meth labs should be outlawed though. If they blow up, then many people can be harmed and lose thier home and everything else they have.
MdmSzdWhtGuy
Well-Known Member
Poll results here are interesting I think. It fits with what I have experienced in real life discussions on this subject. The majority either think they should be legalized or don't care one way or the other while the minority thinks it is a good idea to keep them illegal.
In our poll, only 20% thinks prohibition is a good idea.
In a real way, this issue is very akin to the Fairtax idea. Vast majority of Americans don't like the current tax system, and when given the information on the Fairtax, think it is a great idea, and yet prohibition and the IRS are still the current rule of the day.
Very obvious that our "representative" government is not representing what a majority of people want on these, and likely other, issues.
B.
In our poll, only 20% thinks prohibition is a good idea.
In a real way, this issue is very akin to the Fairtax idea. Vast majority of Americans don't like the current tax system, and when given the information on the Fairtax, think it is a great idea, and yet prohibition and the IRS are still the current rule of the day.
Very obvious that our "representative" government is not representing what a majority of people want on these, and likely other, issues.
B.
