Would it be better if drugs were legalized?

Should drugs be legalized

  • Yes

    Votes: 44 59.5%
  • No

    Votes: 30 40.5%

  • Total voters
    74
Blowtus - No drugs are great, we need more varities and need to use them regularly... proven fact :rolleyes:

For someone who loves to proclaim their own independent thought, and the general value of such, you seem to have a fucking hard time grasping anyone elses.
 
razor's independent thought is that we wants others to think for him.

a bullshit post as you flounder in the ability to show a full picture, covering all angles of the end results of such a proposal. Making joke of me for your own failures. No biggy here, nothing new to me. But please take a better shot, that was like a BB gun.... oh.... ouch... dat huwrt
--------------------------------------------------

BTW, I considered a poll on a topic such as this, in a metal forum that is primarily visited by youth, that runs a 60/40 to be very positive results. Bring the mature adult with more years of overview into the picture and that would quickly be turned.
 
For someone who loves to proclaim their own independent thought, and the general value of such, you seem to have a fucking hard time grasping anyone elses.

Oh really ? Should you apply effort into showing me this failure to grasp, perhaps it would slap me up side the face like a brick of cocaine. Currently what I grasp is the failure of others to paint the full picture as mentioned in my last post to Einherjar and thier frustration in this failure.
 
a bullshit post as you flounder in the ability to show a full picture, covering all angles of the end results of such a proposal. Making joke of me for your own failures. No biggy here, nothing new to me. But please take a better shot, that was like a BB gun.... oh.... ouch... dat huwrt

ahhh... ha... ahha... haha... :lol:

Oh gods man, the things you write are seriously hilarious (and I mean your little "dat huwrt" thing, not your opinion).

I've covered all the bases, as far as I'm concerned. I'm painting you a nice, pretty picture; but you keep knocking the brush out of my hand because you don't like what you see. Basically razor, you don't believe that people are capable of taking care of themselves. You want government control over drugs, censorship, the whole deal, because you think that either a) people can't handle themselves, or b) we shouldn't have to. Then you go on to proclaim that you're not a communist or socialist. However, as we all know, you don't read. So we can all therefore conclude that you've never read Marx or Lenin and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

razor, most of the things you say are of a socialist nature. I'm not a socialist. I don't want the government enforcing drug control with the National Guard. I don't want them breaking down my door when I feel like having a relaxing afternoon smoke. I want to choose for myself. Human beings have the ability and the right. Those who make bad choices must fend for themselves; and if some people are lost in unfortunate accidents... so be it. I'd rather they die free than in a prison.
 
But that is all still too small jarman. As if you or I were to place our abilities to reason as the norm. Everybody has different responses to any given matter, the key is to aviod potential train wrecks. Hard drugs are not a minor matter and its a governments responsibility to protect its population.

I like the idea of let the chips fall where they may and apply it often in my personal dealings... while I also try to identify any potential train wreck. However we have laws that prohibit individuals from making a personal stand against that which they want to be rid of. Sure if the people of a community were allowed to tar and feather a gang or drug dealer or rapist or murderer, we would have a honest and equal let the chips fall where they may system but we dont have this. As much as I'd like it I also realize the chaos it would create. Therefore government being how it was established in the first place must cover all bases. In the case of drugs you have something people dont want around their children, brothers, sisters, friends, whomever, they can not walk downtown and blow the lowlife scumbag mother fuckers brain all over the side walk and walk away without recourse. Therefore you have laws that threaten the lowlife scumbag mother fucker and place him at risk of consequences. We are dealing with huge populations today, its no longer the small tribal situation where such strays would be dealt with swiftly and internally within a small extended family type of situation. Myself, I would prefer the latter but its so far beyond that now.

As for socialism and communism, no I have not read about Marx or Stalin or even Hiltler and Im aware becasue Im told... repeatedly I have socialistic values. I AM proud of these but suspect Im worlds apart from the dark side of the twisted application. Same as I have some favor of reasonable capitalism and reasonable individual freedom. Without abusers on one end of the extreme I wouldnt need to apply my wrath from the other.

Give what is given, one wants to capitalize on turning my people into drug users, they have consequences coming. You want free free free freedom... there you have it.
 
Sure, people have the right to fuck themselves up if they "want", now one just needs to prove that is really what they "want" not some chemical speaking and that no one else has a hand in it.

My discussion has simply been in response to that which I have been addressed or what I have wanted to address.
 
Sure, people have the right to fuck themselves up if they "want", now one just needs to prove that is really what they "want" not some chemical speaking and that no one else has a hand in it.

My discussion has simply been in response to that which I have been addressed or what I have wanted to address.

If a bunch of 'chemicals speaking' are never to have freedom of choice, then what would you suggest be allowed this freedom? Personally I think that anyone who breathes the air has a fucked up perspective, those that don't always seem far safer and more comfortable to me.
 
If a bunch of 'chemicals speaking' are never to have freedom of choice, then what would you suggest be allowed this freedom? Personally I think that anyone who breathes the air has a fucked up perspective, those that don't always seem far safer and more comfortable to me.

I agree and this has helped me keep relatively clean, though no angel. Other people have more issues with it, its that simple. With that we have at least two parties involved and our government can not sanction the selling of potentially harmful and addictive drugs.
 
Personally I think that anyone who breathes the air has a fucked up perspective

I agree

those that don't always seem far safer and more comfortable to me.

I agree and assuming you mean those that dont always have a fucked up.... make you more comfortable. I mean yes I agree, this has always helped me....

Then the rest applies to the legalization aspect and who can not have the right to sell, whomever, harmful products.

Hope that helped

I did not answer who was allowed what freedom, only that there could be no freedom to sell harmfull drugs. I dont think a person needs to look far to find the reasonable freedoms they are allowed so I did not address that part of it, sorry.
 
'Reasonable freedoms'... my how generous. Who could possibly want more?
For an independant thinker you sure are enamoured of the status quo's ideas of safety, comfort, and moral goodness.

Food is harmful and addictive for some people, are you going to propose that obese people be denied freedom to choose what they eat too?
 
i voted yes. Define what's a drug. There are many reasons, but i think the main reason would be narcotraffic. Other interesting thing to think about it's "Taboo", we are thinking about drugs, if they are prohibited or not, its just a topic to avoid some nuclear problems in today's society. If in victorian society was sex, today are drugs.
 
'Reasonable freedoms'... my how generous. Who could possibly want more?
For an independant thinker you sure are enamoured of the status quo's ideas of safety, comfort, and moral goodness.

Food is harmful and addictive for some people, are you going to propose that obese people be denied freedom to choose what they eat too?

I would suggest applying some independent think and compile a list of the freedoms we have, it would be overwhelming. The freedoms we have restricted are most of those which bring harm to others.

Im unaware that there are any laws prohibiting ones eating habits. As far as I know eating is an essential of life and that is not independent thought, it was pounded into my head by evil society manipulators.
 
My mere existence and consumption of the worlds resources brings harm to others, such is not a consistent qualifier for legislation.

I drew a parallel between food and drugs, both potentially addictive and potentially harmful. I want to know if you would support the regulation of what people can eat, and if not, why not?
 
I fail to see any parallel between food and illegal drugs. I am unaware of any chemical addiction to food. Im also pretty sure people need to eat and Im not sure people need to take drugs. In this epic scenerio you produce here you are focusing on users/abusers, which is hogwash in association to many of the points brought by those who favor legalization. Those points are that our jails are full of dealers, drug induced crimes such as theft, there might be cases of drug induced rape as well. The other concern was with the crime that runs rampant due to drug trafficing, such as gang wars. This has been the focus of my concern. Im not aware of situations where food or over eating create such issues, once again it seems I must remind you that eating is an essential. Drug users, are primarily targeted to get to the source, which is the dealers. Those caught with small amounts for use are rarely locked up for any period of time and primarily get a slap on the wrist and are subject to a period of time in which government employees "give them the talk" as Einherjar and others had expressed as how to help those going overboard. Of course this rarely works, once an abuser always an abuser, it only takes one taste.

Myself I wouldnt care if junk food was cracked down on, or many of the additives used in food, it is under constant surveillence but much seems to be let go...... HOWEVER, many people have weight issues due to many reasons, some is simply to much intake of even good foods and some is simply metabolism. I believe as it stands now there is some effort by insurance companies, employers as well as in the field of healthcare to increase incentive to improve ones health through better eating habits.

I see no parallel and consider comparing the two problems to be day and night, which hopefully I have addressed to some level of understanding.